boobies and pee-pees and bums and pussies
At this moment, The Drudge Report is reporting that the FCC Chairman is or has threatened to revoke CBS liscense over Janet Jackson's breastcapade. Does someone have any aspirin?
This is sort of the exact opposite sort of thing that I've been trying to get at on this here blog for the last few weeks, but that sort of opposite that's sort of the exact same thing...Opposite in that one side of the coin is that sex is too important and the absence of it is the perceived death of a person whereas the other side of the coin keeps sex at an etremely long arm's length away...the coin, of course, being sex obsession.
I just don't get the neo-puritan movement. I guess it's not really new at all, but it is a sexual conservatism that is self-defeating in it's own close-mindedness. It's the sort of view that says it all right that Nelly is singing about it being hot and the need to remove clothing and Justin Timberlake and Janet Jackson are also singing about undressing but once skin is shown, a line is crossed. It's the sort of view that actually believes that two deeply in love gay guys getting married to each other will catastrophically disrupt the moral fabric of this country while condoning two kids that don't even know themselves get married for all the wrong reasons because they're at least being responsible about their sexuality and not naging before marriage. It's the sort of view that shuns overt sexuality and yet protects the closests in which very scary skeletons often loom. It's a sex obsession that is completely wrapped up in image just as much as its opposite...and just as fucked up.
I don't understand the idea that a breast being on television is indecent. I don't see anything indecent about the human body at all and see absolutely no reason why nudity, at least in a non-sexual form, is not allowed in the public arena. I do not see why suggestive, though not explicit, sexual nudity is allowed in forums where children are not likely to view it. I do not understand how being in America what I am suggesting here is radical and even perverse, whereas inmost all of Europe it would be considered rather conservative. But that's beside the point...I got a bit detracted there.
The point is explicit sexuality is just as dangerous and unhealthy as the repressed sexuality that the more puritanical among us promote. Denial of sexual freedom (in the case of anti-homosexuality) and outrage at the chance appearance of excessive skin (in the case of the Superbowl breastcapade) is just as erosive to society as promiscuity is. Crying about gay people getting married and breasts a-poppin' is going to cause children to question what these things are even more than belly-shirts and PDAs ever will...and the forbidden fruit factor ("It was not that Adam ate the apple for the apple's sake, but because it was forbidden" - Mark Twain) has influenced mankind more than any other force perhaps greed and love. When will people learn?
It is an idea that many of the great teachers taught -- moderation. It was a major tenant of Jesus, of Buddha, Aristotle, Goldilocks, and others. Not too much, not too little. Sexual obsession either direction is anything but healthy.
This is sort of the exact opposite sort of thing that I've been trying to get at on this here blog for the last few weeks, but that sort of opposite that's sort of the exact same thing...Opposite in that one side of the coin is that sex is too important and the absence of it is the perceived death of a person whereas the other side of the coin keeps sex at an etremely long arm's length away...the coin, of course, being sex obsession.
I just don't get the neo-puritan movement. I guess it's not really new at all, but it is a sexual conservatism that is self-defeating in it's own close-mindedness. It's the sort of view that says it all right that Nelly is singing about it being hot and the need to remove clothing and Justin Timberlake and Janet Jackson are also singing about undressing but once skin is shown, a line is crossed. It's the sort of view that actually believes that two deeply in love gay guys getting married to each other will catastrophically disrupt the moral fabric of this country while condoning two kids that don't even know themselves get married for all the wrong reasons because they're at least being responsible about their sexuality and not naging before marriage. It's the sort of view that shuns overt sexuality and yet protects the closests in which very scary skeletons often loom. It's a sex obsession that is completely wrapped up in image just as much as its opposite...and just as fucked up.
I don't understand the idea that a breast being on television is indecent. I don't see anything indecent about the human body at all and see absolutely no reason why nudity, at least in a non-sexual form, is not allowed in the public arena. I do not see why suggestive, though not explicit, sexual nudity is allowed in forums where children are not likely to view it. I do not understand how being in America what I am suggesting here is radical and even perverse, whereas in
The point is explicit sexuality is just as dangerous and unhealthy as the repressed sexuality that the more puritanical among us promote. Denial of sexual freedom (in the case of anti-homosexuality) and outrage at the chance appearance of excessive skin (in the case of the Superbowl breastcapade) is just as erosive to society as promiscuity is. Crying about gay people getting married and breasts a-poppin' is going to cause children to question what these things are even more than belly-shirts and PDAs ever will...and the forbidden fruit factor ("It was not that Adam ate the apple for the apple's sake, but because it was forbidden" - Mark Twain) has influenced mankind more than any other force perhaps greed and love. When will people learn?
It is an idea that many of the great teachers taught -- moderation. It was a major tenant of Jesus, of Buddha, Aristotle, Goldilocks, and others. Not too much, not too little. Sexual obsession either direction is anything but healthy.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home