Discussion of movies and ReelThoughts topics

It is currently Thu Sep 18, 2014 7:56 am




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 82 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
March 16, 2012: "The PG-13 Fuck" 
Author Message
Post Re: March 16, 2012: "The PG-13 Fuck"
Dragonbeard wrote:
:roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:

Ah, I see you went to the Raf School of Brilliant Debating.

Oh wait, it's just you, Dragon. Sorry, I forgot.


Fri Mar 23, 2012 5:55 pm
Post Re: March 16, 2012: "The PG-13 Fuck"
Vexer wrote:
What's wrong with being a hermaphrodite?

Nothing. I was just talking about other types of people who may dislike sex and nudity in mainstream films.


Fri Mar 23, 2012 5:57 pm
Post Re: March 16, 2012: "The PG-13 Fuck"
Ragnarok73 wrote:
Dragonbeard wrote:
:roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:

Ah, I see you went to the Raf School of Brilliant Debating.

Oh wait, it's just you, Dragon. Sorry, I forgot.


Zing ;)

Nah I just very nearly forgot that this board is swarming with trolls. Nearly had me going there for a second!


Fri Mar 23, 2012 7:01 pm
Post Re: March 16, 2012: "The PG-13 Fuck"
Dragonbeard wrote:
Ragnarok73 wrote:
Dragonbeard wrote:
:roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:

Ah, I see you went to the Raf School of Brilliant Debating.

Oh wait, it's just you, Dragon. Sorry, I forgot.


Zing ;)

Nah I just very nearly forgot that this board is swarming with trolls. Nearly had me going there for a second!

You looking in a mirror? I don't think you are, because you haven't put a loaded .45 into your mouth and pulled the trigger yet.

Feel free to contribute something useful to the thread anytime.


Fri Mar 23, 2012 7:23 pm
Post Re: March 16, 2012: "The PG-13 Fuck"
What's crass about assuming that people's hangups about nudity and sex owe a large share to this country's deep-seated puritanical streak?


Fri Mar 23, 2012 7:45 pm
Second Unit Director

Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2011 5:49 pm
Posts: 229
Post Re: March 16, 2012: "The PG-13 Fuck"
Ragnarok73 wrote:
Vexer wrote:
What's wrong with being a hermaphrodite?

Nothing. I was just talking about other types of people who may dislike sex and nudity in mainstream films.


There's a difference between disliking something and thinking that it's inappropriate for certain age groups.

And it's pretty obvious that you weren't honestly speculating about anyone's views on movie content, but simply trying to be as insulting as possible towards Christians.


Fri Mar 23, 2012 8:59 pm
Profile
Post Re: March 16, 2012: "The PG-13 Fuck"
dps wrote:
There's a difference between disliking something and thinking that it's inappropriate for certain age groups.

True enough. I used the wrong word in my last post, as it was a response to Dragon's post.

dps wrote:
And it's pretty obvious that you weren't honestly speculating about anyone's views on movie content, but simply trying to be as insulting as possible towards Christians.

I'm not being insulting when I say that Christian fundamentalism is the driving force behind the prudish censorship policies in American media. I'm just calling it like I sees it. If you think that's insulting, well, there's not a whole lot I can do for you other than to advise you to think about why you believe in your religion (if you have one).


Fri Mar 23, 2012 9:35 pm
Post Re: March 16, 2012: "The PG-13 Fuck"
Ragnarok73 wrote:
Feel free to contribute something useful to the thread anytime.


After you sir :)

Ken wrote:
What's crass about assuming that people's hangups about nudity and sex owe a large share to this country's deep-seated puritanical streak?


Because being religious and/or a prude are not the only possibilities. On a personal level anyway. Is it too much of a long shot to think that there are similar variables at work when it comes to slapping high age ratings on sexual content?


Sat Mar 24, 2012 12:38 am
Post Re: March 16, 2012: "The PG-13 Fuck"
Dragonbeard wrote:
Because being religious and/or a prude are not the only possibilities.

