Violence>>>>>>Humping. Why?

[Skepticktok]

As I reflected on "Christian culture" after leaving it something really struck me. Why is it that among many Christians images of violence are so much more acceptable then images of two people enjoying consentual sexual activity? I know one pastor who was far more concerned that his son might see a movie/tv show where two people were having sex then he was that his son would see a movie in which people were shooting at one another. Has anyone else noticed this about their Christian loved ones and friends? Do you have any explanations?

 

I made a video about it actually.

 

[VacuumFlux]

You can't see that movie, it's rated R! Oh, wait, just for violence? There's no nudity, no suggestive scenes, no foul language? Oh, ok, go ahead and watch it.

 

I've seen that plenty, I now think it's crazy, but I don't have much of an explanation other than taboos are strange things.

 

Maybe it's got something to do with purity? I read something once where morality can be put into a couple of categories, and one of them is purity. One big difference between social conservatives and social liberals was that the conservatives placed much more importance on the category of purity. Violence is in a different moral category than sexuality and cussing. Ah, found a brief thing about it on wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Haidt#Moral_Foundations_Theory

[dyanaprajna0]

I have a theory. I think it's because xtians don't approve of sex generally, while they're prone to violence themselves, so it's more in the ok category. It probably has something to do with their mental disorders and whatnot. Just my opinion.

[Eugene39]

It's just an extension of the Christian God. He's "a little" violent.

[Skepticktok]

That's what I was thinking too. Violence in the Bible is "rationalized" so much more then overt sexuality (Song of Solomon/Songs excluded.)

[SairB]

Maybe it's because there's some twisted notion that portrayal of sex will be more 'tempting' than portrayal of violence?

 

I don't know. There's certainly some reason and some statistical evidence to support the idea that watching violent movies and playing violent video games helps to desensitise people to the severity of violent actions; but perhaps there's still some concern that whilst the negative consequences of violence are easy to apprehend (depending upon the portrayal, of course), the supposed negative consequences of 'illicit' sex are not so, and therefore all possibility of seeing sexual activity as a source of pleasure, release, relaxation and sundry other positive consequences is completely taboo as far as uptight Christians are concerned.

 

Yet there was that appalling Mel Gibson movie, The Passion of the Christ, which was essentially torture porn for Christians. I read that there were Catholic parents taking their children to see this cinematic abomination, and that was somehow not reprehensible because it was all in the Buy-bull, y'know, and therefore perfectly pure and unproblematic.

 

At the end of the day, Christianity glorifies torture, suffering and humiliation, whilst abominating bodily pleasure of any kind, and that is ultimately the reason that violence gets a free pass whilst they are busy clamping down on anything suggestive of sex, especially in the context of enjoyment of same.

[JoeCoastie]

Funny how the Christian right sees "sexual deviancy" as what's destroying the country rather than violence. You won't hear Rick Santorum talk about bullying, school shootings, or gang violence, but he's all over same sex marriage, abortion, and birth control.

My parents were like this. Made me afraid of sex for a while, but now I can finally have sex without guilt.

[JohnnieNaked]

It's interesting to me that bonobo's have the most promiscuous and gratuitous sex out of any primate species and have the least violence. They actually screw to deal with social issues. Chimpanzees however, only have sex for reproduction and they are a highly violent animal.

 

Weird huh?

 

Maybe we should all just screw the problem away. If more people had more sex, there'd be a LOT less violence imo.

[mcdaddy]

It's interesting to me that bonobo's have the most promiscuous and gratuitous sex out of any primate species and have the least violence. They actually screw to deal with social issues. Chimpanzees however, only have sex for reproduction and they are a highly violent animal.

 

Weird huh?

 

Maybe we should all just screw the problem away. If more people had more sex, there'd be a LOT less violence imo.

 

I second.

[LoneTarus]

It's interesting to me that bonobo's have the most promiscuous and gratuitous sex out of any primate species and have the least violence. They actually screw to deal with social issues. Chimpanzees however, only have sex for reproduction and they are a highly violent animal.

 

Weird huh?

 

Maybe we should all just screw the problem away. If more people had more sex, there'd be a LOT less violence imo.

