PDA

View Full Version : Too Much Sex In Popular Culture?


Taak Farst
11-07-2009, 06:58 AM
Basically, this is a debate thread considering the title question. Do you think there is too much sex in popular culture? why?

I think there IS and it's stupid how all people want on a night out is sex sex, booze, and more sex - it's really stupid...
I ask this question as I was watchin an ep of Argumental and thought about the topic in question.

Ztalker
11-07-2009, 07:52 AM
Meh...depends.

The influence it has on children is what bothers me. Some children in my class watch music station (past 9PM) and movies in the same timeslot all the time.

I can see those children act differently then the ones who are 'sent to bed' at a normal time.

But anyways, for me personally, I don't think there's that much sex in the media. It's all very suggestive, not plain explicit. Just look at the Cooper (I has zereau I.Q. lolzor) Mass Effect case. The people who shout 'TOO MUCH SEX' are always on the front line, sometimes even before objectively looking what it's all about. Overreacting is what causes this debate in the first place.

Imo:
-Music video's: Very suggestive. What bothers me most there is the language. Candy Shop from 50 Cent is just...ugh.
-Games: In SERVICE of the story, very, very mildly suggestive display of sex. Mass Effect had a beautiful sex scene, very Titanic-ish and in service of the story.
-Books: Some 'teen' books are VERY explicit. Recently read through some of the books children in my class read. It's...suggestive to say the least. But that could be the depending on country.
-Movies: Depends. A hot actress doesn't turn me on...but that's because I can think abstract and see a sex scene in service of a movie, not the other way around.

Anyways, influence of the above hasn't turned bme into a sexual pervert and I think that at a certain age (around 15) children can see things in an abstract way and see through it all. Before that, parents should explain/protect their children.
Let's face it: At a certain age children will be confronted with sex anyway. In the practical way (12 year old dad in Brittain: Way to go parents!), or a theoretical way (I got sexual education from the age of 13 if I remember correctly). As long as they don't see above mentioned examples as fact, it's good.

Sabretooth
11-07-2009, 10:20 AM
To be short, no, there isn't too much sex in popular culture yet, and there won't be until explicit sex becomes acceptable in manstream media. If people want booze and sex, and be stupid, they have full right to, and the media will indulge them, of course.

The media will always supply what is in demand, so long as it isn't stopped by law. And in demand is sex, because people are horny. The more people consume sex media, the more the media presents sex, until the people tire of it, a phenomenon very unlikely.

Like violence, sex in real life happens a whole lot more than it does on TV or in film. If this entertainment media is to imitate or reflect real life, it's going to have to have a lot more sex and violence than it does right now.

mur'phon
11-07-2009, 11:23 AM
@: Sabre: Agreed

I think there IS and it's stupid how all people want on a night out is sex sex, booze, and more sex - it's really stupid...

Why care? Given that it's usually easy enough to find people to hang with who aren't sex-obsessed, it's not as if you need to let it affect you.

urluckyday
11-07-2009, 01:46 PM
I think it's just like violence in popular culture. Sure it may worry someone if a child watches more and more of it, but I highly doubt they're going to do anything unforgivable unless they're messed up in the head already.

Totenkopf
11-07-2009, 01:56 PM
There is too much, but then I'm not into voyeurism.

adamqd
11-07-2009, 06:19 PM
You dont have to be Stupid to enjoy Sex and Booze, and your not necessarily Stupid as a Result of it Either. I'm Not saying I want to watch a Film with my family that has Sex scenes in it, but Sex is our very nature, and it is AWESOME, so I'll have as much sex a possible Please waiter... In the Media? not so Much.

VarsityPuppet
11-07-2009, 06:41 PM
I myself am not easily offended by anything, so It's quite easy for me to adopt a "no-censorship" view on everything.

Occasionally, I think some forms of media can go a little too far, especially when it goes a little beyond its given rating. There should be no full frontal nudity or aggressive swearing in a PG-13 movie for instance.

