466
Teens Want Less Sex in Movies and TV Shows, Study Finds
(variety.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 25 Oct 2024
466 points (94.6% liked)
News
23376 readers
1764 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Dude, there's a difference between romance and full-on extended sex scenes. Fade to black and get on with the plot.
The sex scenes that most mainstream dramas have traditionally had are brief and not explicit.
And also not necessary. You don't need to see two people fucking to know they're in love. I assume you don't need to see your friends fucking to understand that they met someone they're really into.
Nothing is strictly necessary, you can tell instead of show any aspect of a relationship. But if drama is going to show a representative cross section of what human relationships are like, sex will be a part of that like romance and friendship aspects are.
It's not about how no drama should show sex. It's about how it is regularly getting shoehorned in at the expense of story, character development or run time.
And they don't show a representative cross-section. Almost all sex in mainstream films is heteronormative and done by beautiful people. There are exceptions, but they are few and far between.
When we see a proportionally accurate representation of queer sex screens on our scenes, I'll concede that they're at least showing a broad representation, even if it does ignore all sorts of sexual kinks that would also need to be represented.
What if it's not about love? Sex can be about many things and for the sake of the story.
Saying it only happens as the result of a perfect romance story is puritan and not beneficial to demystifying sex as an act that humans do.
And yet generally they're romance scenes and not scenes involving lust or rape.
I am not the one saying it. Hollywood is.
No you are speaking from a specific point.
Poor things had lots of sex, not about love or romance.
Teeth, is rape.
Even Pretty Woman has a sex scene that is about the lust of the main character with no kissing to show it.
There are plenty of examples to prove you wrong as much as you have examples of your point.
You are the one saying it cause you are making a broad statement from your perspective ignoring all that doesn't fit into it. It doesnt make you right to selectively pick your examples because it's the ones you think of and have a problem with you try to apply to the rest of it.
You listed two indie movies that were not made within the Hollywood system and one example from 1990.
Are you really going to use those to claim that most sex scenes in Hollywood movies and TVs are not about romance?
Poor Things I watched in an AMC, fuck off with that.
You provided no examples and I provided multiple that are big films that played for massive audiences that sex is used for multiple reasons and not singulary one and gratuitous.
I am not going to list 20 films cause you would deny them just as easily from your place of predetermined correctness.
Yes. Indie films get national and international distribution. I'm not sure why you're not aware of that. They are still not made within the Hollywood system.
And you're right, 20 films would not show evidence that most sex scenes in Hollywood films are about romance. I think you're being a little silly about this. Romance stories are one of the most popular types of stories and have been for pretty much all of human history. Stories about rape and lust less so.
Sex has reasons to exist and your issues with it are your own. It's not just about them being not always about romance but about the characters when done right. They are not just about showing love in romance movies.
You bring absolutely nothing to an argument other than your own sense of correct and force others to bring forward their points so you can ignore them. It's, as always, a waste to reply to you.
When did I ever say it was always about romance?
This was the first comment that started the conversation which you then entered into:
To which my response was:
We were talking about mainstream dramas.
That is why I also said:
And also why I said:
I mean I don't know how I could have been more clear that I wasn't talking about every case.
Uhh... some boob first, then fade to black.