 

I would be glad to test this theory out. any volunteers?

[lunaticheathen]

[TheBluegrassSkeptic]

I always thought that sex was a form of male rite of passage and a punishment of humility. In the bible, men started sexual encounters as a right. Also in the bible, men raped other men as a form of humility. So I really don't understand why christards today have such an issue with sex in movies. Honestly, their version of sex is more disgusting than any movie that could be put out there. As far as the acceptance of violence, well it is a blood ritual based cult, so it makes sense they justify that.

[Akheia]

Well, that whole "bloodthirsty savage barbaric god" thing, and Christians tend to view morality in terms of sexual expression. Moreover, when they say "purity," they really mean "the utter control of women's expression of sexuality." And a woman's purity is measured 100% by if/when she spreads her legs, for whom, how often, for what purpose, and under which circumstances.

 

I don't get the terror around women's sexuality, but the Abrahimic religion is famous for spazzing out royally over it.

[TrailBlazer]

The bible is full of sex and violence, and this phenomenon still applies. Children learn in Sunday school all about how David slayed Goliath, how God slaughtered the masses of pagans, how Sampson defeated great armies.... etc. But what Sunday school lesson ever talks about Song of Solomon, or the meaning of the phrase "and then he knew her", or the rape of Tamar. or even the definition of Concubine!

 

There's a fine line when it comes to children and how much is appropriate for them to know about sex for their age, but sheltering children from the realities of healthy sex is likely to backfire and manifest itself into various forms/degrees of sexual dysfunction later in life.

[Kaiser01]

We are a culture acustomed to violence, its far more pervasive than sex even though thats pretty pervasive as well.

[AKR]

Maybe because violence was promoted in the Bible while sexuality was usually condemned. Seems backwards, but most of Christianity is.

[alpha centauri]

I also have been disgusted with our society's propensity to portray, elevate and fantacize about violence (lots of movies have made millions of dollars selling "gore porn").

 

You can find those movies readily for sale in Wal-Mart (such as "Saw," etc), but videos portraying consenting adults enjoying a good fuck in graphic detail are labeled triple x, and before the internet, people who wanted to see them would have to go to an adult video store.

 

I find graphic violence much more horrific than graphic sex, but somehow, our twisted culture (dominated by god-fearing Christians) is content to accept violence, while portraying sex as shameful, dirty and perverted (except as they strictly define it).

[falemon]

The concerns relating to sex, and the susceptibility of young people towards sexual behaviour in response to popular culture are far more pressing than the likely influence of violence in certain types of households.

 

How much do violent movies encourage fighting and violence compared to sexual behaviour. Sexual behaviour is much more common and is something people are expected to get involved with so when it comes to movies I would imagine that parents wouldn't want their children to be tempted or have their curiosity for sex triggered at too early of an age.

 

So I don't think it's irrational for there to be more noise made about sex than violence. There are reasons you don't show porn to 5 year old girls, it's sexual.

 

People watch pornography because it gives sexual pleasure. The same cannot be said for violence, unless, well ...

[Skepticktok]

I saw this happen again recently when I was watching John Carter of Mars with my loved ones (one of whom is six years old.) Her guardian, a devout Pentecostal, was far more concerned about a scene where two people kissed vs. all of the sword fights and killing.

There seems to be an underlying assumption in this violence>>>>>humping debate that sex is inheriantly bad or something that, reluctantly, we have to live with in the confines of marriage. Another Ex-Christian friend of mine put forth the idea recently that so many people are more concerned about sex because they can understand being "turned on" whereas they don't really understand the urge to murder people.

I do really believe that some of the panic over this has alot to do with the fact that many of the adults in question don't know how to deal with sexuality in their own lives and are projecting it onto children and young adults.
  

[Geezer]

I get the obsession with the sex thing. I think that’s why Baptist are against dancing. It’s my understanding they fear someone might think they are having sex while standing up.    

[Akheia]

I get the obsession with the sex thing. I think that’s why Baptist are against dancing. It’s my understanding they fear someone might think they are having sex while standing up.    

