• weew@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    38
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    12 hours ago

    Sex scenes in movies are a combination of this weird shameful “I want to show I’m having sex but I can’t actually show it” and “It’s almost like porn if you removed all the porn.”

    You’re really stuck in a pointless awkward middle ground that satisfies nobody. And 95% of the time it isn’t even plot relevant so you’re just wasting time. The decline basically just coincides with internet access to the masses.

    • Flocklesscrow@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      12 hours ago

      I correlate it with the weird feelings that religion introduced about sex and let Al Pacino speak my feelings in Devil’s Advocate:

      “let me give you a little inside information about God. God likes to watch. He’s a prankster. Think about it. He gives man instincts. He gives you this extraordinary gift, and then what does He do? I swear, for His own amusement, His own private cosmic gag reel, He sets the rules in opposition. It’s the goof of all time. Look, but don’t touch. Touch, but don’t taste. Taste, don’t swallow.”

      • Lad@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        6 hours ago

        To hell with bra-on sex, duvet covering the lower half of the bodies sex, very dark room sex. Depict it artistically with full nudity and penetration. Show the sex in a way that people actually have sex.

        That would be refreshing in a mainstream movie.

  • businessfish@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    31
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    13 hours ago

    as an asexual person i find other people’s opinions on this interesting. the sex scenes do nothing for me and i’m usually just waiting for them to end but i understand my circumstances are not common. i can only assume that someone who is into sex gets something out of sex scenes, otherwise they wouldn’t exist.

    what i don’t understand is the demonizing of sex scenes in movies. like does everyone only watch movies with their parents/kids? i don’t like sex scenes due to my asexuality and i’m glad that there are few of them because this cultural shift benefits me specifically (who has never been in the target demographic) in a roundabout way. but i wouldn’t say they are all gross/unnecessary/graphic/etc as a blanket statement like i see people in this thread and other places online say. art doesn’t need to be for everyone.

      • Noodle07@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        11 hours ago

        As a don’t get any sex person sex scenes reminds me that I’m horny and makes me unconfortable and feel like a waste of time in a movie

      • madcaesar@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        11 hours ago

        Yea unless somone is getting killed or mugged in the middle of the sex, it usually adds nothing of value

  • WoahWoah@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    10 hours ago

    Roughly correlates with the rate of decrease in people 18-30 having sex. I’m not sure of the order of influence there, or if there even is one, but it’s possible the declining presence of sex in media is a result of it being less relatable for something like 30% more young people than previous generations.

  • XaiwahBlue@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    12 hours ago

    My question would be how much of this is actors no longer being completely subjected to the gross wims of the director. How many scenes had little to do with a story and felt more like the director using the opportunity to make pretty people obey them.

    We have intimacy directors now and what may also be happening is individuals having more say in production and in their bodily autonomy and I don’t see that as an issue particularly.

    Did random sex scenes really hit the level of art for you folks? Is pornography art the same way? 🤔 You know both are made for mass sale and consumption usually, the same way, much more than trying to make content to say anything.

    But um “it so bad we block the titties!” or whatever is popular to say. Even though i personally don’t remember many that added anything story related. Show me them bonding in a real way, sex doesn’t cement anything if you’ve ever had a cheating partner, but a real collection of moments spent together between them that shows understanding and sacrifice for each other can really have an impact.

  • Hegar@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 day ago

    I just find it hard to believe that more films have drugs than profanity.

    • vovo@lemmy.dbzer0.comOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      6 hours ago

      You can’t read the chart like that. Everything starts with 100. It shows the decrease/increase of each vice separately.

  • bulwark@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    Interesting, I thought I noticed this trend but never saw it quantified. I guess the public sentiment changed around '05 about sex in movies. Might be they just get it from pornhub now instead.

  • JackGreenEarth@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    edit-2
    20 hours ago

    Dishonest graph, the y axis goes from 65 to around 100, rather than starting at 0

    • gurapo
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      13 hours ago

      deleted by creator

    • kaffiene@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      19 hours ago

      Don’t know why you got voted down. It’s true and it’s the first thing I noticed about the graph

  • JDPoZ@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    94
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    1 day ago

    Because the world shifted to the right a bunch more regarding sexual content… fucking websites now want you to show your ID in some states to view porn.

