21 ms·

I find the US prudishness thing so fascinating. I'm travelling at the moment, and meeting lots of Americans (and Europeans for contrast). There's definitely a h

I find the US prudishness thing so fascinating. I'm travelling at the moment, and meeting lots of Americans (and Europeans for contrast). There's definitely a huge difference in tolerance for swearing and blasphemy. Also several well-educated and seemingly intelligent Americans who hold strong racist opinions. But that's another subject. I guess it all comes down to the religion. Americans do seem to be more religious, specifically more Christian, and the Christian Church has always taught that sex should only be for procreation. Enjoying it is a sin, apparently. Though I can't find that anywhere in any of the commandments, or the new testament. Plenty of instruction about not murdering people, though, but that didn't seem to get through...

lou1306 8y ago
Italy is (was?) quite religious too, what with Vatican City and a very long Christian-Democratic dominance in national politics, but it is also the birthplace of commedia sexy [1], and erotic comics artists such as Milo Manara and Guido Crepax were quite famous back in their day (they still are). The US seem especially prudish when it comes the depiction of sex in arts and entertainment. [1]: https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commedia_sexy_all%27italiana https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commedia_sexy_all%27italiana
- thaumasiotes 8y ago
  > it is also the birthplace of commedia sexy [1] > [1]: https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commedia_sexy_all%27italiana https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commedia_sexy_all%27italiana Sure enough, the Italian genre name is commedia sexy. I'm always interested in phrases like this -- sexy is obviously an English word. It's very common for foreign words to be borrowed when the speaker feels that the concept they express doesn't have a good match in his own language. I'm pretty confident that everything I understand by the word "sexy" can be idiomatically expressed in Italian that is not obviously foreign. Do you happen to know what the Italians mean by using "sexy" as opposed to a more natural-looking word?
  - BerislavLopac 8y ago
    I can't speak for Italian, but coming for another very heavily Catholic country I would say that the reason is that most other words having to do with sex are very much perceived as either bad (e.g. blasphemous or just rude), or simply medical, based on the traditional usage. The word "sexy" (as opposed to "sex") has always had an air of playfulness and joy.
  - klez 8y ago
    In Italian we use "sexy" in a way that roughly means "erotic" or "sexually exciting".
    - lou1306 8y ago
      I would like to add that Italians tend to borrow English words a lot. (In the 19th century it was the same, but with French; ancient Romans were similarly fascinated by Greek). There may be multiple reasons for that. In IT, English terms (kernel, firmware, bootloader, driver, etc.) are usually preferred because translations might be more ambiguous. In other cases, English just sounds more exotic/sophisticated to the average listener.
- umvi 8y ago
  Italy is not religious at all. Everyone is "catholic" but nobody actually goes to church or leads christian lives other than meaningless rote rituals. Try to get Italians to start going to church regularly, reading the Bible regularly, etc. and you'll be met with indifference or hostility.
  - lou1306 8y ago
    I agree this may be true today, but the example I have cited come from the 60s and the 70s. For contex, divorce became allowed in 1970 (a 1974 referendum unsuccessfully tried to repeal that law); abortion was a crime until 1978 (again, a 1981 referendum failed to repeal the law). Same-sex unions have only been introduced in 2016. So, even though religious sentiment may be weak, the Italian cultural and political landscape is hugely influenced by the views of the Church. As an aside, reading the Bible has never been a strong part of Catholic religiousness anyway, due to the fact that biblical exegesis has been historically (ie. until Vatican II) reserved to the clergy. There are indeed other forms of devotion, like the rosary or the liturgy of the Hours, which are more or less frowned upon by more "secular" people.
ChrisSD 8y ago
More specifically, it's US' brand of Evangelical Protestantism that's ultra prudish. This seems to have seeped into their society as a whole.
azernik 8y ago
> Though I can't find that anywhere in any of the commandments, or the new testament. A quibble - while this negative view of sex may not be the view of other texts in the Bible, it is very clearly part of Paul's worldview, as evidenced in e.g. 2 Corinthians.
- zozbot123 8y ago
  > while this negative view of sex may not be the view of other texts in the Bible, it is very clearly part of Paul's worldview, as evidenced in e.g. 2 Corinthians. A further quibble - Paul's worldview wrt. sex is actually, and very clearly, a negative view of Graeco-Roman sexual practices, which were by-and-large openly exploitive. And that negative view was broadly shared by philosophers at the time, especially within Stoicism[1] - indeed, there had been at least some philosophically-inspired criticism of Greek practices, however understated, even centuries before Jesus or Paul. [1] The broader historical analogies between Stoic and early Christian views actually explain a lot of early Christianity's success, particularly within Graeco-Roman elites. We have sources essentially stating as much, such as one Stoic philosopher regarding "the wise king of the Jews" as the equal of Socrates and Pythagoras-- in that all of them were unjustly murdered, and yet their wisdom spread thereafter; proving that the favor of the gods is what really matters in the end.