But people need to do a little thinking for themselves. How about instead of getting offended by everything, just turn the damn TV off? I know this doesn't apply for everyone, but some people act like it's being shoved down their throats.

Samnmax221
11-08-2009, 12:42 AM
I'll keep this short. Sexual repression leads to perversion, look how ****ed up Japan is (Not that the US is perfect, but last time I checked we didn't need to write up legislation specifically to keep men from groping people on trains). If I wasn't so tired I know I could formulate something better, but I thought I'd just drop that nuke (no pun intended) and see what happens.

jonathan7
11-08-2009, 10:07 AM
There are several different concerns I think, firstly as pointed out by Murph and Sabre, there is demand for media which has sex in it. There is also the consideration that as Samnmax pointed out sexual repression is not a healthy attitude to take; look at the shocking treatment of woman in Saudi Arabia as a further example of what happens.

That however I think needs to be balanced with concerns for children and teenagers; I do think that there is (at least on UK tv) too much sexual content. Further more various studies do show that a high percentage of our teenagers get their body image and imaginations of what sex is life from pornography. This means, especially for girls and woman that there are unrealistic expectations of what they should look like from guys. (In studies, teenage boys are asked to identify real boobs and fake boobs - the continually pick the fake boobs (i.e. the plastic surgery crafted ones), while most boobs do not actually look like that.

Personally I do not think it is healthy that teenage boys should get their impression of what woman look like from pornography; again studies show instead of thinking pornography is a fantasy, they seem to think is a realistic depiction of sex. Quite how this matter is rectified is a matter of discussion.

With regards more "main stream" sex in the media; I do think that programmes viewable by children (at least in the UK) contain both too much sex and violence. This is to the extent that if I have kids today, I wouldn't let them watch terrestrial television until they were 13. Adverts are the greatest party guilty of his, over the usual programmes kids may watch; but for example quite how the Dark Knight was a 12 considering the level of violence in it, I don't know.

mur'phon
11-08-2009, 10:25 AM
I'm in general supicious of rating media acording to age, it seems like a wonderfull excuse for parents to not get to know how their children handles voilence/sex (I'm not including swearing because children swearing is more embarasing for themselves than harmfull). I have seen plenty of parents enforcing a blanket bann on having their children interacting with media they are too young too use acording to the rating, despite them obviously handling it, just as I have seen plenty of parents hiding behind the rating when it's obvious their children can't handle it.

VarsityPuppet
11-08-2009, 02:12 PM
I'm in general supicious of rating media acording to age, it seems like a wonderfull excuse for parents to not get to know how their children handles voilence/sex (I'm not including swearing because children swearing is more embarasing for themselves than harmfull). I have seen plenty of parents enforcing a blanket bann on having their children interacting with media they are too young too use acording to the rating, despite them obviously handling it, just as I have seen plenty of parents hiding behind the rating when it's obvious their children can't handle it.

Another good point. And we all know that studios like to push for lower ratings so they can get a broader demographic. Like J7 mentioned with the Dark Knight, it was quite a bit more violent than it's rating led it on to be, but in all fairness, it didn't have many sex scenes (if any at all. I don't remember quite clearly. Not exactly my fav movie.)

Anyways, for some people it can be really hard. You hear about studies of children who play video games that become more aggressive, but don't forget about those who play them and are relatively unaffected.

Same goes with sexual content on TV. Some people are instantly turned on at the sight of your standard Victoria's secret commercial (understandable), and some people don't even care.

Everyone's different, which makes it hard to rely completely on rating systems.

JesusIsGonnaOwnSatan
11-08-2009, 11:47 PM
If you're told you're not allowed to have something, you want it all the more. Its human nature. So when there is a cultural taboo saying something shouldn't be done, it is also wanted all the more.

The only thing stopping something like sex in popular culture is the amount of people who don't want it. Back in the early 20th century the amount of people against sexuality's general presence in culture was high. When the numbers shift from one side of the fence to another for whatever reason [such as religious beliefs (or the lack thereof), personal preference or cultural acceptability, etc,] you get what we have today.

