You know, one thing that doesn't help marriages in this country is the noxious nature in which sex permeates so much of our society. Things are a little out of control when a son and father cannot watch a ball game without being exposed to unexpected nudity and profanity. Sometimes you CAN'T turn the channel. You don't see it coming. There is not one show on prime time network programing that a person could watch without running the risk of being exposed to profanity, even if it is just in the commercials.
Some do more than just push the edge, they seem to be going out of their way to "define deviancy downward". And that isn't good enough. Like so many other things in this society, the freedom to do what you want and to be what you want to be is not sufficient. It's not enough that the rest of us accept it, we must somehow endorse it as well. Wouldn't that imply an homoginization of ourselves that would be far beyond a "melting pot"?
The whole point of freedom of speech is that if you hear many and varied points of view on any given subject, you are better equppied to make an informed decision. It also implies that one has the right to come to their OWN decision. Every single person agreeing on every little thing was never the intent and is a frightening concept. So why is it so evil to disagree?
If I have given a controversial subject thought and consideration, am I a bad person if I disagree with your assessment? Of course not. But think of the social issue you feel most strongly about. What if I were on the opposite side of that issue? Could we agree to disagree or would you think me less of a person because of my position?
For 5000 years we have needed the family unit because it worked best in an agricultural society. Things didn't change much for people while they were all growing stuff. Most of them didn't travel more than 30 miles from the place they were born in an entire lifetime. They knew that they would pretty much work on the farm and so would their kids and the grandkids, too. Then we had the industrial revolution and things changed. We learned to fight for our rights, to mass produce, to move across the planet and to develop massive appetites for recreational activities. With all of this change occurring exponentially, that family unit is not quite as necessary. So values change. You have no idea where you will end up when your life is over and you can only guess what you will be doing in the meantime. Values change some more. It would just make sense that with all of this change, value systems would be clashing all over the place.
If we could just get away with simple respect for each other, things would be a whole lot easier all the way around. But this is an odd place. We can have a smoking section but not a section for grace when appropriate. For some reason, it has suddenly become politically incorrect to actually expect consideration when it comes to honor and all things decent. At one time, society used to use it's pressure to apply the very values that are being attacked by so many today. And they HAVE the right to attack those values. But that right should end where my rights begin. And I would like the right to through an occasional day without being exposed to gratuitous sex, profanity and violence. How unreasonable is that? I would think that you should have to go out of YOUR WAY to find that stuff. I remember a time when you pretty much did. Damn. I am getting old.
Some do more than just push the edge, they seem to be going out of their way to "define deviancy downward". And that isn't good enough. Like so many other things in this society, the freedom to do what you want and to be what you want to be is not sufficient. It's not enough that the rest of us accept it, we must somehow endorse it as well. Wouldn't that imply an homoginization of ourselves that would be far beyond a "melting pot"?
The whole point of freedom of speech is that if you hear many and varied points of view on any given subject, you are better equppied to make an informed decision. It also implies that one has the right to come to their OWN decision. Every single person agreeing on every little thing was never the intent and is a frightening concept. So why is it so evil to disagree?
If I have given a controversial subject thought and consideration, am I a bad person if I disagree with your assessment? Of course not. But think of the social issue you feel most strongly about. What if I were on the opposite side of that issue? Could we agree to disagree or would you think me less of a person because of my position?
For 5000 years we have needed the family unit because it worked best in an agricultural society. Things didn't change much for people while they were all growing stuff. Most of them didn't travel more than 30 miles from the place they were born in an entire lifetime. They knew that they would pretty much work on the farm and so would their kids and the grandkids, too. Then we had the industrial revolution and things changed. We learned to fight for our rights, to mass produce, to move across the planet and to develop massive appetites for recreational activities. With all of this change occurring exponentially, that family unit is not quite as necessary. So values change. You have no idea where you will end up when your life is over and you can only guess what you will be doing in the meantime. Values change some more. It would just make sense that with all of this change, value systems would be clashing all over the place.
If we could just get away with simple respect for each other, things would be a whole lot easier all the way around. But this is an odd place. We can have a smoking section but not a section for grace when appropriate. For some reason, it has suddenly become politically incorrect to actually expect consideration when it comes to honor and all things decent. At one time, society used to use it's pressure to apply the very values that are being attacked by so many today. And they HAVE the right to attack those values. But that right should end where my rights begin. And I would like the right to through an occasional day without being exposed to gratuitous sex, profanity and violence. How unreasonable is that? I would think that you should have to go out of YOUR WAY to find that stuff. I remember a time when you pretty much did. Damn. I am getting old.
7 Comments:
Why would think cultural acceptance of nudity would lead to divorce? Or even put nudity and profanity together? Divorce has nothing to do with nudity. Profanity perhaps, but not nudity.
It is not nudity that is our problem but our problematic rejection of ourselves and nature. Remember the old joke about Baptists - "Why don't Baptists have sex standing up? They are afraid someone might think they are dancing." What is wrong with dancing? Yet we have a large segment of our society that not only protests our God given bodies, but even resists simple displays of interaction and affection. That seems perverse.
