Is America in denial about sexuality?

reply to post by calihan_12

amsterdam anyone?

Vegas? I'm being very honest here- America isn't that much different. Vegas is our Amsterdam, minus the drugs. You can get legalized prostitutes, pornography, subculture sex clubs, escorts, strip bars, etc. You can get the rest just about everywhere else except the legalized prostitution.

Originally posted by calihan_12
well just like the above poster stated, nudity on television and people walking around nude in europe is much more acceptable. sorry you dont believe that, but it is.

america is extremely uptight when it comes to nudity. i mean... why do you think people arent free to walk around naked in their town? its not acceptable. but in many places it is and its a normal part of life.

americans only see sexuality in terms of porn and the "ideal" woman. americans have been so warped by media in general, and the same has happened with sexuality. it is all only media for people now. they watch a porn flick a few times and think thats how women look and what they do in bed.
im a female, i should know this. many guys are completely dilusional because of the medias portrayal of sex. the sex in porn is a fantasy.. it is a MOVIE just like you wouldnt believe the stuff you see in regular movies, you shouldnt believe the things you see in porn are what actual couples do... because most dont. and if they do, im willing to bet they were influenced by what they have seen in porn. its unhealthy

at least europeans have a healthy view on those things. they are not unrealistic and they see beauty in just about everyone , whether they be fat and hairy or perfect.

[edit on 21-8-2009 by calihan_12]

[edit on 21-8-2009 by calihan_12]

Like i said i have seen loads of nude beaches in America and loads listed. Just like European nude beaches. I know that to be true!

Europe is a large Catholic continent. Millions of devote Catholics. Like i said we all know what happens when you mix Sex and Religion together. Nudity and sex are scene as a bad thing. Look what happened when the Da vince Code came out..it caused sush an outrage with catholics over here, because it went against there religion.

When you watch MTV videos from all your rappers and people like Britney spears, Christina aguilera, Madonna. There videos are full of Sex content. They are Americans beign brodcasted on an American network. So the whole censor is BS!

America created Playboy...Marilyn Monroe biggest sex icon of the 20th century was American. New York has got more Gay night clubs that tree's. The L word is a lesbian Tv show brodcasted on American Tv.

I can accept the way other people see things like yer self!

Though IMO its a BS myth!!

Peace!

Tsom87

The difference is that sex is a titillation in America; while in large parts of the rest of the world it is just sex without anything extra -- ie. it is just normal.

I prefer to see it as normal. A naked body is natural, not automatically a sex object. A woman nursing in public is just a good mother; not an exhibitionist.
I could go on and on, but I think you get my point.

Originally posted by wayno
The difference is that sex is a titillation in America; while in large parts of the rest of the world it is just sex without anything extra -- ie. it is just normal.

I prefer to see it as normal. A naked body is natural, not automatically a sex object. A woman nursing in public is just a good mother; not an exhibitionist.
I could go on and on, but I think you get my point.

i agree. and this largely what i meant in regards to europe vs america. in europe sexuality is normal, it isnt anything crazy, its what its supposed to be and people enjoy it.

here in america, it is a "false sexuality"... just like television and media gives a false sense of everything... of stories.. of what people are "supposed" to look like, even though they are all photoshopped and airbrushed... everything in america is fake

people dont have a REAL sexual connection with their bodies. They have been warped by what real sexuality and beauty is, and theyve turned it into something else.

Originally posted by grover
On one hand sex is everywhere...as jokes...as ads...on TV and in the movies... in fashion...not just adults but kids as well... it is displayed everywhere

On the other hand we are severely repressed about it...and do our best to hide it...and when it comes to our children we are positively psychotic about it.

I agree completely! The story I'm reminded of is my husband's experience working at a video store. The mother of several children refused to rent "The Blue Lagoon" for her kids because of the "sexual suggestions"... She left the store with "Texas Chainsaw Massacre" instead...

Mylee Cyrus made more sexually suggestive movements with her body as she was just dancing and singing without the pole. The presence of the pole makes people highly uncomfortable: Look! There's a pole! Oh, no!

I am confused by many Americans' attitude about sex and sexuality. It's ridiculous and makes no sense to me at all. This coming from a girl who was raised under a very sexually oppressive environment and "broke out and went wild" at her first available opportunity.

yeah i also noticed (because i was mormon until about 13 years old) that mormons are some of the CRAZIEST people i have ever known. they are so repressed because of insane restrictions of the mormon church, that by the time they grow up they go insane and break free and have sex with anyone that walks, drink more than anyone drinks, and do every drug you can think of.

its repression that sparks these things in people. if everyone just had a healthy sex life and was allowed to do that without being judged, i dont think we would see half of the perverted crap we see out there

Originally posted by wayno
The difference is that sex is a titillation in America; while in large parts of the rest of the world it is just sex without anything extra -- ie. it is just normal.