The major reason causing the "population shift" is the influential power of the media. Media influences people who influence media that influences more people, and so on.

Another reason is of course people themselves (which is actually the source of the media's influential power: media is actually about people).
So: People influenced by media influence other people who influence other people, who influence media, etc.

Personally, i think its a machine that can only be stopped by an opposing movement of equal or greater force. The only way such a movement would come into being would be chance: the constant shifting and activity of the equations of our existence. That, or Divine intervention.

@Christians: You probably believe its the latter, and that there is no former, to which i say you're right. Throughout history God has countered depravity with stronger movements of His own (such as the old Revivals in America, for example) But isn't it curious that nothing has been done so far? Most actions in history were taken before it ever got to the stage that it is now...

The influence it has on children is what bothers me. Some children in my class watch music station (past 9PM) and movies in the same timeslot all the time.
I'm quite surprised at it too. Not long ago i was teased by some 12 and 13 year olds for not having had sex before.

But anyways, for me personally, I don't think there's that much sex in the media. It's all very suggestive, not plain explicit. Just look at the Cooper (I has zereau I.Q. lolzor) Mass Effect case. The people who shout 'TOO MUCH SEX' are always on the front line, sometimes even before objectively looking what it's all about. Overreacting is what causes this debate in the first place.
My post above is based on the premise that there actually is to much sex in media. But i am referring to media as a whole. Some things are more explicit than others. (such as R rated movies, for example). I can't say i liked the scene in Mass Effect, (simply because of what other people may think) but it was relatively nothing, and it was targeted at mature audiences. I'm hoping that they keep it at the same level for the sequels.

DAWUSS
11-08-2009, 11:58 PM
You just have to know where to look and what to look for.

jonathan7
11-09-2009, 12:25 AM
@Christians: You probably believe its the latter, and that there is no former, to which i say you're right. Throughout history God has countered depravity with stronger movements of His own (such as the old Revivals in America, for example) But isn't it curious that nothing has been done so far? Most actions in history were taken before it ever got to the stage that it is now...

I find it curious that God would decide to act against sex in the media with "divine intervention", yet he wouldn't intervene to stop the Crusades (perpetrated in his name from a Christian PoV) or the Holocaust for example.

A "Revival" is not a counter to "spiritual depravity", if it was, why did Nazi Germany one of the most evil regime's in the history of the world not experience a revival? Why has Saudi Arabia not experienced a revival given the horrors there? As such I cannot think a Revival is God's counter to "spiritual depravity" rather, to Quote Wiki; "Christian revival is a term that generally refers to a specific period of increased spiritual interest or renewal in the life of a church congregation or many churches, either regionally or globally." If you believe in such revivals, I would not make arrogant assumptions, based on incomplete data as to what motivates God!

Lord of Hunger
11-09-2009, 01:51 AM
Yeah, Jonathan7 kinda summed up many of my views on this subject in that last post. Personally, I do believe in a deity, but I highly doubt that It cares about what people do in bed (or against walls, in cars, in restrooms, etc. ;) ) or portrayal of that subject in popular culture. For one thing, why would God make us innately horny if being horny is sinful.

And yes, we are innately horny. Millennia of evolution has eliminated those who did not enjoy or did not actively pursue sexual pleasure. Fact is, we are the product of lust. Saying lust is evil is like saying we are evil. Possessiveness, however, is evil, and occurs in both theistic and atheistic contexts.

@ Original Post:

I think its quite the opposite. There is too little. For one thing, violence is much more common in the media than sex, considering that the media goes out of its way to censor sexuality when possible.

Totenkopf
11-09-2009, 02:31 AM
For one thing, why would God make us innately horny if being horny is sinful.

Perhaps a perverse sense of humor.:p Seriously, though, making us innately horny may have been for the perpetuation of the species. It doesn't mean, though, that wanton excesses in the name of horniness are acceptable. In the words of Yoda :yoda4:....Control! Control! You must learn control. Being horny isn't in itself sinful, but rather what we do in the name of horniness is where we would get in trouble.