    I think acclaimed director Paul Verhoeven put it best when he called our country a land full of gleefully violent prudes when people freaked out about his use of sexuality, nudity and people being comfortable naked around members of the opposite sex.

    • where_am_i@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 hours ago

      The world didn’t do shit.

      It was as normal in Europe to be naked and talk about sex as it is now. Actually, it probably got even a bit more normal.

      Your stupid Hollywood is somehow watched by everyone around the world while it’s produced to cater to your dumb average American. And they’re religious and prudent. And that has been the case since forever. Which is why having naked breasts in your cinema is something wild.

      In the meantime french movies would casually have people full naked every second movie.

      Am I really on a movies community?

      Now, your dumb Hollywood realized their cringe sex scenes aren’t appreciated by about anyone, and so they cut them out. Big deal.

      Definitely not the world shifting, and not even your moronic populace. Proportion of religious prudes is still dropping even in the dumbfuckistan. And yet no more sex in the movies. Go figure.

    • Entropywins@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      59
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      23 hours ago

      When nudity/sexuality is shown artistically or actually has some depth or place in the story being told, I enjoy it, but 90% of that hollywood shit is hot garbage and I think a lot of folks feel the same.

      • LemmyKnowsBest@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        33
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        23 hours ago

        90% of that hollywood shit is hot garbage and I think a lot of folks feel the same.

        And who HASN’T been in a situation, watching TV or movie with parents or other polite company, when a sex scene comes on (completely unnecessary to the plot), making everyone uncomfortable. I’d like to think that audience surveys have been taken into account to make Hollywood stop including sex scenes.

        • MBM@lemmings.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          20
          arrow-down
          9
          ·
          21 hours ago

          It’s only uncomfortable if you make it uncomfortable, but if you’re all adults it doesn’t have to be. Maybe it helps to grow up in a less puritanical country than the US though.

        • Zannsolo@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          14 hours ago

          That’s why I only watch shows like sex/life with my in laws the sex is crucial to the plot.

      • where_am_i@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        5 hours ago

        The disappearance of the sex scene in American cinema, the suppression of the body under the moral imperative of commodities in neoliberal capitalism, and Verhoeven as antagonizer.

        Bro, you gotta stop reading shit like this. It’s bad for your brain. Not everything is capitalistic plot to suppress your whatever.

        Why wouldn’t you be able to see it as “the viewers didn’t enjoy our cringe sex scenes, so we got rid of them, cuz we sure as hell couldn’t put real sex scenes into movies”. And no, not because of purity. But because even good porn is cringe and fake.

        So maybe it’s really a decomcratic decision and it’s only possible because through capitalism there’s monetary pressure on the film industry to do the things people want.

        Whichever it is, you gotta stop reading BS that starts with a conclusion in the first sentence, and no matter the subject it’s the same conclusion: capitalism oppressing the working class. You’d make Lenin cringe.

    • M137@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      12 hours ago

      You realize there is more than the US in the world right…? You’re really proving stereotypes by saying “the world” and then giving only US states as an example. A lot of the world haven’t shifted to the right. It’s pretty certain this graph was based on mostly American stuff anyway, so both the image, this whole post and you are all doing the classic 'Murican thing of thinking US specific things apply to the whole world.

      • JDPoZ@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        9 hours ago

        Sorry - meant just “the world of media.” Obviously a majority of films marketed internationally seem to be from the US, but yeah it’s mostly a US issue. We’re violent sexually repressed religious prudes.

  • originalucifer@moist.catsweat.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    63
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 day ago

    i think it was prevalent before the interwebs because there was largely few places to get porn, and throwing it in a movie meant more eyeballs.

    as porn became immediately available in other forms (mostly the internet), the unnecessary scenes could be eliminated as a waste of time and a detraction from plots. they ceased being a reason to draw eyeballs.

    • shinratdr@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      20
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      1 day ago

      Bingo. This is 100% the reason, and it’s funny that people assume anything else. When you can just watch porn at any time with no effort, sex scenes are gratuitous and awkward distractions except in rare circumstances.