  - azernik 8y ago
    I think this is understating his views - in 2 Corinthians, he is very clearly against sex period, and sees sex within marriage as a necessary evil for those unable to practice complete celibacy.
- marcus_holmes 8y ago
  Ah yes, the old misogynist himself. I forgot about him. Which is stupid of me, because this whole thing probably starts with him.
dancek 8y ago
To be fair, no major Christian church teaches that enjoying sex is a sin. The Roman Catholic Church does teach that contraception is sinful. No major Protestant church does.
- _jal 8y ago
  True, but in the US, they mostly all lay on the neuroticism about sex pretty heavily.
- TheOtherHobbes 8y ago
  Lust is considered one of the deadly sins. I'm not sure where the line between "lust" and "acceptable desire" is, and I suspect most Christians aren't either - although marriage and procreation usually seem to be involved somewhere. There are far more unconditionally sex-positive religions.
  - harimau777 8y ago
    From a theological perspective (which may be different from the social norms that a given church teaches) I think the answer would be that it is bad if it is outside of marriage, not done in love (e.g. objectifying someone), or if it becomes more important to someone than God (which would be considered idolatry).
    - state_less 8y ago
      It is bad... It is good... Why is it okay to treat people with such heavy handed authoritarianism. I wish more explanation was given.
      - minkzilla 8y ago
        There is, at least in the Catholic tradition, explanations for pretty much every teaching. From the doctors of the church (the most famous being Augustine), papal encyclicals, and ecumenicla councils. It is all very philosophically and scientifically grounded. You might disagree with the reasoning or a base assumption (natural law) but there are explanations. Normally it has to do with how your action effects yourself and others. In this case objectifying someone causes you to perhaps treat them poorly and prevents you from seeing the inherent dignity in them as a person. I’m not making a comment on this vs. violence because I think that’s a much more cultural thing in America and I haven’t looked into the Church’s stance on portrayal of violence, if it has one.
belorn 8y ago
I would also blame religion if not that here in Sweden we went from accepting sex and censoring violence to accepting violence and censoring sex, within about the span of almost just 10-20 years. The norm just changed and its very noticeable in movies if one compared those made before 1990 and those made after 2000. There is no corresponding change in the religious demographic. If anything that demographic went down until 2015, where for other reasons it started to go up.
- ChrisSD 8y ago
  Others in this thread think that's the influence the USA has had via their multinational tech companies.
- coldtea 8y ago
  That's the Americanization of the world. If most of one's movies, songs, tv shows, social media control, search engine biases, etc, come from a single country, with its cultural stickups, that's what you get.
  - extra88 8y ago
    > cultural stickups *cultural hangups, but I understood you.
    - zozbot123 8y ago
      He actually meant that people are literally being robbed of their culture at gunpoint, due to hostile American influence. That's what government-enforced censorship is, after all.
  - Flimm 8y ago
    I would hypothesize that it is due to the greater influence of feminism. I realise that not all feminists would agree, but many feminists have been against the objectification of women's bodies in pornography, sexualized advertising and media.
    - 8y ago
beobab 8y ago
Enjoying sex isn’t a sin. Sex is supposed to be held in the highest regard. It’s a wonderful and joyous thing. The point is, I believe, to avoid cheapening it, making it less than the truly awesome thing it is. It’s supposed to be a priceless gift shared with your true love. Packaging it and selling it makes it less valuable. I believe that if you approach the subject with that mindset, a lot of the decisions that society has made suddenly make a bit more sense.
- sacado2 8y ago
  Replace "sex" with "food" and you just described French culture.
  - yoz-y 8y ago
    Only the older generation snobbish french culture. If you look around here, restaurants that are full are kebabs, burger joins and other fastfood.
  - GuB-42 8y ago
    Poor quality food never was illegal in France. For a time, fast food joints avoided France because they thought there would be no market. There were wrong, and they are everywhere now. It doesn't mean the value of good food has cheapened. If anything, now that there is a point of comparison, the opposite is true. Good restaurants, from Michelin 3-star to inexpensive "plat du jour" lunches, are still there. So are long lunch breaks and good home cooking. And I am talking about people of every age.
    - stochastic_monk 8y ago
      There’s even a McDonald’s on the Champs-Élysées now.
      - microcolonel 8y ago
        I think there's a distinction between "poor quality" and "bad idea".
coldtea 8y ago