Bimmerman
11-09-2009, 02:48 AM
I recently got back from ten months in Germany. Compared to their popular culture, no, the US is full of nothing but prudes. I say this because on page one of the widely circulated newspaper are fully nude girls seemingly just for kicks (they're not ugly either..... :thmbup1:). Going from there, where casual/intentional nudity is nothing, to the States where simply seeing a low cut top sends mothers and politicians aflutter.....no, our culture really could use a good helping of nudity.

Plus, in the age of Google, any kid the age of 8 has already seen porn, and probably gay/lesbian porn as well. So, it stands to reason, why bother, honestly, with the whole "protect the children" line of idiocy? Kids come into the world breastfeeding, but suddenly after the age of small the sight of a woman's breast will corrupt them for all time and turn them into incorrigible rapists, philanderers, and adulterers? Or whatever reason d'jour. It does not make sense. People. Are. Stupid. Politicians are worse.

Cliffs for the lazy: No, we don't have enough sex, drugs, nor cursing in popular culture mediums such as TV.

JesusIsGonnaOwnSatan
11-09-2009, 06:00 AM
I find it curious that God would decide to act against sex in the media with "divine intervention", yet he wouldn't intervene to stop the Crusades (perpetrated in his name from a Christian PoV) or the Holocaust for example.

A "Revival" is not a counter to "spiritual depravity", if it was, why did Nazi Germany one of the most evil regime's in the history of the world not experience a revival? Why has Saudi Arabia not experienced a revival given the horrors there? As such I cannot think a Revival is God's counter to "spiritual depravity" rather, to Quote Wiki; "Christian revival is a term that generally refers to a specific period of increased spiritual interest or renewal in the life of a church congregation or many churches, either regionally or globally." If you believe in such revivals, I would not make arrogant assumptions, based on incomplete data as to what motivates God!
hmm, my post seems to have conveyed an unintended message... i am actually challenging the revival notion, not asserting it.

Rtas Vadum
11-09-2009, 08:25 AM
I'm not sure if there is enough, to much or "needs to be more", but it seems to me that it doesn't matter how much there is, we seem to always find the need to keep "children" and "kids" in the dark. Like some others have said, it doesn't matter much if they see any sort of violence in movies and such, but let someone be any sort of naked, and that is were the problems will start, not if he/she sees a violent movie.

Course, I'm on the fence with this. Well, at least in the sense were I think that everyone needs a healthy dose of both violence and sex, in some form, be it someone who plays GTA and watches a dirty movie, or someone who does both without the console or the television. Though the latter isn't the best of situations, it sometimes is reality.

Darth Avlectus
11-09-2009, 09:08 PM
Ehh, it depends. When we start getting explicit in mainstream is too late--at some point there is a line that needs to be drawn.

Is there too much? In some senses, yes. However, some senses it needs to be as fully present as possible to define and contrast.

I have seen a ton of good points already in this thread. If I may: discretion is NOT repression.

On the one hand you haverepression making people into pervs later on; on the other you have no bounds and guidelines and yet we're surprised when these people either end up prevs or victims or ****ups in some other form.

While I do agree that nazi parents who isolate their children and expect them to grow up as perfect little people are just asking for trouble, I have seen all too many times where parents refuse to intervene on these points and it culminated a number of scenarios (too numerous to list them all here) that could have been prevented.

Then there are parents who do it right, and get involved with their children. These parents don't let it be a freefall (they know when "enough is enough"), but at the same time are honest about these things. Maybe if the child is too young to know in detail at a certain point you give them a little something to essentially answer their question and then tell them that the details shall be reserved for future discussion.

We need generally and mutually agreed upon decency standards. Universally. Now, before you start shouting "BAH theocracy!", then accuse me of fascism and hound on separation of church and state, I should like to point out that standards and guidelines of decency are not a solely religious thing. Hell, part of the reason I was once an atheist was at disgust at how some religious people were morally liberal and used selective ethics to justify and make special pleas. I've since become a bit more faithful and learned that regardless of faith (or lack thereof) a person's actions are indicative of their character. SO, point being is that we can agree on character values and that it is not any one faith forcing their views down everyone else's throat.