    • frezik@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      18 hours ago

      You can get gratuitous violence on the internet, too. Far more than the most violent slasher film. Availability isn’t the reason.

      • originalucifer@moist.catsweat.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        17 hours ago

        the desire for gratuitous violence is probably orders of magnitude less sought for than our sex drive.

        sex is so much more of a psycho-social driver than violence as to make your assumption invalid.

        e. i would also add slasher films are slasher films. they arent regular movies with slasher film parts thrown in to attract as many eyeballs as possible. they were written to attract people into that niche thing.

          • originalucifer@moist.catsweat.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            17 hours ago

            it isnt. its your own confirmation bias.

            gratuitous [unnecessary] sex scenes are/were in an incredibly larger number of movies than the violence i think youre referring to.

            • frezik@midwest.social
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              12 hours ago

              Uh, the graph in OP says otherwise. I guess it depends on your definition of “gratuitous”.

              Is James Bond shooting his way through badies–without a drop of blood being shown–gratuitous? How does that compare to a flash of boobs on screen in another movie?

              • originalucifer@moist.catsweat.com
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                12 hours ago

                that why i mentioned it depends on the type of violence. it was mentioned ‘slasherfilms’ which i find is an entirely different level compared to james bond.

                i dont think that level has changed much at all. movies that require action, still have that nonsense.

                you dont see sites advertsing short form violence like pornhub. its apples/oranges.

                • frezik@midwest.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  10 hours ago

                  Would you say that the conversion of TV from broadcast/cable to streaming has resulted in a lot more nudity? If so, why hasn’t Internet porn reduced it?

                  Here’s the point I’ve been circling around: the availability of Internet porn does not adequately explain why depictions of sex and nudity in movies have gone down. It’s the first idea that pops into peoples head, but it doesn’t quite fit. What does is the rating system. Somewhat with the introduction of PG-13, and more dramatically so with NC-17. “This Movie Is Not Yet Rated” goes into this in more detail, but I’ll lay out what it’s getting at.

                  If you go back to the 1970s and '80s, you have PG movies with nudity. “Airplane”, released 1980, had a quick flash of boobs along with an extended blowjob joke. “Superman”, released 1978, had Superman as a kid climbing naked out of that pod. Expressly non-sexual, but nudity none the less. Today, Airplane would go straight to an R rating for that flash of boobs unless it’s from a director like James Cameron, who gets to pull strings and do whatever they want. I don’t think you could do the Superman bit at all.

                  You also have some R rated movies at the time showing extended closeups of the faces of women in sexual pleasure. This has almost entirely disappeared from all mainstream movies. Liv Taylor’s character in “Jersey Girl” (PG-13) talks about masturbating, and that was scandalous.

                  Then PG-13 shows up in 1984 in response to movies like “Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom” pushing PG too far. When that happens, PG becomes the older kids movie rating, and PG-13 is supposedly for teenagers. Except, now you can’t really do scenes like Temple of Doom did and still be PG-13, either. Too much blood. Plus, you can’t have nudity except maybe the odd butt (usually male), again with the exception of being James Cameron.

                  Also, you get one F-bomb in PG-13 movies. It has to be stated in anger (“fuck you”) and not in reference to sex (“Should we go home and fuck each others brains out”). This isn’t an official rule anywhere, but even people outside the industry have picked up on it.

                  So now you can have James Bond shooting up tons of baddies as long as you don’t show any blood. The same movie will also go to great lengths to carefully conceal the lead actresses’ nipples at all times.

                  This gets much worse when NC-17 comes along. This was an attempt to rebrand the X rating, which tended to be associated with outright porn. “XXX” was never an MPAA rating; the porn industry adopted that for itself, but the association got stuck. So hey, surrender that idea to porn, change X to NC-17, and now we can make “serious” movies with lots of sex.

                  Showgirls then completely bombs.

                  What happens next is that NC-17 is used as a bludgeon by the ratings board. Do what we say, or else we’ll rate you NC-17 and most of the theaters won’t even show your movie. There’s a bit of psychology going on here where the ratings board wants to feel like they have a say in the movie itself. This has sometimes resulted in directors deliberately putting in stuff they know will never pass, then it gets flagged by the ratings board, they drop it, and the ratings board gives it the OK.