I prefer to see it as normal. A naked body is natural, not automatically a sex object. A woman nursing in public is just a good mother; not an exhibitionist.
I could go on and on, but I think you get my point.

This is a good way to put it.

I was a little surprised when I saw an episode of Marc and Olly with the Mek tribe in New Guinea, it aired on Sunday in the early evening and they blurred the penises on the tribesmen. I'd seen that same episode later in the week, and in the day, were there was no blurring.

This is an obvious example of something comepletely non-sexual being treated as if it was....assumingly to protect the children. This also assumes that kids aren't up watching TV past a certain time.

It just seems....odd...and off to me the way I see the body and sexuality...or even sensuality treated here in the US.

I completely understand why people got bothered about things like the Miley video (although in all honestly, the Liebowitz photos make me scratch my head a bit) but the fact is those same fans have seen that and FAR more blatant and explicit simply by there own seeking out and curiosity. I don't think we give our kids enough credit to interperet things for themselves, of course with parental input. Sheltering only causes confusion...our teenagers are far more intuitive and intelligent than I thing we give them credit for.

It's not all MTV and Madonna. After all, where did Madonna get it?

reply to post by El Davicho


just tell them about STDs/AIDS, unwanted pregnancies, kids, and the backbreaking work it entails just to be able to feed one; tell them its 100 times more work than having a dog

yeah i definitely think parents only assume the worst of their kids. my mom always thought i was some crazy party nut, when in reality i was actually just hanging out with my best friends watching movies and cooking all the time.

it always made me laugh when she would say "I know you are up to something! where were you last night?!?" and in my head im thinking.. woman.. you are nuts.. i was cooking chicken last night

In the UK censors are certainly stricter than in Europe. One odd thing about censoring over here is that foreign subtitled films with fairly explicit sex scenes in them are more likely to get past the censors than English language films with almost identical content, I'd imagine its because they think children are less likely to watch a subtitled film. I only noticed this because I am a fan of foreign cinema and it's quite obvious when watching them. I have been told by a number of people from the USA that violence in media is far more acceptable than sex. I think this is most apparent, for me at least, in the films and games on the market.

I don't know how things are in the US between parents when it comes to sexual openness so I cant really comment. Being British I can comment on this for the UK. Admittedly I have a somewhat limited experience as I can only draw on what my friends have told me and my relationship with my own parents. My parents were determined to bring me up so that I could be open with them, they didn't want me to be forced to hide things out of fear. The two best illustrations of this I can give, that fit this topic, are that firstly from a young age they would answer any question I asked and secondly that when I got into my teenage years they told me that when it came to sex they would rather I was in my own home safe than hiding it from them. This wasn't the same for everyone I know though I'd say it was 50/50 with half of my friends parents like mine and the other half dead set against, one girl I know was kicked out when she was caught.

it is pretty rediculous when violence is more acceptable than sex

that just shows how closed minded people still are about it.

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic

Mylee Cyrus made more sexually suggestive movements with her body as she was just dancing and singing without the pole. The presence of the pole makes people highly uncomfortable: Look! There's a pole! Oh, no!

Good thing to note, very true. She's was being 'suggestive' before the pole even made an appearence. It's funny where people draw the line.

Besides, although this is another topic entirely, the origin and symbolism of dancing is directly linked to sex and sensuality. It's very hard to seperate the two.

[edit on 21-8-2009 by El Davicho]

reply to post by El Davicho


I agree with you.

I think there are many ways in which this is perpetuated in American society, not least because of the insane witch-hunt for "paedophiles" which started in the 90's.
The protection of kids is the no: 1 motivating factor.

The fact is, bad things happen, they always have. Nothing has changed in that regard. What has changed is the methods of reporting, the criminal system and ability to spread such fear throughout a community until it becomes an entity with its own momentum.

You just need to look at your legal system and the "registers" you have for "sex offenders". People can end up on such lists for stupidly ridiculous reasons, and they are branded simply as a "sex offender" the circumstances of their guilt are not identified.
A frat could streak at a party, and if a minor is present and a complaint made, that poor guy is then on a register as as a "sex offender"!

We have the same problems in the UK too.

I don't think this stems from religion any more. It probably did at one time, but now it's all about political correctness and "protecting children". Just look at Italy, the epicentre of Catholicism, and they're at it like Bunnies!
The attitudes to sex in mainland Europe are probably the most relaxed anywhere in the world.