>I guess it all comes down to the religion. Americans do seem to be more religious, specifically more Christian, and the Christian Church has always taught that sex should only be for procreation. Yes, but that religious attitude also goes through the whole culture, so the puritanical / prudish attitude ends up in the minds of atheists and the public in general, even if they haven't stepped into a church in their life. So you get the phenomenon in all ends of the spectrum, from the Hayes code, CD "parental advisory" and moral panics of the right, to the political correctness and moral panics of the left. At the same time, the are religions like catholicism that can appear similarly reserved, but in social practice the majority of their adherents can be more open to sex, partying, and all kinds of moral ambiguity. There are exception in close knit communities under perceived attack (e.g. Ireland), but in the main they tend to be more open to "sin". That's because protestantism emerged as a fundamentalist "back to the original morality" sect, where strictness was its main thing.
- cat199 8y ago
  > CD "parental advisory" and moral panics of the right not so germaine, esp. given that your overall sentence was balanced, but 'parental advisory' can most clearly be traced to tipper gore, al gore's wife, and so, if one believes the 'left right' dichotomy valid for US politics, 'from the left'.. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tipper_Gore#Parents_Music_Resource_Center_(PMRC) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tipper_Gore#Parents_Music_Reso...
peterwwillis 8y ago
Americans always were, and continue to be, Puritanical. Since the late 60's we split into Puritans and Puritanically anti-Puritans. There's not much middle ground.
swiley 8y ago
Some uninformed churches may have taught that (there are a lot of pretty wacko churches in the US.) If you actually read the Bible though sex and marriage is supposed to be a sort of alagory for the church’s union with Christ and it’s supposed to be pleasant.
- marcus_holmes 8y ago
  It is the basis of the Catholic Church's opposition to contraception, and has been part of their teachings for over a thousand years now.
  - swiley 8y ago
    Yeah I would group the catholic church in with that. What they teach isn't really scripture but rather loosely inspired by it.
pbhjpbhj 8y ago
>and the Christian Church has always taught that sex should only be for procreation // What's your basis for saying that? Certainly Song of Songs (in the OT) presents erotic intimacy in a positive manner, and does not to my recollection mention procreation.
- eli_gottlieb 8y ago
  >Certainly Song of Songs (in the OT) presents erotic intimacy in a positive manner, and does not to my recollection mention procreation. Shir haShirim is a Jewish text. Christians sort of awkwardly avoid bringing it up, because, well, yeah, it's ancient Hebrew erotic poetry.
  - song-bringer 8y ago
    Actually, evangelicals and Protestants frequently bring it up as an affirmation of married love [1]. Catholics are more likely to bring it up as an allegory of love between God and the Church or even God and the individual soul (even considering the obvious interpretation to be "heretical"). This is pretty similar to the traditional and still occasional Jewish tradition of it singing it at Passover as an allegory of love between God and Israel [3]. [1] https://www.gotquestions.org/Song-of-Solomon.html https://www.gotquestions.org/Song-of-Solomon.html (popular, very evangelical / Baptist site) [2] http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03302a.htm http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03302a.htm (1913 Catholic encyclopedia) [3] https://www.chabad.org/holidays/passover/pesach_cdo/aid/1708/jewish/The-Song-of-Songs.htm https://www.chabad.org/holidays/passover/pesach_cdo/aid/1708...
yoz-y 8y ago
One thing that got me thinking the other day, is that English is the only language that i know of that has the X-word replacement for swear words. In other languages people either use a similar sounding word (fuck/fudge) or just don't use it. I'd be interested to know why is this and if other languages have a similar way of putting the word in your head without saying it.
Zelphyr 8y ago
> several well-educated and seemingly intelligent Americans who hold strong racist opinions At the risk of opening that particular can of worms; I'm curious to know if you can provide more details on this? As an American I suspect I am perhaps too close to the problem and unable to see it but most of the well-educated, intelligent people I know harbor little to no racial opinions.
- zapita 8y ago
  You are asking in good faith, so please don’t take this the wrong way. I can give you one clue: from your comment I already know that you are a white American, and that the “well-educated, intelligent people [you] know” are also overwhelmingly white. Ask yourself: how do I know this? It’s because never in a million years would an African-American, or Muslim American, or Native American, say something like that. Non-white Americans experience racism, both overt and subtle, every day. Most White Americans are oblivious to it because they live in a highly segregated society, and they don’t have any close friends or family experiencing it. So they perpetuate the myth of a “colorblind society” - the idea that race doesn’t matter in America anymore. And by denying the problem, we are doomed to perpetuate it. I recommend reading White Rage by Carol Anderson, it’s a good introduction to the topic. Every American should get educated on race relations 101. You can’t understand the USA without understanding the role racism plays in its history and institutions.
door5 8y ago
>Also several well-educated and seemingly intelligent Americans who hold strong racist opinions. But that's another subject. Bring up Muslims or Roma people to a European and you'll find this isn't a uniquely American problem.