                  You can’t always do that, though. Directors won’t bother shooting a scene at all when they think the ratings board will nix it. Nudity has become nearly absent from R rated movies altogether because of this, and it’s a very brief flash if it’s there at all. One exception being Wolf of Wallstreet. Directed by Martin Scorsese–another director who has enough pull to get whatever they want. Anybody less than an S-tier director doesn’t get to do that. That movie is now 11 years old, and I’d challenge you to find another R rated movie with that much nudity and sex that’s been produced since.

                  Violence in R rated movies hasn’t gone the same way, because the ratings board members don’t care as much. They’re largely Americans (as far as we know; they were when “This Movie Is Not Yet Rated” was produced), and American culture is stuck in a mindset that violence is less bad than nudity. Also, Showgirls was known for sex, not violence, and that’s the sack of bricks hanging over every R rated movie director.

                  So in a perverse way, the opening of PG-13 and NC-17 ratings have actually reduced artistic expression, not opened it up.

                  Streaming evolved in a totally different way, and isn’t subject to the same incentives.

  • ihatetheworld@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    56
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    21 hours ago

    My brain just go … when random awkward 30 second sex scene happens out of nowhere or they just start making out, kissing and moaning loudly then suddenly we are in the next scene and everything is back to normal. Why?

    Unless the film is sexual in nature random full frontal nudity, stray tits, stray ass, visible privates always makes me so confused.

    • TheFriar@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      18 hours ago

      Okay, but what makes it “random” to you? It’s art. Nudity in art has been around since art began—took a few years off for puritanical reasons, sure, but we’re all human, we all share having a naked body in common. And sex is the most natural thing. So to include it in art is just as natural.

      Our attitudes toward it have changed. Why, though? What makes you feel awkward about seeing sex or nudity

      • ihatetheworld@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        14 hours ago

        I get art. But there are alot of nudity in the mainstream films that are not that. If i want to watch sex there is porn. If i want nudity in art those exist too.

        Don’t you feel awkward watching two actors play pretend? Or having your 5.1 audio system start moaning in a film when you are not expecting those type of content. Random naked body parts i don’t mind those but often time you can remove those and nothing of value will be lost. So my question is why?

        • TheFriar@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          13 hours ago

          Do I feel awkward watching two actors act? No. Do you?

          My point is, what makes you guys so uncomfortable with sex? Doesn’t that strike you as a little odd? Watching a movie with superfluous sex scenes with, say, your family, is definitely weird. But not because of the sex, but because you’re watching sex with your family there and that is awkward.

          Everyone keeps saying “if I want to see sex, I’ll watch porn.” But that’s…such a weird take, I think. It’s not about getting turned on by sex scenes or trying to get off. It’s just a portrayal of a pretty massive part of life that everyone seems scared of or something. I just don’t get that.

          • ihatetheworld@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            11 hours ago

            When it comes to surprise sex scene yes. The whole thing is just awkward. But when i am watching a film and i am expecting it to happen then no.

            Uncomfortable with sex? No. My point was I don’t want to be watching an action movie and get a surprise sex scene that last too long and add nothing to the story. Maybe i am weird but clearly i am not the only one that appreciate a good film without those unnecessary sex scene. Otherwise we wouldn’t be seeing a steep decline of sex in films.

            • TheFriar@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              6 hours ago

              Well I dunno if people not liking it is the reason we’re seeing a steep decline. If that were the case, we’d be seeing a steep decline in shitty movies. And that line is trending the other way.

              I personally think it’s more a sort of return to Puritanism—in some respects. People are, in fact, very touchy these days. I mean, the intention is good in those touchy people. We want to see less exploitation, see less offensive or unequal treatment of people. And that’s great. But I don’t think sex in film is inherently exploitative nor does it necessitate unequal treatment.

              But you know what else we’re seeing? A steep decline in young people having sex. Millennials were the generation having the least sex, until gen Z came along. Now they’re the generation having the least sex (in adolescence/young adulthood). I personally think there’s a connection there, too. We are more wary of anything that might get people upset—well, I say “we” but really I mean the capitalists. They want your money and will be as inoffensive as they think is necessary to get it. So really, what we’re seeing is a capitalist response to a seemingly more sensitive consumer.

