Pornography restrictions being codified into law, adult art being restricted from most Lemmy instances, Tarot readers blotting out the nudity on their cards on Reddit.

I’m watching the Magicians, on Amazon, and I use subtitles. All the curse words are purposefully filled in with random letters, so as not to offend the reader.

What’s up with all the prudishness? Can people knock it off, please?

People have vaginas. And titties. And dicks. And asses. They swear. They drink. They fuck. Why is this generation afraid of that? Acknowledging these things isn’t going to increase your chances of being sexually violated. So, what’s the deal?

  • captainlezbian@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    6 hours ago

    Yep, and it’s a real problem imo. People are becoming afraid of sexual content. As someone who’s been involved in free the nipple (a feminist movement aiming for the acceptance of bared breasts outside of sexual contexts), who’s done nonsexual full nudity in various forms, and also has engaged in orgies, this prudishness really concerns me. Sexual and body liberation are part of women’s liberation and general freedom, including in thoughts, expression, and action.

    Sexual frustration, fear, resentment, and immaturity is also a part of fascistic thinking and I believe it’s a contributor to the modern far right. Love and pleasure are becoming more stigmatized than hate and pain. Accepting that it’s ok if art or someone’s actions are more sexual than you’d like so long as it’s not targeting you is vital.

    Like obviously I appreciate NSFW tags, just because I acknowledge breasts can be nonsexual doesn’t mean I want to accidentally have them pop up in my feed at work.

    Also lol at censoring the magicians, one of my favorite shows and a prime example of a show that loses a ton of characterization and theming by censoring it

  • Hanrahan@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    17 hours ago

    yes they are, US religiosity and prudishness is coming for us all.

    It’s been a slippery slope, Bush had aid pinned to family first values, Obama had Hillary tie aid to stopping sex trafficking, (not on Epstein’s island though apparently) reads well in the news… alas it played out in the streets of Cambodia that women with condoms were jailed because why else you need condom unless you’re a hooker ? also gave them a reason to stop and frisk women. My partner and I were living there back then, what a fucking mess.

  • metermatic26@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    22 hours ago

    I think at least part of it is a backlash against the proliferation of pornography (its shocking just how prolific and how degrading porn actually is compared to the ‘good ‘ol days’). A lot of youngsters were first confronted with porn as children through their smartphones.

    But a lot of it also has to do with changing attitudes towards woman and sexuality. We’ve had corporations marketing woman and teen girls as sex objects for decades now, but we now also have an increase of violence against woman and we have the manosphere and far-right extremists campaigning against basic woman’s rights like abortion, equal pay and whatnot.

    So I guess the real question is, are more people taking offense of nudity because of their conservative beliefs? Or are more people viewing nudity in popular media as a means of sexualizing (and thus degrading) women?

    • DudleyMason@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      9 hours ago

      sexualizing (and thus degrading)

      That core attitude is a big part why I can’t respect this new secular Mormonism. There’s nothing degrading about sexualization. The very idea of it is tied to the idea that a woman’s worth is tied up in her virginity, which is a concept born from the patriarchal ownership of women. Sexualization is only degrading to property because it reduces the value of the property. Anyone who claims they don’t see women as property but that sexualization does degrade women is incredibly confused.

  • TwistedTurtle@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    25
    ·
    1 day ago

    I find the wanton sexualization of the 80s and 90s almost wholesome compared to whatever the fuck is going on these days. Sex is too important to be relegated to porn - but that seems to be the mission now.

    We’re allowed to have heaps of gratuitous violence, action, and misery in our art - but for some reason sex/nudity has this unique obligation to directly progress the plot (if it can’t be removed altogether). Sex apparently can’t just be part of character development, themes, world building, or just gratuitous fun, anymore without giving these fucking prudes the ick.

    • Corkyskog@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 day ago

      I remember going to the UK as a teenager back in the early 2000s and was culture shocked by the lack of violence. It was just so different, it was more shocking then the extra sex.

  • Muffi@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    41
    ·
    1 day ago

    Very much so.

    I am Danish. A lot of our culture and humor used to revolve around the naked body and sex. This has totally changed within the last 20 years.

    My personal theory is that social media censorship of anything sexual is the reason. America exported their prudish culture and it is erasing our culture.

  • crimsonpoodle@pawb.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    1 day ago

    Different people have different reasons.

    Small group of real prudes: either actually feel this way, or hold various levels of opinions, or are generally ambivalent to sexual content but have decided to construe sexualization with sexual misconduct. It works; no sex, no sexual misconduct.

    Then the advertisers cater to those people because they don’t want to get bad press and want the broadest appeal: non sexual things appeal to prudes and non prudes alike: so make everything non sexual. Avoid offense and maximize eye balls.

    Then platforms want to attract advertisers, so they make rules and filters that over reach. Afterall if nothing is remotely close to sexual then we don’t chance there being an Ad next to something sexually offensive.

    Then the content creators, whos livelihood depends on the unequal relationship with the platforms self censor to attempt to avoid the broad stroke of platform censorship.

    The middle ground then becomes vacant. The sexual but not sexually offensive content gets thinned out. So there is less and less of a reason for platforms, or advertisers, or creators to allow, endorse, or create that content.