- 13of40 8y ago
  Whoah there. Just because the parent is painting all Americans with one brush doesn't mean we have to reciprocate.
  - Tade0 8y ago
    Then again that bit about the Roma is somewhat accurate. On the other hand majority of the Roma refuse to assimilate, and on a much deeper level than pretty much any immigrant at that, so it's possible to imagine why this prejudice lives on.
    - door5 8y ago
      This is my point though -- European racism is portrayed always somehow "different". It's the exact same story and there are no excuses for it. Anti-Roma prejudice is no more rational or justified than any other prejudice, and it's just as violent and dangerous.
      - marcus_holmes 8y ago
        The same can be said for Australian prejudice against aboriginals. But I've never met a European traveler who expresses an anti-Roma opinion. I've met several US travelers who have expressed some really severe anti-African-American comments. So, yes, the prejudice is probably the same, but the level of hatred, and the willingness to express it, is not.
        door5 8y ago
        This is anecdotal, the data does not support your claim: http://www.pewglobal.org/2014/05/12/a-fragile-rebound-for-eu-image-on-eve-of-european-parliament-elections/pg-2014-05-12-eu-0-09/ http://www.pewglobal.org/2014/05/12/a-fragile-rebound-for-eu...
brobdingnagians 8y ago
My church doesn't teach it's only for procreation, and we are solidly Christian. We teach that it's also wholesome, fun, and great to be enjoyed between husbad and wife; a spark of the divine, if you will. That it is between a husband and wife and God to decide when to have children, and so contraception is totally appropriate. Sex helps build the relationship. I remember when my dad taught a lesson at church about how sex was great; and I took a class at a religious university where it was specifically taught we were sexual beings meant to enjoy it. Not prudish here, just also very conscious of how powerful a force it is and so it should be between life-long committed people who can make the most of it and enjoy it fully without having the emotional damage of sharing yourself with someone who then skips out on you. Use it how God intends it and it is even better.
- klmr 8y ago
  > Not prudish here, just also very conscious [that sex] should be between life-long committed people That is prudish. To be perfectly clear, it’s entirely fine to decide that this is the right thing for yourself. But the way your comment is written makes it clear that you think this is the only correct way, for everyone. Yeah, that’s extremely prudish.
  - brobdingnagians 8y ago
    definition of prudish: `having or revealing a tendency to be easily shocked by matters relating to sex or nudity; excessively concerned with sexual propriety.` Having a belief that a loved one would be happier if they do not take drugs and acting on that to attempt to persuade them is love and concern (and they are free to disagree with me). Having a belief that a loved one would be happier if refrained from using sex in a certain way is love and concern; not prudishness. We teach our children to not run in front of cars or to read Plato, why not impart other things we think will help them? whether or not you agree with the particulars, it is every persons duty to try to help the world be a bit better and happier.
    - klmr 8y ago
      The “excessively concerned with sexual propriety” part of the definition applies to what you’ve written. You’ve got some very clear and quite restrictive ideas about how sex is to be enjoyed, and you view other ways as harmful. And, to reiterate, that’s totally fine. But most people with differing opinions about sex will recognise yours as prudish.
bagacrap 8y ago
> Also several well-educated and seemingly intelligent Americans who hold strong racist opinions. But that's another subject Yes, it is, unless your subject is bashing Americans.
- marcus_holmes 8y ago
  no, it wasn't. I regret bringing it up now.
rexpop 8y ago
> Americans who hold strong racist opinions. But that's another subject. I'm not sure it is. America has strongly patriarchal institutions, enforcing very particular and rigid sex/gender roles. Our economy, for example, relies on women staying at home to raise children. This removes them from the arena of compensated labor, depriving them of commercial agency except as a bread-winning man's proxy. More or less. This kind of economic role-enforcement is also heavily racialized; latino workers are massively represented in agriculture, black workers in service work, and both groups are deprived of the high-pay, high-tech opportunities that white men like myself take for granted. In her indispensable feminist text, "The Will to Change", bell hooks uses the phrase “imperialist white-supremacist capitalist patriarchy” to describe the interlocking political systems that are the foundation of our nation’s politics.
pnw_hazor 8y ago
Christians aren't banning content on the internet. Tumbr, Facebook, and Twitter don't care a hoot about what Christians think. In some mainstream internet corners Christian content is more likely to banned than purient content.
- klmr 8y ago
  Could you give an example? I’m drawing a blank.
dang 8y ago
This comment managed to take the thread down a nationalistic flamewar tangent, a racial flamewar tangent, and a religious flamewar tangent. That's a hellish trifecta. I get that you didn't mean to, but can you please not post like that on this site? https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