Why do I say we need this? Because even though there are mostly good parents, the few out there (nazis raising sheep and naive idiots; trash raising monstrous little animals or victim jailbait) who don't know what they're doing or don't care could make it miserable for everyone else.

I also don't relish either my daughter getting knocked up by the first boy she meets, or my son either getting sent home because he brought my hustler to his elementary school and called the teacher a slut, or bringing in some leech.

That's my :twocents:. :carms:

jawathehutt
11-10-2009, 02:08 AM
I recently got back from ten months in Germany. Compared to their popular culture, no, the US is full of nothing but prudes. I say this because on page one of the widely circulated newspaper are fully nude girls seemingly just for kicks (they're not ugly either..... :thmbup1:). Going from there, where casual/intentional nudity is nothing, to the States where simply seeing a low cut top sends mothers and politicians aflutter.....no, our culture really could use a good helping of nudity.

Plus, in the age of Google, any kid the age of 8 has already seen porn, and probably gay/lesbian porn as well. So, it stands to reason, why bother, honestly, with the whole "protect the children" line of idiocy? Kids come into the world breastfeeding, but suddenly after the age of small the sight of a woman's breast will corrupt them for all time and turn them into incorrigible rapists, philanderers, and adulterers? Or whatever reason d'jour. It does not make sense. People. Are. Stupid. Politicians are worse.

Cliffs for the lazy: No, we don't have enough sex, drugs, nor cursing in popular culture mediums such as TV.

Thank you for saying everything I would have said except I spent less time in Germany. I'm sure everyone here who has been to or is in college knows what happens when the people who were sheltered their entire life go to a party. In fact just last Saturday, I met a person like that, her first time drinking, she couldn't stand on her own and we threw a guy out for trying to "walk her home" without anyone who she knew. So ya, good thing her parents sheltered her so she could almost get raped when she left her bubble of safe things.

Ztalker
11-13-2009, 06:32 AM
Thank you for saying everything I would have said except I spent less time in Germany. I'm sure everyone here who has been to or is in college knows what happens when the people who were sheltered their entire life go to a party. In fact just last Saturday, I met a person like that, her first time drinking, she couldn't stand on her own and we threw a guy out for trying to "walk her home" without anyone who she knew. So ya, good thing her parents sheltered her so she could almost get raped when she left her bubble of safe things.

Excellent point....sums up my rant completely.
As long as parent guide their children properly, there's nothing wrong with the popular culture as it is :)

Just funny addition: I used to work at a school and one of the older teachers now had a child in her class and had known the child's mother too. She claimed the mother did stuff in the bicycle stand her own child would never do. Wild 70's (or 80's) eh?

VarsityPuppet
11-13-2009, 01:45 PM
Kids come into the world breastfeeding, but suddenly after the age of small the sight of a woman's breast will corrupt them for all time and turn them into incorrigible rapists, philanderers, and adulterers?

^ QFT

As it's been stated, I guess you just have to know your kids. For some, media has a big influence, for some, not so much.

Tommycat
11-13-2009, 10:26 PM
I wouldn't say there is too much sex in pop culture. I would say there aren't enough parents being parents in society. Lets face it the media could show whatever the heck they want. If parents would pay attention to what their kids are watching they would know what shows to allow them to watch. If they don't want them watching something like sexual content, they can keep it from them. Violence, same deal.

Don't get me wrong, I'm far from a prude. Heck, my parents who were die hard Republicans were also nudists. But it's all in HOW the sexual content is presented. I mean showing a hardcore sex scene as opposed to an actual love scene could make the difference in whether it's acceptable for a kid to see. It also depends on the age of the child too. Really it comes down to the parent deciding whether the kid is ready for the information. Or as I said... Parents being PARENTS

Working Class Hero
11-14-2009, 12:01 AM
Yeah, Jonathan7 kinda summed up many of my views on this subject in that last post. Personally, I do believe in a deity, but I highly doubt that It cares about what people do in bed (or against walls, in cars, in restrooms, etc. ;) ) or portrayal of that subject in popular culture. For one thing, why would God make us innately horny if being horny is sinful.