    This is why vocal opinions of small groups hold so much sway today. The cycle feeds into itself as people whos only interaction with sexual content is hardcore porn generally fall into that second “ambivolent but lets avoid it just to be safe”. This pipline then has a complicated but similar relationship on the political side of things.

  • DudleyMason@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 day ago

    It’s really all our faults. The first time someone used the phrase “horny jail” unironically and wasn’t slapped into the following week, we invited this. The first time someone complained about a sex scene in a movie and wasn’t shunned from their entire social circle and relegated to hanging out with the Boomer ladies at the local church, we began building the world we’re trapped in.

    And the people in here defending this new secular Puritan paradigm all sound fucking insufferable. It doesn’t matter if you’re an upright prude because your gullible enough to think sex makes God angry or if you’re an upright prude because you think it’s a feminist position. Either way you’re still a jackass who’s clinging to a sexual morality invented by bronze age goat herders to maximize the prices they could get for selling their teenage daughters to their middle aged friends.

    • MonkeMischief@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      21 hours ago

      The first time someone used the phrase “horny jail” unironically and wasn’t slapped into the following week

      Maybe I’m incorrect but I always thought this came about because people went so ridiculously in the other direction where their dopamine-receptors were completely captured by pornhub, that it was a polite way to bop them on the nose for being a gross gooner in completely non-sexual contexts.

      Like anything amusing on the Internet though, it simultaneously started to mean everything and nothing at all, I guess. Lol

      • Weydemeyer@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        8 hours ago

        I agree. The places on the internet where the phrase “horny jail” or similar phrases are used tend to skew towards having more men than women. And turns out women (and plenty of men!) are not comfortable with a post about how AOC is opposing data center construction and there’s a bunch of comments about how hot she is. The idea is to create a space where people may not feel comfortable can be comfortable that is appropriate to the purpose of the thing. Most of the “prudishness” and censoring OOP and others are citing relates to sexualization in places where there are specific reasons not to sexualize. Just because you can’t be weirdly sexual when talking about like, news of the day doesn’t mean someone else is being prudish, come on.

      • DudleyMason@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        20 hours ago

        their dopamine-receptors were completely captured by pornhub, that it was a polite way to bop them on the nose for being a gross gooner in completely non-sexual contexts.

        Even if true, I stand by what I said.

        Anyone not radically sex-positive has the same effect on society as a whole as the most vehement anti-porn crusader, because puritanism is the cultural default anywhere the spiritual descendants of those bronze age goat fucking child sellers have been able to rule (almost everywhere now).

  • L0rdMathias@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 day ago

    No. These things come in waves. We’re certainly on the prudish side of the cycle right now, but the modern prudes are a far cry from the prudes of yesteryear.

    The world propensity for prudeness is trending down on a macro scale, but we are also at a point where the existing prudes have consolidated and are the strongest they’ve been in the short term.

  • Sherad@lemmygrad.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    16 hours ago

    I don’t like prudes either, and I do think it comes in part from certain kinds of morally compartmentalized people who are wound so tight from societal/religious/cultural pressures and envy of those who don’t feel as bound to such things that they need it to keep being some taboo thing for their own weird peace of mind.

    Not sure if anyone said this yet but I do wonder sometimes if (widely available/freely accessible porn) is also about control/atomization. Having a socially disconnected populace that can only satisfy their innate sexual urges by some sort of supernormal stimuli viewed on a screen that the system can control is just another data point that can be exploited/behavior controlled.

    The less real connections someone can make with real people who don’t conform to their supernormal standards, the less they might be able to form communities that can be self-sufficient (to a degree) or fight to change things in the real world. Being physically intimate with someone isnt just a way of sharing pleasure or expressing affection, it’s also one of several highly motivating factors for people to touch grass, which is where 99% of everything that matters actually happens.

    Beyond the scope of the topic here, I suppose. Porn is just one avenue. I’m not against it, but there are plenty of reasons to revile the abusive industries that churn it out, and the proliferation of hollow AI porn bots that give people psychosis.

    I also blame marketing research and of course, capitalism, for degrading everything they touch to soulless data points to be collated and directed by the whims of those with the power to do it.

  • RichardNixos@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    19
    ·
    1 day ago

    I’m watching the Magicians, on Amazon, and I use subtitles. All the curse words are purposefully filled in with random letters, so as not to offend the reader.

    IANAL, but in my opinion this violates the “functionally equivalent services” test of the Americans with Disabilities Act Title IV, and in a just world they would get hit with a massive lawsuit.

    • captainlezbian@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      6 hours ago

      Both someone hard of hearing and a fan of that show (which incidentally was some of the best deaf rep I’ve seen) it’s such an offensive thing to do. We deserve word for word captions at a minimum (and none of that “speaking Spanish” bs), we should also have access to captions that include speakers, non verbal sounds, tone indicators, etc.

      But also that show uses sexual content and profanity as crucial artistic elements. The long term trauma of rape is a major theme of early seasons. Multiple characters use sex as a means of distracting themselves from their life and thoughts, some use it as the only vulnerable connection they can have.

    • BeMoreCareful@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 day ago

      I feel like half the captions are AI now and are pretty shit. In a few more years it’ll be illegal to have a disability.