That was more or less the exact rationale given to me while in both the Southern Baptist and Pentecostal churches. They viewed dancing as foreplay. Confusingly, even married couples were not allowed to dance.

[MissingLink]

When my children were younger, my brother and I had this same discussion. He asked me why I worried more about them seeing sex scenes than violent ones.  This is probabably a total cop-out, but the only way I could explain it to him was to say that I could tell my children, "That's fake blood", or, "He's not really dead", but nudity/sexual scenes are pretty much real.  Damn our puritan heritage!

[Geezer]

Repressed sexuality is not only a problem but it can lead to some serious consequences. Many here are probably familiar with the Mary Winkler case in 2006 that occurred in Selmer TN. Both Mary and her Church of Christ preacher husband’s family heritage was Church of Christ. Her husband’s father was a well known and respected preacher in the Church of Christ.

 

Mary shot her husband in the back with a shotgun at point blank range. Her trial revealed that she had been a battered wife. The list of his alleged abuses was quite lengthy.  Many wondered why she simply didn’t divorce him, but those who are familiar with the Church of Christ know why. In the c of c divorce simply isn’t an option for anyone let alone a preacher from a well known c of c family.

 

According to her testimony he made her dress up like a hooker and submit to rough sex which included anal penetration.  The c of c are extreme bible literalist, so Mary was little more than his property in his eyes. And as her husband, at least in his mind and from what he was taught, she had to submit to his will whatever his will might be.

 

If her testimony was true, and the jury believed her because she was acquitted, then he was a sexual sadist. It also came out that he had a large collection of porn and he made her watch it with him. Now if you’re not a Christian then role playing within marriage probably isn’t a big deal and couples who engage in it voluntarily likely have fun and enjoy it. Porn, in and of itself, is probably looked upon as a form of sexual fantasy and entertainment by consenting adults, but that is not the normal attitude when Christians become involved in this kind of sexual fantasy or activity.

 

That kind of stuff is sin brother and Christians, especially any kind of fundamentalist Christian, is mandated to denounce it and anyone who becomes involved with it. If it was known that  Mary’s husband was involved with porn and wanted to role play prostitution with his wife he would have been fired on the spot and blacklisted from ever being allowed to do anything again in the Churches of Christ, and his father might have suffered too for not bringing his son up right.

 

I doubt if the nature of Christianity’s obsession with sex is really understood outside Christianity, but it should be considering all the minister’s and Church officials that have been arrested for engaging in sexual acts and activities that are illegal.  The thing that is usually the most desirable is the thing that we’re denied. And that is also often the thing that is the most salacious too. Illicit sexual activities has destroyed a lot of men, their fortunes, and their careers.  

[Geezer]

I’ll add this addendum to my prior post. When the Mary Winker incident occurred I was still active on the ex-Church of Christ web site. Mary received virtually no sympathy whatsoever over there. In fact most posters were outraged that she wasn’t sentenced to life in prison.

 

I would be interested in finding out what people think about her be acquitted here on this site.

 

 

A life time movie was made about this incident. I think the name of it is The Pastor's Wife. Selmer TN is about 125 miles from us and our local TV had extensive coverage during the trial. The movie version is typical Hollywood. They obviously didn't do their research because the movie is filled with errors. The c of c is probably one of the few Christian religions that don't exhibit the cross inside their buildings and it would be unusual for them to have one outside their building too, but I have seen one occasionally outside the building but never inside. And Church of Christ "clergy" are only referred to as the preacher or minister but never, and I mean never, as the pastor. That would be a major no no. The movie got a lot of other stuff wrong too, but the story line pretty much follows the trial transcript.

 

If my memory is correct, and it may not be, I think the reason she was acquitted was because the prosecutor over charged her. I think the jury was only given the option of finding her guilty or innocent of first degree murder. If the prosecutor had charged her with manslaughter the jury would likely have convicted her.

[ContraBardus]

The main symbol of Christianity is an implement for torture and the image of a man who never had sex being tortured to death... Their entire faith revolves around the story behind that image with an especially large focus on those events and putting them in a positive light... Republican Jesus suffered and died for you! Appreciate it and play with your guns!

 

Suddenly it all makes sense!