And yes, we are innately horny. Millennia of evolution has eliminated those who did not enjoy or did not actively pursue sexual pleasure. Fact is, we are the product of lust. Saying lust is evil is like saying we are evil. Possessiveness, however, is evil, and occurs in both theistic and atheistic contexts.

@ Original Post:

I think its quite the opposite. There is too little. For one thing, violence is much more common in the media than sex, considering that the media goes out of its way to censor sexuality when possible.
You've broken my heart, Lord of Hunger.:hang1:
I wouldn't say there is too much sex in pop culture. I would say there aren't enough parents being parents in society. Lets face it the media could show whatever the heck they want. If parents would pay attention to what their kids are watching they would know what shows to allow them to watch. If they don't want them watching something like sexual content, they can keep it from them. Violence, same deal.

Don't get me wrong, I'm far from a prude. Heck, my parents who were die hard Republicans were also nudists. But it's all in HOW the sexual content is presented. I mean showing a hardcore sex scene as opposed to an actual love scene could make the difference in whether it's acceptable for a kid to see. It also depends on the age of the child too. Really it comes down to the parent deciding whether the kid is ready for the information. Or as I said... Parents being PARENTS
I'm with you, mate. :thmbup1:

Bimmerman
11-14-2009, 04:01 AM
I wouldn't say there is too much sex in pop culture. I would say there aren't enough parents being parents in society. Lets face it the media could show whatever the heck they want. If parents would pay attention to what their kids are watching they would know what shows to allow them to watch. If they don't want them watching something like sexual content, they can keep it from them. Violence, same deal.

Don't get me wrong, I'm far from a prude. Heck, my parents who were die hard Republicans were also nudists. But it's all in HOW the sexual content is presented. I mean showing a hardcore sex scene as opposed to an actual love scene could make the difference in whether it's acceptable for a kid to see. It also depends on the age of the child too. Really it comes down to the parent deciding whether the kid is ready for the information. Or as I said... Parents being PARENTS

A big +1 on this.

ForeverNight
11-14-2009, 04:05 AM
Yes, it's amazing what would happen if Parents were Parents as opposed to their kids' best friends. It's pitiful to see what happens when that occurs.

Tommycat
11-14-2009, 07:34 AM
Yes, it's amazing what would happen if Parents were Parents as opposed to their kids' best friends. It's pitiful to see what happens when that occurs.

Well to be honest, parents being their kids best friend, while bad, is nowhere near as bad as the parents who aren't around to raise their kids. The worst parents are the ones who let the kids learn everything they know from TV. When you use that box to babysit your kids for you, you're putting a lot of trust in whatever random program may show up. I mean, I like Family Guy, but I'll be darned if I want my kids growing up on it's values. I mean you wouldn't want your kids to think it was somehow OK to light their sister on fire, because "Fire is cool."

Bimmerman
11-14-2009, 10:23 PM
Well to be honest, parents being their kids best friend, while bad, is nowhere near as bad as the parents who aren't around to raise their kids. The worst parents are the ones who let the kids learn everything they know from TV. When you use that box to babysit your kids for you, you're putting a lot of trust in whatever random program may show up. I mean, I like Family Guy, but I'll be darned if I want my kids growing up on it's values. I mean you wouldn't want your kids to think it was somehow OK to light their sister on fire, because "Fire is cool."

But fire is cool....


and Meg's not.....

vanir
11-15-2009, 12:40 AM
I think sexual identification portrayed in media has a direct relationship with popular culture.

OP mistook "popular culture" with "commercial media" fyi, a form of popular culture is say, date culture in the 18-25yo demographic, where a form of commercial media is a television show or a magazine genre (like Cleo or Girlfriend).

