darth_ender said:
Imperialscum, I don't know if you are aware, but you are actually a bigot.
Am I? I actually consider myself tolerant. For example, I think the religion is one interpretation of nature. Like science is. Something that you won't hear from many atheists, let alone scientists. However I obviously think science is by far better one.
darth_ender said:
If sex is so acceptable for general discussion, why don't we include children in the visuals? Why do we lock the bedroom door so our kids can't get in? Why don't you walk around the house naked with your significant other at all times? Why do we keep most details between partners?
Well you lock the door because you want a privacy in general. I lock the door when I go to a toilet. I lock the door when I work (is now work inappropriate because people like privicy when doing it?). I even prefer to eat alone if possible. But that doesn't make any of that inappropriate to be shown in a film/art. Whether you want to see it is up to your preference. However you have no ground to forbid artists showing it.
darth_ender said:
Why do most people remain faithful to partners, or at least find that an ideal, especially since in evolutionary terms, a strong bull impregnating multiple cows is the best way to ensure a stronger species and many children to pass on genes?
One bull impregnating multiple cows does not necessarily ensure stronger species. Too many offspring from a single individual (no matter how good it may be) may reduce the variety. Poor variety is not good from evolutionary perspective.
darth_ender said:
In fact, now that we're on that topic, if sex is so important for evolution, why is its primary evolutionary function (reproduction) downplayed and in fact portrayed as undesirable more often than not? Why is it lust that is advocated, not love, not producing children whom one could love? Why is the possibility of pregnancy skipped nine times out of ten, as if contraceptives were not of concern because, hey, we're talking about fun sex here? Why are the less pleasant aspects not usually shown, such as messy bodily fluids, or the difficulty of bringing women to orgasm or sometimes simply arousing them, or the discomfort of a woman's first time, or premature ejaculation, or heck, unless we're talking actual pornography, even the most essential organs for sex actually shown? Still, people find it necessary to censor certain things, it appears? Why?
I will answer: because people still draw certain lines where they take offense or find revulsion. But filmmakers want to push that line. I remember reading that the director of Basic Instinct wanted to be the first to show an erect penis and still maintain an R rating. He did not succeed, but not for lack of trying.
So what is the point of showing all this? It's not to show the beauty of sex. Anyone who has had love-filled (not lustful) sex already appreciates that beauty. It's to arouse, to make it self-serving and about pleasure and indulgence. We are a society that loves to indulge ourselves rather than give. And it is that selfish indulgence that film makers and TV producers are appealing to.
All I am saying is that an artist can freely show nudity and sex as these things are nothing inappropriate. They aren't considered inappropriate by the society per se. Ancient Greek or Ancient Rome had not problem with it. It is the more modern religions that polluted the society with "moral" standards that consider them inappropriate.
darth_ender said:
Yes, I sound high and mighty.
Well I am.
:p
darth_ender said:
And Imperialscum, I also don't know if you realized, but you're a bit of an idiot. You have cast religion as nonsense and sex (nominally baby-free) as essential to evolution. Has it occurred to you that the reason that religion is so prevalent is because it too is an important evolutionary step? But please, don't stop being an idiot or a bigot on my account. Continue to be a jerk, by all means.
When I said "sex" I was referring to the entire concept (reproduction included). You seem to twist things the way you want to hear them.