lou1306 8y ago

Italy is (was?) quite religious too, what with Vatican City and a very long Christian-Democratic dominance in national politics, but it is also the birthplace of commedia sexy [1], and erotic comics artists such as Milo Manara and Guido Crepax were quite famous back in their day (they still are). The US seem especially prudish when it comes the depiction of sex in arts and entertainment. [1]: https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commedia_sexy_all%27italiana https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commedia_sexy_all%27italiana

thaumasiotes 8y ago
> it is also the birthplace of commedia sexy [1] > [1]: https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commedia_sexy_all%27italiana https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commedia_sexy_all%27italiana Sure enough, the Italian genre name is commedia sexy. I'm always interested in phrases like this -- sexy is obviously an English word. It's very common for foreign words to be borrowed when the speaker feels that the concept they express doesn't have a good match in his own language. I'm pretty confident that everything I understand by the word "sexy" can be idiomatically expressed in Italian that is not obviously foreign. Do you happen to know what the Italians mean by using "sexy" as opposed to a more natural-looking word?
- BerislavLopac 8y ago
  I can't speak for Italian, but coming for another very heavily Catholic country I would say that the reason is that most other words having to do with sex are very much perceived as either bad (e.g. blasphemous or just rude), or simply medical, based on the traditional usage. The word "sexy" (as opposed to "sex") has always had an air of playfulness and joy.
- klez 8y ago
  In Italian we use "sexy" in a way that roughly means "erotic" or "sexually exciting".
  - lou1306 8y ago
    I would like to add that Italians tend to borrow English words a lot. (In the 19th century it was the same, but with French; ancient Romans were similarly fascinated by Greek). There may be multiple reasons for that. In IT, English terms (kernel, firmware, bootloader, driver, etc.) are usually preferred because translations might be more ambiguous. In other cases, English just sounds more exotic/sophisticated to the average listener.
umvi 8y ago
Italy is not religious at all. Everyone is "catholic" but nobody actually goes to church or leads christian lives other than meaningless rote rituals. Try to get Italians to start going to church regularly, reading the Bible regularly, etc. and you'll be met with indifference or hostility.
- lou1306 8y ago
  I agree this may be true today, but the example I have cited come from the 60s and the 70s. For contex, divorce became allowed in 1970 (a 1974 referendum unsuccessfully tried to repeal that law); abortion was a crime until 1978 (again, a 1981 referendum failed to repeal the law). Same-sex unions have only been introduced in 2016. So, even though religious sentiment may be weak, the Italian cultural and political landscape is hugely influenced by the views of the Church. As an aside, reading the Bible has never been a strong part of Catholic religiousness anyway, due to the fact that biblical exegesis has been historically (ie. until Vatican II) reserved to the clergy. There are indeed other forms of devotion, like the rosary or the liturgy of the Hours, which are more or less frowned upon by more "secular" people.

ChrisSD 8y ago

More specifically, it's US' brand of Evangelical Protestantism that's ultra prudish. This seems to have seeped into their society as a whole.

azernik 8y ago

> Though I can't find that anywhere in any of the commandments, or the new testament. A quibble - while this negative view of sex may not be the view of other texts in the Bible, it is very clearly part of Paul's worldview, as evidenced in e.g. 2 Corinthians.

zozbot123 8y ago
> while this negative view of sex may not be the view of other texts in the Bible, it is very clearly part of Paul's worldview, as evidenced in e.g. 2 Corinthians. A further quibble - Paul's worldview wrt. sex is actually, and very clearly, a negative view of Graeco-Roman sexual practices, which were by-and-large openly exploitive. And that negative view was broadly shared by philosophers at the time, especially within Stoicism[1] - indeed, there had been at least some philosophically-inspired criticism of Greek practices, however understated, even centuries before Jesus or Paul. [1] The broader historical analogies between Stoic and early Christian views actually explain a lot of early Christianity's success, particularly within Graeco-Roman elites. We have sources essentially stating as much, such as one Stoic philosopher regarding "the wise king of the Jews" as the equal of Socrates and Pythagoras-- in that all of them were unjustly murdered, and yet their wisdom spread thereafter; proving that the favor of the gods is what really matters in the end.
- azernik 8y ago
  I think this is understating his views - in 2 Corinthians, he is very clearly against sex period, and sees sex within marriage as a necessary evil for those unable to practice complete celibacy.
marcus_holmes 8y ago
Ah yes, the old misogynist himself. I forgot about him. Which is stupid of me, because this whole thing probably starts with him.

dancek 8y ago

To be fair, no major Christian church teaches that enjoying sex is a sin. The Roman Catholic Church does teach that contraception is sinful. No major Protestant church does.