Nobody said they were. That's the thing about generalizations. You might be left-handed, but I'm not out of line for saying that you're probably right-handed.


Sat Mar 24, 2012 1:53 am
Gaffer
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2012 7:44 pm
Posts: 6
Post Re: March 16, 2012: "The PG-13 Fuck"
Quote:
Religion plays into both issues, specifically fundamental Christianity. The "average" fundamental Christian doesn't have problems with violence but has major problems with sex and nudity. I'm not able to say whether this has filtered in from society or whether it influences society, but there is a relationship. Keep in mind that most card-carrying NRA members would consider themselves fundamentalist Christians and morally upright citizens.

Almost all fundamental sects, not just Christianity, are scared to death of sex and nudity. On the other hand, many use violence regularly.


I agree that fundamental sects are more averse to sex and nudity but I guess my real question is what is the root of this deep seated fear with sexuality and what exactly is in jeopardy if it is experienced? Is it the purity of the individual that’s at stake and the belief that uncorked human emotion, caused by the loosening of sexual restraints, will throw society into chaos? Wouldn't violence already have this same disruptive effect?

Is it like the clip that Dragonbeared shared of Ways of Seeing, where a naked body represents people at their most exposed/vulnerable state, making onscreen nudity even more unsettling than an act of violence? Or do you guys see the root cause to be something entirely different?


Sat Mar 24, 2012 2:28 am
Profile
Post Re: March 16, 2012: "The PG-13 Fuck"
My best guess is that the root cause has much to do with the institutions of power and influence. Sex is an easily abused tool of manipulation. This is something that religiously-founded governments have known for millennia. If you can control what people do in the privacy of their own bedrooms, and if you can control how they feel about those things, then you control the people. Period.

I don't think it's a stretch to say that sex and the visual of the nude form are two of the best parts of the human experience. There is no logical reason why they would come to be associated with shame, guilt, taboo, and filth on their own accord. Yet, when influential individuals and organizations forge an association between those things and the concept of mortal sinfulness, it forces us to second-guess the wisdom of our own judgment--and, accordingly, to trust theirs.

People of power and influence, or those who aspire to be, are often the ones to condemn sexuality most readily. If they're being genuine, then much of the fire in their rhetoric may very well be misdirected sexual passion, unhealthily funneled into the repression of others. If they're not being genuine, which is entirely plausible, then they're probably not practicing what they're preaching. Think of the well-known cases of conservative politicians being disgraced after getting caught in compromising circumstances.

Those are my thoughts on the matter, anyway. Blame the jerks in charge.


Sat Mar 24, 2012 3:44 am
Post Re: March 16, 2012: "The PG-13 Fuck"
Dragonbeard wrote:
Ragnarok73 wrote:
Feel free to contribute something useful to the thread anytime.


After you sir :)

Aww, I thought you were at least above the "No, you are!" rebuttal. Oh well.

Dragonbeard wrote:
Ken wrote:
What's crass about assuming that people's hangups about nudity and sex owe a large share to this country's deep-seated puritanical streak?


Because being religious and/or a prude are not the only possibilities. On a personal level anyway. Is it too much of a long shot to think that there are similar variables at work when it comes to slapping high age ratings on sexual content?

Speaking of useful, why don't you provide your thoughts on what those other possibilities are? Remember, the key word in this is "plausible". Good luck.


Sat Mar 24, 2012 5:28 pm
Director
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 10, 2009 10:09 pm
Posts: 1292
Post Re: March 16, 2012: "The PG-13 Fuck"
Ken wrote:
My best guess is that the root cause has much to do with the institutions of power and influence. Sex is an easily abused tool of manipulation. This is something that religiously-founded governments have known for millennia. If you can control what people do in the privacy of their own bedrooms, and if you can control how they feel about those things, then you control the people. Period.