In date culture for example I've noted a prevalence among American female profiles at date sites to be preferences and dating criteria of sexual compatability. Which is rather odd considering that discussion is purely behavioural and hasn't the slightest thing to do with personality, if either or both parties are involved in personal development and development of their relationship.
Dating culture among Americans in particular (this does not hold true for Euro date culture at all, who've totally different priorities), seems to be largely centred upon prepackaged commercial marketing. Women are full of win, and awesome, and have so much personality, and men have achieved such and such goals by such age and demonstrate particular backgrounds and future prospects. Plus it's very clicky, and in the vast majority of cases all these claims are wholly the product of good salesmanship and are in no way reflective of the individual you've become interesting subsequently in dating.

Euro culture is less sex-centric, which is funny because they're a lot less hung up about sex over there than in the 'States, hell adolescant teens do the nudist beach thing without a drama and have witty repore and a bemused smirk for dirty old men who might want to stalk them, who'll be totally outmatched in terms of who controls this game here.
They're way more into personality, and saying you're an out of work artist doesn't mean you're a redneck from a trailer park telling big ones, it means that's actually what you are no lie, and it gets you as many dates as any fake "bad boy" act in yankland.

So yeah I think yank culture sucks eggs and you did it with dumb as can be sexual elevation in media. Now every little pubescant 14yo think's the universe owes her millions of dollars and all the Brad Pitts she can sleep with because she grew breasts.

Darth Avlectus
11-15-2009, 02:47 AM
Thank you for saying everything I would have said except I spent less time in Germany. I'm sure everyone here who has been to or is in college knows what happens when the people who were sheltered their entire life go to a party. In fact just last Saturday, I met a person like that, her first time drinking, she couldn't stand on her own and we threw a guy out for trying to "walk her home" without anyone who she knew. So ya, good thing her parents sheltered her so she could almost get raped when she left her bubble of safe things.

That is on the one side of too little sex. They don't know how toy handle it responsibly or at all.

Another example I'd like to point out is that even if the young lady in question is savvy about such things...if the parents were total nazis, the first thing she is going to do when she gets out of the house is to go find someone to satisfy her curiosities...or several someones. Or as the saying goes: All those nerdy good girls you know in/knew back in high school become (pardon my language) "slut of the year". Even now that hell of bothers me, but it's the parents' fault for isolating.



As it's been stated, I guess you just have to know your kids. For some, media has a big influence, for some, not so much.
That's the major problem nowadays. It's all about sweeping it under the rug. Like it isn't what it is. That children will be children forever. Or that the parents are too wrapped up in themselves.

I wouldn't say there is too much sex in pop culture. I would say there aren't enough parents being parents in society.

While this is prevalent in isolated parenting, this is also just as much part of the other side of the issue: I have seen many in my life who have no/ have had NO parental regulation. The result is similar but opposite. From a young age these kids perpetrate acts against other kids--or god knows what else. Or they are in just as much a position to be taken advantage of as is an isolated kid. More often it is in the form of some rather low things they do and cover with lies. Allowing for such 'experimentation' or just full on over indulgence sets them up for no value or respect for such things.

Point being: Without the parental involvement, in any case, it is a tragedy waiting to happen and everything most likely will go to hell. Parents really need to NOT shy away from having these kind discussions with their kids. Play an active involvement in their kids' lives.

Don't get me wrong, I'm far from a prude. Heck, my parents who were die hard Republicans were also nudists. But it's all in HOW the sexual content is presented. I mean showing a hardcore sex scene as opposed to an actual love scene could make the difference in whether it's acceptable for a kid to see. It also depends on the age of the child too. Really it comes down to the parent deciding whether the kid is ready for the information. Or as I said... Parents being PARENTS

Major QFT.

I think sexual identification portrayed in media has a direct relationship with popular culture.

OP mistook "popular culture" with "commercial media" fyi, a form of popular culture is say, date culture in the 18-25yo demographic, where a form of commercial media is a television show or a magazine genre (like Cleo or Girlfriend).