One thing that really does bother me is censorship.
The idea that some government body or panel of people have the right to tell me what I can view and what I can't (while such things are within law) is insane.
Again (just as it was in the 80's) it's put down to protecting minors. What about the responsibility of the parents? They can control the PC, the Cable TV, they can monitor what their kids are doing (if they do their job right) and it doesn't need to affect the rest of society through the implementation of insane laws and restrictions.

It completely baffles me why we "protect" people from the realities of sex between adults, nudity etc, and yet we are quite happy to see news at any hour of the day where one country is slaughtering another over religious belief or ownership of resources and land.

Originally posted by detachedindividual


Again (just as it was in the 80's) it's put down to protecting minors. What about the responsibility of the parents? They can control the PC, the Cable TV, they can monitor what their kids are doing (if they do their job right) and it doesn't need to affect the rest of society through the implementation of insane laws and restrictions.

All good points, but what interests me about this one is that if we are so concerned about protecting young people from sexual content why hasn't the law cracked down on the internet? How is it that ANYONE can go to Google, type in most whatever they wish to see, click 'Images' and there you go? Google doesn't check age...and the sites that do just ask you to tell them how old you are.

Funny, imagine you could buy alchohol that way.

The problem with what the article is talking about is that it was speaking about a 16 year old girl who was turned a pole into a stripper pole.

We could have national naked Fridays for all I care, but a 16 year old girl has no buisness acting like a stripper. If that means I am a prude, fine, I call it having common sense. Something her father is sorely lacking. He is to busy riding his gravy train as far as he can.

I think that everyone sees sex/sexuality from their own little microscopic view of the world.

You can't classify all Americans or all Europeans based on the actions of a few.

When we raised our kids we were pretty open about sex. We live in the country and breeding animals was part of that experience. They learned as they grew up about the sexual act.

We never hid or tried to repress anything about sex/sexuality from them. The one thing that we did talk to them about was STDs. We wanted our kids to enjoy their lives without hangups.

Some of the generalizations I've read here crack me up.

Originally posted by jd140
The problem with what the article is talking about is that it was speaking about a 16 year old girl who was turned a pole into a stripper pole.

We could have national naked Fridays for all I care, but a 16 year old girl has no buisness acting like a stripper. If that means I am a prude, fine, I call it having common sense. Something her father is sorely lacking. He is to busy riding his gravy train as far as he can.

I see your point, however in this case she shouldn't be dancing the way she does at all. What does the pole matter? Go Google 'Miley Cyrus' click images and see how many of the photos that pop up can't in any way be construed as suggestive.

Go to the local mall, and see how many younger girls are walking around with shorts shorts with the words 'Juicy' plastered on the back.

It's NOT OK to objectify girls, no matter the age, my point is that the objectification stems from our attitudes towards sex. As does our reaction to it...and our definition of objectification is a little twisted if we consider the Liebowitz photos 'sexual'.

I guess, our culture seems a bit sexually confused? Prude may not be the word at all.

I should add that all of this is obviously relative to where you live. Not ALL of America is the same. This is what I observe from what I see presented in the media, and the way people react to it. Including people around me.

I swear there were people around me disgusted by the 'breast feeding' shot on some mag cover (Vanity Fair? not sure) 4 years ago or so.

[edit on 21-8-2009 by El Davicho]

reply to post by El Davicho


I didn't bother watching the video, I saw clips on television and felt dirty just for watching that disgusting display.

If her dance was just as bad as the pole routine then I agree with you. Her dad needs to grow a set and stop trying to cash in on his daughter. She is 16, not a sex symbol as her dad is trying to maker her out to be.

Originally posted by jd140
reply to post by El Davicho

 

I didn't bother watching the video, I saw clips on television and felt dirty just for watching that disgusting display.

If her dance was just as bad as the pole routine then I agree with you. Her dad needs to grow a set and stop trying to cash in on his daughter. She is 16, not a sex symbol as her dad is trying to maker her out to be.

See, watching it didn't bother me in the slightest. It didn't appeal to me, because I'm not a fan of her music, but it didn't strike me as overtly sexual. Eye of the beholder I guess...

But I guarantee you she IS a sex symbol to the girls her age, and I can guarantee you boys her age are drooling over her. And it would be the case with or without the video and the pole.

[edit on 21-8-2009 by El Davicho]

Its one thing to be open and honest about the reality that a girl, or guy, can be very sexual before the age of 18, its another altogether to allow them to do just about anything or wear just about anything they want.

Part of accepting sexuality is to also accept limits to conduct.

Just from what walks past my house every day I get the impression that it is all the rage for very young girls to go around with only a minimum clothes -- everything short-short and skimpy. I am sure they get it from the likes of M.S. and others on tv.

It may be innocent exploration, but it is fraught with risk as well. I am all for honesty, but parents should not be afraid to set limits as well.