Back to profanity and violence. At its basis, profanity is meant to shock in a violent way. In fact I would advance that divorce probably more to do with cultural acceptance of violence and prejudice than anything else. (Don't you think it is difficult for a person to accept/embrace violence and yet also believe in love? I do. I think Jesus did too.) After all divorce itself is a fairly extreme painful almost violent experience.
I like Robert DeNiro's observation as a movie producer about the perverse nature of our culture and acceptance, almost hunger for violence - "show someone kissing a tit, the movie will get a R rating or worse; show someone cutting the tit off you might get by with a PG-13".
More comfort with simple public affection and acceptance of our bodies and forms would lead to better, stronger relationships. Rather than juvenile lust and desire for a local substitute for the latest SI swimsuit model or the Coors twins.
Recently, I found it interesting that France where public affection and nudity is accepted has a lower divorce rate than the US. And French couples in marriage also have the highest rate of intercourse in the world.
Just so people won't feel that I am only picking on Baptists and maybe someone can explain why we should rely rely on religion to restore our "moral fabric" and stop the destructive influences of perverse and violent sex?
Holy crap, Meg, what prompted THIS? Well, since you brought the subject up I DO have a thought or two.
I'm approaching geezerhood having lived 56 years and I, too, am amazed by what I have seen and what I am seeing now...but I think you and I see different things. What I see is a society which has increasingly allowed bigoted, frustrated, sexually phobic, childish, ingorant and retrograde "thinking" to influence it far beyond the point of what one would expect in an open and tolerant society. What I see oozing out of every pore of the religious (read: Christian and Muslim) sophists in this country (and one could certainly argue, the world) is an ignorance and intolerance reeking of captiousness so malignant as to be frightening.
What I see is a HUGE push from the religious and religious-based to force our society to accept their arid and parochial view of things as the default viewpoint. In this infantile world they are working mightily to establish it is individual and societal catastrophy to see a naked woman, to hear music that THEY don't deem appropriate, to hear words THEY don't want to hear; my god, what if two people of the same sex actually LOVE eachother? Well, the world would be doomed. The religious in this country, now infusing the government, are not content with being allowed to think what they want, believe what they want, practice what they want; they seem absolutely incapable of living their own lives, they MUST force their narrow-minded crap down EVERYONE's throat (read: mine) or they aren't happy. And for some reason our society tiptoes around these self-rightous, smug cretins, dripping accommodation and acquiescence.
Well, guess what? NOT ME. I may be swept away on a tide of single and double digit IQ's yearning for the good ole days of 1951, but I won't go willingly nor quietly. And you know what else? Get THIS: I am NOT afraid of seeing a woman's boob, and (gasp, wheeze...) I don't care if my kids see one. I am NOT afraid of hearing "fuck" or "shit" and actually use those words in common discourse and I don't care if my kids use them. It is NONE OF MY BUSINESS who has sex with whom (assuming adult and willing partners,) it is NONE OF MY BUSINESS if two men or women wish to marry. Good for them, love is an increasingly rare commodity, at least in my life. I don't care what kind of music my kids listen to, they are doing just fine. They are NOT in the grip of the devil. I don't much care how other people live THEIR lives, so long as it doesn't overly infringe on mine. (And that does NOT extend to someone whining that he or she is "offended" by my lifestyle...or my speech...or my beliefs...be offended, who gives a shit, you narrow-minded moron? "Offended" has become a shibbolith of the religious which portends dire consequences. I don't care if you are offended or not...YOUR juvenile thinking offends ME...I can gripe about it, and do, but go ahead and think the way YOU want...and I'll go ahead and be offended. If I can live through being offended then, my friends, so can YOU.)
And, lastly, I really LOVE gratuitous sex and sexual displays. I can't seem to get enough of it. Beyond that, I'm not afraid of it. It's ok with me if they sell stuff using good looking, busty, lewd-looking women on tv. I don't care one whit about Janet Jackson's boob. MY kid saw the big brouhaha last year...has seen a close up still shot of Janet's teat...and, guess what? She hasn't become a whore, transvestite, or turned to stone.
Jesus, will you just relax? Everything is going to be just fine.
Ah, the good old debate. You must've been up late, eh?
I'm with ya on this one Meg. I am not part of the religious right (I'm not even Christian), but I see people trying to "blame" an attempt to shift back to morality on the conservatives.
I'm a person who appreciates reality. And reality is, the pervasiveness of sex, AND violence, ain't workin' folks. Check out drop out rates... teenage pregnancy rates... drug addiction rates. Yes, they dip up and down but overall are higher than ever. I work with young children as a living and I see the damage of this "openness" daily. Parents don't take responsibility for being PARENTS. Being friends to your kids does NOT work, ladies and gentleman. Ask the Columbine parents.
I am not implying the self denial of decades ago is appropriate, EITHER. Spouse abuse, incest, and other evils were sickly covered up. We need as a society to find our balance. Cherish our children. Respect each other. Respect ourselves!
Oh yeah, forgot to sign... :-)
Lisa
*CLAPPING LOUDLY* for Uncle Enore!
-Stacey
All this talk about abstinence is making me horny!
Post a Comment
<< Home