_jal 8y ago
True, but in the US, they mostly all lay on the neuroticism about sex pretty heavily.
TheOtherHobbes 8y ago
Lust is considered one of the deadly sins. I'm not sure where the line between "lust" and "acceptable desire" is, and I suspect most Christians aren't either - although marriage and procreation usually seem to be involved somewhere. There are far more unconditionally sex-positive religions.
- harimau777 8y ago
  From a theological perspective (which may be different from the social norms that a given church teaches) I think the answer would be that it is bad if it is outside of marriage, not done in love (e.g. objectifying someone), or if it becomes more important to someone than God (which would be considered idolatry).
  - state_less 8y ago
    It is bad... It is good... Why is it okay to treat people with such heavy handed authoritarianism. I wish more explanation was given.
    - minkzilla 8y ago
      There is, at least in the Catholic tradition, explanations for pretty much every teaching. From the doctors of the church (the most famous being Augustine), papal encyclicals, and ecumenicla councils. It is all very philosophically and scientifically grounded. You might disagree with the reasoning or a base assumption (natural law) but there are explanations. Normally it has to do with how your action effects yourself and others. In this case objectifying someone causes you to perhaps treat them poorly and prevents you from seeing the inherent dignity in them as a person. I’m not making a comment on this vs. violence because I think that’s a much more cultural thing in America and I haven’t looked into the Church’s stance on portrayal of violence, if it has one.

belorn 8y ago

I would also blame religion if not that here in Sweden we went from accepting sex and censoring violence to accepting violence and censoring sex, within about the span of almost just 10-20 years. The norm just changed and its very noticeable in movies if one compared those made before 1990 and those made after 2000. There is no corresponding change in the religious demographic. If anything that demographic went down until 2015, where for other reasons it started to go up.

ChrisSD 8y ago
Others in this thread think that's the influence the USA has had via their multinational tech companies.
coldtea 8y ago
That's the Americanization of the world. If most of one's movies, songs, tv shows, social media control, search engine biases, etc, come from a single country, with its cultural stickups, that's what you get.
- extra88 8y ago
  > cultural stickups *cultural hangups, but I understood you.
  - zozbot123 8y ago
    He actually meant that people are literally being robbed of their culture at gunpoint, due to hostile American influence. That's what government-enforced censorship is, after all.
- Flimm 8y ago
  I would hypothesize that it is due to the greater influence of feminism. I realise that not all feminists would agree, but many feminists have been against the objectification of women's bodies in pornography, sexualized advertising and media.
  - 8y ago

beobab 8y ago

Enjoying sex isn’t a sin. Sex is supposed to be held in the highest regard. It’s a wonderful and joyous thing. The point is, I believe, to avoid cheapening it, making it less than the truly awesome thing it is. It’s supposed to be a priceless gift shared with your true love. Packaging it and selling it makes it less valuable. I believe that if you approach the subject with that mindset, a lot of the decisions that society has made suddenly make a bit more sense.

sacado2 8y ago
Replace "sex" with "food" and you just described French culture.
- yoz-y 8y ago
  Only the older generation snobbish french culture. If you look around here, restaurants that are full are kebabs, burger joins and other fastfood.
- GuB-42 8y ago
  Poor quality food never was illegal in France. For a time, fast food joints avoided France because they thought there would be no market. There were wrong, and they are everywhere now. It doesn't mean the value of good food has cheapened. If anything, now that there is a point of comparison, the opposite is true. Good restaurants, from Michelin 3-star to inexpensive "plat du jour" lunches, are still there. So are long lunch breaks and good home cooking. And I am talking about people of every age.
  - stochastic_monk 8y ago
    There’s even a McDonald’s on the Champs-Élysées now.
    - microcolonel 8y ago
      I think there's a distinction between "poor quality" and "bad idea".