I don't think it's a stretch to say that sex and the visual of the nude form are two of the best parts of the human experience. There is no logical reason why they would come to be associated with shame, guilt, taboo, and filth on their own accord. Yet, when influential individuals and organizations forge an association between those things and the concept of mortal sinfulness, it forces us to second-guess the wisdom of our own judgment--and, accordingly, to trust theirs.

People of power and influence, or those who aspire to be, are often the ones to condemn sexuality most readily. If they're being genuine, then much of the fire in their rhetoric may very well be misdirected sexual passion, unhealthily funneled into the repression of others. If they're not being genuine, which is entirely plausible, then they're probably not practicing what they're preaching. Think of the well-known cases of conservative politicians being disgraced after getting caught in compromising circumstances.

Those are my thoughts on the matter, anyway. Blame the jerks in charge.

That and the fact that onscreen sex/nudity = parental paranoia that it will automatically make their kids horny and, thus, want to [gulp] play with themselves... which means they'll have to [double gulp] talk to their kids themselves about sexuality rather than crossing their fingers in hopes that they learn everything they'll need to know about it in school when they reach 'that age.' :P


Sat Mar 24, 2012 7:41 pm
Profile
Post Re: March 16, 2012: "The PG-13 Fuck"
Ragnarok73 wrote:
Aww, I thought you were at least above the "No, you are!" rebuttal. Oh well.


Of course I am, it's just a little friendly banter :) I like to think that even if I'm thickheaded, I am at least friendly about it!

Like those dogs that drool on your lap out of sheer affection :P

I'll explain the other possibilities later, right now I've a new magazine full of tits to look at ;)

I need to learn which is which when they come to feed...


Sat Mar 24, 2012 11:05 pm
Post Re: March 16, 2012: "The PG-13 Fuck"
A friend of mine had a band called The Hermaphrodites. Their first album was called "Go fuck yourself."


Mon Mar 26, 2012 4:13 am
Post Re: March 16, 2012: "The PG-13 Fuck"
MunichMan wrote:
A friend of mine had a band called The Hermaphrodites. Their first album was called "Go fuck yourself."

This is fucking brilliant.


Mon Mar 26, 2012 4:17 am
Post Re: March 16, 2012: "The PG-13 Fuck"
Ken wrote:
MunichMan wrote:
A friend of mine had a band called The Hermaphrodites. Their first album was called "Go fuck yourself."

This is fucking brilliant.


It was a slash/death metal garage band that didn't last very long, but they did manage to put out an album. Not my kind of music, but the name and album title were just awesome.


Mon Mar 26, 2012 5:09 am
Post Re: March 16, 2012: "The PG-13 Fuck"
My own band is called Tyrannovox, which, my drummer assures me, stands for "Large terrible voice". I lobbied for "The Dilettantes", but I was turned down.

I'm a sucker for a good band name, though. "The Hermaphrodites" deserved to succeed, based solely on the name.


Mon Mar 26, 2012 5:17 am
Post Re: March 16, 2012: "The PG-13 Fuck"
MunichMan wrote:
A friend of mine had a band called The Hermaphrodites. Their first album was called "Go fuck yourself."

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:


Mon Mar 26, 2012 12:41 pm
Post Re: March 16, 2012: "The PG-13 Fuck"
MunichMan wrote:
A friend of mine had a band called The Hermaphrodites. Their first album was called "Go fuck yourself."


Like :D I'm not sure they could possibly follow that up!

The band I'm in is called Frost Hammer, which isn't that clever but my bandmate and I do an unplugged side project called Brewers Fair, since we both share a liking for making homebrew. Good name I like to think :) Have also played in a band called North For The Winter, and played on a record called "All Rivers Lead To Phoenix", both names of my own creation.

Ken what do you do band-wise?


Mon Mar 26, 2012 8:26 pm
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 82 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group.
Designed by Vjacheslav Trushkin for Free Forum/DivisionCore.
Translated by Xaphos © 2007, 2008, 2009 phpBB.fr