In date culture for example I've noted a prevalence among American female profiles at date sites to be preferences and dating criteria of sexual compatability. Which is rather odd considering that discussion is purely behavioural and hasn't the slightest thing to do with personality, if either or both parties are involved in personal development and development of their relationship.
Dating culture among Americans in particular (this does not hold true for Euro date culture at all, who've totally different priorities), seems to be largely centred upon prepackaged commercial marketing. Women are full of win, and awesome, and have so much personality, and men have achieved such and such goals by such age and demonstrate particular backgrounds and future prospects. Plus it's very clicky, and in the vast majority of cases all these claims are wholly the product of good salesmanship and are in no way reflective of the individual you've become interesting subsequently in dating.

Wow, and this is an outsider's perspective. You hit it right on the nose I think. Clique-ish stuff turns me off from the get-go. I actually abhor most, if not all, dating sites. There is no better way than to get to know the individual first.

I often times find myself saying "WTH" at some of the absurd expectations. And frowning at their attitude: if you don't have a bachelor's degree by the time you are 16, have 3 cars and 2 homes, look like hollyweird's newest fashion, are too manly or wussy, you do do this, you don't do that, you're a complete and total loser. :dozey:

Euro culture is less sex-centric, which is funny because they're a lot less hung up about sex over there than in the 'States, hell adolescant teens do the nudist beach thing without a drama and have witty repore and a bemused smirk for dirty old men who might want to stalk them, who'll be totally outmatched in terms of who controls this game here.
They're way more into personality, and saying you're an out of work artist doesn't mean you're a redneck from a trailer park telling big ones, it means that's actually what you are no lie, and it gets you as many dates as any fake "bad boy" act in yankland.

We do have that here, but it's not likely to be found online...or in the clubs.

I'm tired of pretending--the flings and extra marital affairs with mil*'s were fun while they lasted but I sort of feel sick from it. Like eating too much fast food. :barf:

So yeah I think yank culture sucks eggs and you did it with dumb as can be sexual elevation in media. Now every little pubescant 14yo think's the universe owes her millions of dollars and all the Brad Pitts she can sleep with because she grew breasts.

Thank you. Though I think I take exception to the 'yank' part, I think you have nailed this one perfectly.

El Sitherino
11-16-2009, 06:31 PM
It's not really a matter of too much sex in popular culture, but rather the way we view and treat sex. Glorification of turning people into merely objects is what I would consider a larger problem than the exposure of breasts and genitals.
It's say it's more an issue of there's too much disrespect in popular culture, people insulting, killing, assaulting for nothing more than to look dominant. It seems like many leaps back from where the concept of a society has gotten us, though I suppose all great things have ways of working themselves back around on us as problems.
The truth is, though, that fear will only create more problems than we already have, it's how we got to this point in the first place.

VarsityPuppet
11-16-2009, 08:10 PM
It's not really a matter of too much sex in popular culture, but rather the way we view and treat sex. Glorification of turning people into merely objects is what I would consider a larger problem than the exposure of breasts and genitals.

Sounds like idolatry to me... or well, getting close to it. Not the exact definition, but getting close.



The truth is, though, that fear will only create more problems than we already have, it's how we got to this point in the first place.


I don't know if it's so much fear as it is apathy.

El Sitherino
11-17-2009, 03:32 AM
I don't know if it's so much fear as it is apathy.

Well the problem we face today was created out of the fear shown during the 60's sexual liberation movement, and that only came out of earlier versions of puritanical ideas of modesty. The western idea of modesty and indecency has really only catapulted the idea that now bites us in the ass when it comes to sex.
As well we created generations, that are now taking over media, holding ideas that there isn't to be a respect of relationships themselves. Domestic abuse is back on the rise due to the return of the idea that sexual partners are merely objects, and it's rising more in female-on-male violence. Of course unfortunately most of this is being clouded with the arguments of over-exploitation and the "rise" of sexual fetishism involving BDSM, this however is untrue and there's no evidence to indicate there has been any rise in bondage fetishists.
A lesson history has already taught us is that over-indulgence is a killer, but so is fearing something so much we eliminate it's existence. With proper education and the divulgence of information, it won't matter how much sex covers our media.