              And that’s just shitty all around. Thanks once again, capitalism.

          • piccolo@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            3 hours ago

            It’s just a portrayal of a pretty massive part of life that everyone seems scared of or something. I just don’t get that.

            Perhaps if it was included for character development between two individuals, you might have a point. But a lot of time its just shoehorned and out of place. Also, for the record, its not a major part of life for many people, which creates even more disconnect.

        • TheFriar@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          edit-2
          15 hours ago

          I mean, isn’t that a matter of opinion? Puritans thought bare shoulders and exposed knees were graphic. There’s definitely a discussion of what type of sex on film is exploitative. But “graphic?” Look to other culture’s cinema. Routinely showing full nudity, men and women—not glorifying it or exploiting it, literally just a naturalistic exposure of skin—makes the story grounded in reality. And has a way of not fixating on it or exploiting it, but rather depicting people and just exposing bodies.

          And also, we’re talking about nudity and sex being “graphic” while network television has us hacking up human bodies. That’s not thought of as too graphic but exposed breasts and genitalia somehow is? How backwards is that? That type of behavior, I think, creates your type of outlook, because it’s hidden away and thought of as “too much.” I’ve never cut open a body or shot someone, but I’ve definitely been naked and had sex. How do you square that?

          • stebo@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            13 hours ago

            i just want to watch a movie without uneasy scenes that ruin the entire experience

            I’m okay with certain movies having them, I’ll just not watch those. But there are movies that you watch for other reasons that don’t need them at all, like the matrix for example.

    • superkret@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      35
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      17 hours ago

      It’s purely in the film so producers can tell young actresses to get naked for the “job interview” cause it’s part of the film.
      The fact that those useless sex scenes aren’t in films as often anymore is a good sign.

      • ihatetheworld@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        14 hours ago

        Yes i am glad i am seeing less of those useless sex scenes. In my opinion implied sex is better than graphical sex scene most of the time. You don’t need to see them have sex to know that they did and it will get the point across just the same to the audience without all the awkward and cringey aspect that comes with two actors playing pretend.

    • Demdaru@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      18 hours ago

      Naked is okay. Sexual is unneeded. Normalize body.

      I sound like some brainswashing machine from 80’ movie xD Anyway, I am more rolling my eyes hard at current trend to insert romance everywhere than occassional, non-sexual nudity.

      • Zahille7@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        16 hours ago

        You’ve exactly put my thoughts into words in your first couple sentences.

  • weker01@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    49
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    14 hours ago

    That sex is even considered a vice on the same level as drugs and violence is fucking bonkers.

    This graph alone gives legitimacy to this idea. Nudity and sex are completely normal (and necessary) things in life. That something that is needed for everyone reading this to exist being labeled as a vice like violence and drugs is actually disgusting IMHO.

    • where_am_i@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      4 hours ago

      So is peeing and shitting. And yet somehow you don’t get a 5 minute scene of someone on a shitter and then the exact shot of their turds being flushed down.

      Sex and nudity are normal. And yet I don’t wanna watch my friends have sex. Do you? Wierd huh?

      So, why exactly is it so unbelievable that people just don’t wanna watch actors pretend to do the most intimate thing we all got?

      Feels awkward, yes. Feels akward when it’s bad and feels even more awkward when it’s good. And it would be most akward if they actually properly showed the entire process and it was real.

      • weker01@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        4 hours ago

        Nice strawmen you got there. I never said anything actually about the use in film nor did I say anything about personal preference.

        I protest the idea of categorizing sex and nudity as vices at the same level as drugs and violence. That is something the graph presupposes by comparing to these and actually labeling sex as a vice.

        Of course one could have a discussion on when and how sexuality in media should be depicted but not under the premise that sex is a vice.

        Edit: Surely you would agree that defecating is not a vice? No one should tell someone they should not shit. Or you should be ashamed of shitting.

        No one says shitting is on the same level as taking drugs or beating someone to death.

        So why do people lump sex in with violence and drugs.