coldtea 8y ago

>I guess it all comes down to the religion. Americans do seem to be more religious, specifically more Christian, and the Christian Church has always taught that sex should only be for procreation. Yes, but that religious attitude also goes through the whole culture, so the puritanical / prudish attitude ends up in the minds of atheists and the public in general, even if they haven't stepped into a church in their life. So you get the phenomenon in all ends of the spectrum, from the Hayes code, CD "parental advisory" and moral panics of the right, to the political correctness and moral panics of the left. At the same time, the are religions like catholicism that can appear similarly reserved, but in social practice the majority of their adherents can be more open to sex, partying, and all kinds of moral ambiguity. There are exception in close knit communities under perceived attack (e.g. Ireland), but in the main they tend to be more open to "sin". That's because protestantism emerged as a fundamentalist "back to the original morality" sect, where strictness was its main thing.

cat199 8y ago
> CD "parental advisory" and moral panics of the right not so germaine, esp. given that your overall sentence was balanced, but 'parental advisory' can most clearly be traced to tipper gore, al gore's wife, and so, if one believes the 'left right' dichotomy valid for US politics, 'from the left'.. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tipper_Gore#Parents_Music_Resource_Center_(PMRC) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tipper_Gore#Parents_Music_Reso...

peterwwillis 8y ago

Americans always were, and continue to be, Puritanical. Since the late 60's we split into Puritans and Puritanically anti-Puritans. There's not much middle ground.

swiley 8y ago

Some uninformed churches may have taught that (there are a lot of pretty wacko churches in the US.) If you actually read the Bible though sex and marriage is supposed to be a sort of alagory for the church’s union with Christ and it’s supposed to be pleasant.

marcus_holmes 8y ago
It is the basis of the Catholic Church's opposition to contraception, and has been part of their teachings for over a thousand years now.
- swiley 8y ago
  Yeah I would group the catholic church in with that. What they teach isn't really scripture but rather loosely inspired by it.

pbhjpbhj 8y ago

>and the Christian Church has always taught that sex should only be for procreation // What's your basis for saying that? Certainly Song of Songs (in the OT) presents erotic intimacy in a positive manner, and does not to my recollection mention procreation.

eli_gottlieb 8y ago
>Certainly Song of Songs (in the OT) presents erotic intimacy in a positive manner, and does not to my recollection mention procreation. Shir haShirim is a Jewish text. Christians sort of awkwardly avoid bringing it up, because, well, yeah, it's ancient Hebrew erotic poetry.
- song-bringer 8y ago
  Actually, evangelicals and Protestants frequently bring it up as an affirmation of married love [1]. Catholics are more likely to bring it up as an allegory of love between God and the Church or even God and the individual soul (even considering the obvious interpretation to be "heretical"). This is pretty similar to the traditional and still occasional Jewish tradition of it singing it at Passover as an allegory of love between God and Israel [3]. [1] https://www.gotquestions.org/Song-of-Solomon.html https://www.gotquestions.org/Song-of-Solomon.html (popular, very evangelical / Baptist site) [2] http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03302a.htm http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03302a.htm (1913 Catholic encyclopedia) [3] https://www.chabad.org/holidays/passover/pesach_cdo/aid/1708/jewish/The-Song-of-Songs.htm https://www.chabad.org/holidays/passover/pesach_cdo/aid/1708...

yoz-y 8y ago

One thing that got me thinking the other day, is that English is the only language that i know of that has the X-word replacement for swear words. In other languages people either use a similar sounding word (fuck/fudge) or just don't use it. I'd be interested to know why is this and if other languages have a similar way of putting the word in your head without saying it.

Zelphyr 8y ago

> several well-educated and seemingly intelligent Americans who hold strong racist opinions At the risk of opening that particular can of worms; I'm curious to know if you can provide more details on this? As an American I suspect I am perhaps too close to the problem and unable to see it but most of the well-educated, intelligent people I know harbor little to no racial opinions.

zapita 8y ago
You are asking in good faith, so please don’t take this the wrong way. I can give you one clue: from your comment I already know that you are a white American, and that the “well-educated, intelligent people [you] know” are also overwhelmingly white. Ask yourself: how do I know this? It’s because never in a million years would an African-American, or Muslim American, or Native American, say something like that. Non-white Americans experience racism, both overt and subtle, every day. Most White Americans are oblivious to it because they live in a highly segregated society, and they don’t have any close friends or family experiencing it. So they perpetuate the myth of a “colorblind society” - the idea that race doesn’t matter in America anymore. And by denying the problem, we are doomed to perpetuate it. I recommend reading White Rage by Carol Anderson, it’s a good introduction to the topic. Every American should get educated on race relations 101. You can’t understand the USA without understanding the role racism plays in its history and institutions.

door5 8y ago

>Also several well-educated and seemingly intelligent Americans who hold strong racist opinions. But that's another subject. Bring up Muslims or Roma people to a European and you'll find this isn't a uniquely American problem.