    • sunzu2@thebrainbin.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      14 hours ago

      You are thinking of it wrong… Why would these bitches be having sex when they could be working a corpo making daddy some mother fucking money?!

  • RBWells@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    40
    ·
    10 hours ago

    What bothers me more is that violence gets a PG rating here, sex gets an X rating. How in the world is it more inappropriate for kids to see people naked than for them to watch someone hack someone else to death? The graphic violence should get a more restricted rating than on screen sex.

    • Duamerthrax@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 hours ago

      When your nation always needs to be at war, it’s helps to repress sexuality and normalize violence. This isn’t so much a conspiracy theory, but an observation of an emergence behavior that reinforces itself.

    • stebo@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      19 hours ago

      You do realise that every “normal” superhero or fantasy movie contains some sort of violence right?

      Criticizing movies for violence is like saying people get violent because of video games.

      • grrgyle@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        16 hours ago

        I’m not following your logic. I think there’s an unspoken leap being made

      • Zahille7@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        16 hours ago

        They’re talking about “ultraviolence” like The Boys or Dredd. Scenes that show incredibly detailed and gory violent acts like someone getting their skull crushed against a wall, or someone literally going “splat” against the concrete after falling a hundred stories.

        • stebo@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          15 hours ago

          Ok but at least you know beforehand that those movies will be violent. If you don’t like it, don’t watch it.

        • stebo@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          12 hours ago

          porn movies exist

          movies about sexual relations are fine, I just wish less movies about other things would contain random sex scenes that come out of nowhere

    • GladiusB@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      30
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      We are all here because of sex. I think it’s outrageous that violence is glorified when there isn’t a single person here not made from sex. Ok maybe a few but it’s a really small percentage.

      • Ziglin@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        19 hours ago

        We never had a choice. I’m certainly not thankful for being born.

        I’ve also been told here that I’m probably partly asexual, which I believe is unrelated. But it shows that some people just aren’t interested.

        I really don’t see the reason for comparing it violence either. Drugs seem to be popular there too and they’re probably also a common reason for conception and I also don’t like seeing them.

        Is there such a thing as fluff movies? (I’d probably give one of those a try.)

    • jjjalljs@ttrpg.network
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      27
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      I remember a bunch of years ago talking about This Film Is Not Yet Rated, and how I thought it was absurd a scene where someone’s brains get shot out and they die is ok, but a non-graphic cunnilingus shot was unacceptable. The two people I was talking to, a woman older than me and someone my age, were both like “No that makes total sense. I’d watch a violent movie with my kid but not one with sex in it”

      I was like, “You’d rather your kid run around fantasizing about murder than sex?” And they were like “yeah”

      • Dragon "Rider"(drag)@lemmy.nz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        20 hours ago

        Drag also thinks it’s important for kids to know about murder. They should get to hear stories like Beowulf, the Iliad, and Star Wars. Children need to be taught that violence is a valid solution to certain types of problems. Otherwise you’ll raise a society of cowards who believe in following the law and keeping negative peace.

      • stebo@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        16 hours ago

        Personally I’d show neither to my kid. The thing with violent movies is that you know beforehand they will be violent. Sex scenes on the other hand, come out of nowhere, add nothing to the plot and only leave you in disgust. Happy to see those go away.

        • jjjalljs@ttrpg.network
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          15 hours ago

          Sex scenes on the other hand, come out of nowhere, add nothing to the plot and only leave you in disgust

          These are not universal truths

    • AwkwardLookMonkeyPuppet@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      11
      ·
      22 hours ago

      It bothers me that we’re at a place in society where all real violence is vehemently condemned. Mutual combat is prohibited in 46 of the 50 states, kids get expelled if they stick up to bullies, people are raised from birth to be complete victims if they’re ever in a physical confrontation, but then there’s all of this non-stop glorification of violence on-screen.

      • Dragon "Rider"(drag)@lemmy.nz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        20 hours ago

        If Thanos tries to destroy the world, the Avengers cut off his head.

        If Rupert Murdoch tries to destroy the world, you’re not even allowed to smash his windows. It’s not fair! Violence is good and TV taught drag why.