13of40 8y ago
Whoah there. Just because the parent is painting all Americans with one brush doesn't mean we have to reciprocate.
- Tade0 8y ago
  Then again that bit about the Roma is somewhat accurate. On the other hand majority of the Roma refuse to assimilate, and on a much deeper level than pretty much any immigrant at that, so it's possible to imagine why this prejudice lives on.
  - door5 8y ago
    This is my point though -- European racism is portrayed always somehow "different". It's the exact same story and there are no excuses for it. Anti-Roma prejudice is no more rational or justified than any other prejudice, and it's just as violent and dangerous.
    - marcus_holmes 8y ago
      The same can be said for Australian prejudice against aboriginals. But I've never met a European traveler who expresses an anti-Roma opinion. I've met several US travelers who have expressed some really severe anti-African-American comments. So, yes, the prejudice is probably the same, but the level of hatred, and the willingness to express it, is not.
      - door5 8y ago
        This is anecdotal, the data does not support your claim: http://www.pewglobal.org/2014/05/12/a-fragile-rebound-for-eu-image-on-eve-of-european-parliament-elections/pg-2014-05-12-eu-0-09/ http://www.pewglobal.org/2014/05/12/a-fragile-rebound-for-eu...

brobdingnagians 8y ago

My church doesn't teach it's only for procreation, and we are solidly Christian. We teach that it's also wholesome, fun, and great to be enjoyed between husbad and wife; a spark of the divine, if you will. That it is between a husband and wife and God to decide when to have children, and so contraception is totally appropriate. Sex helps build the relationship. I remember when my dad taught a lesson at church about how sex was great; and I took a class at a religious university where it was specifically taught we were sexual beings meant to enjoy it. Not prudish here, just also very conscious of how powerful a force it is and so it should be between life-long committed people who can make the most of it and enjoy it fully without having the emotional damage of sharing yourself with someone who then skips out on you. Use it how God intends it and it is even better.

klmr 8y ago
> Not prudish here, just also very conscious [that sex] should be between life-long committed people That is prudish. To be perfectly clear, it’s entirely fine to decide that this is the right thing for yourself. But the way your comment is written makes it clear that you think this is the only correct way, for everyone. Yeah, that’s extremely prudish.
- brobdingnagians 8y ago
  definition of prudish: `having or revealing a tendency to be easily shocked by matters relating to sex or nudity; excessively concerned with sexual propriety.` Having a belief that a loved one would be happier if they do not take drugs and acting on that to attempt to persuade them is love and concern (and they are free to disagree with me). Having a belief that a loved one would be happier if refrained from using sex in a certain way is love and concern; not prudishness. We teach our children to not run in front of cars or to read Plato, why not impart other things we think will help them? whether or not you agree with the particulars, it is every persons duty to try to help the world be a bit better and happier.
  - klmr 8y ago
    The “excessively concerned with sexual propriety” part of the definition applies to what you’ve written. You’ve got some very clear and quite restrictive ideas about how sex is to be enjoyed, and you view other ways as harmful. And, to reiterate, that’s totally fine. But most people with differing opinions about sex will recognise yours as prudish.

bagacrap 8y ago

> Also several well-educated and seemingly intelligent Americans who hold strong racist opinions. But that's another subject Yes, it is, unless your subject is bashing Americans.

marcus_holmes 8y ago
no, it wasn't. I regret bringing it up now.

rexpop 8y ago

> Americans who hold strong racist opinions. But that's another subject. I'm not sure it is. America has strongly patriarchal institutions, enforcing very particular and rigid sex/gender roles. Our economy, for example, relies on women staying at home to raise children. This removes them from the arena of compensated labor, depriving them of commercial agency except as a bread-winning man's proxy. More or less. This kind of economic role-enforcement is also heavily racialized; latino workers are massively represented in agriculture, black workers in service work, and both groups are deprived of the high-pay, high-tech opportunities that white men like myself take for granted. In her indispensable feminist text, "The Will to Change", bell hooks uses the phrase “imperialist white-supremacist capitalist patriarchy” to describe the interlocking political systems that are the foundation of our nation’s politics.

pnw_hazor 8y ago

Christians aren't banning content on the internet. Tumbr, Facebook, and Twitter don't care a hoot about what Christians think. In some mainstream internet corners Christian content is more likely to banned than purient content.

klmr 8y ago
Could you give an example? I’m drawing a blank.

dang 8y ago

This comment managed to take the thread down a nationalistic flamewar tangent, a racial flamewar tangent, and a religious flamewar tangent. That's a hellish trifecta. I get that you didn't mean to, but can you please not post like that on this site? https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html