Discussion in 'Abrahamic Religions' started by Namaste Jesus, May 3, 2014.
you should visit this site for wonderful chat
If you're an evangelical Christian, you would probably answer yes: you have committed adultery in your heart if you are aroused by making or watching a risque' film. At least this is what I gather from listening to This American Life which recounts the sexual and spiritual lives of two male friends who came of age during the 80s. They were so consumed with trying to avoid lustful thoughts that they could think of little else. They both came to realize, sometime in adulthood, that their spiritual lives were suffering from their obsessions and that they would be better Christians by not trying so hard.
Some extreme evangelicals seem to have sex on the brain they spend so much time condemning it!
Hi NJ —
I think the attitude has moved on here in the UK since the Benny Hill days. Certainly the casual sexism and racism that marked the media of the 70s and 80s is no longer acceptable, and we have a number of high-profile sexual abuse cases dating back to this era, where the general excuse seems to be 'remember it was the 70's', as if that makes everything OK.
You have to ask yourself where the humour lies.
If one professes a 'spiritual belief' in line with the great spiritual/religious traditions, then it's very much to do with it. A pre-requisite of the spiritual life is ascesis, the practice of detachment from the sensible passions and appetites, so sexual titillation – which is what 'bawdy' is – is contrary to the path.
Well 'bawdy humour' falls under the condemnation of Matthew 5:28, because it objectifies the other, that's the point.
Put another way: Would I object to seeing my partner or daughters rendered suddenly undressed by some bizarre incident for the salacious amusement of others?
If that makes me 'old-fashioned', then OK. I happen to believe in the maxim 'do unto others ...'
Thanks for sharing your point of view Thomas. Always appreciated.
Oddly enough, the films I did the post production work on were very popular in the UK. It's also interesting to note that out of the total UK sales, 30% were to women.
I don't share your reservations about family members appearing in such films though. One of my nieces was actually in one of them. Her husband does shares your point of view however and that particular film was never released.
Nothing wrong with being old fashioned. That's exactly the market these films were catered to.
I can't believe you'll go to such lengths to justify the sexploitation of women.
That's the thing. I don't see it as sexploitation. Sex was never the intention of any of the films I was involved in.
Thomas said"If one professes a 'spiritual belief' in line with the great spiritual/religious traditions, then it's very much to do with it. A pre-requisite of the spiritual life is ascesis, the practice of detachment from the sensible passions and appetites, so sexual titillation – which is what 'bawdy' is – is contrary to the path."
Hmmmm. Ascesis as a pre-requisite of the spiritual life? That is taking it to an extreme, seems to me. There are many paths in all the great spiritual/religious traditions; ascesis is but one of those paths. Specifically those paths that are the most extreme in ultra strict religious doctrine. We're talking about the giving up all your worldly goods and living in a monastery devoid of any contact with the physical world in which we live types.
Not that there is anything wrong with that tradition. Those who choose that path apparently receive great benefit from it. I put 'apparently' in that last statement only because I do not personally know anyone like this, so my speculation has to be based on third party information.
My point though is that rigorous self-denial and active self-restraint is not the only acceptable religious path. There are plenty of paths that allow for a balance instead of an extreme - and those paths are no less religiously appropriate.
I've always followed more of a 'balance in all things' approach to life.
Don't be naive, NJ, of course it is ... it is in your own words:
Where else is the humour, other than in the sexploitation?
Sexploitation is a word you used not me. It's your interpretation of the work, not the intention.
The humor is in the story itself not any one focal point. In many of the films I worked on, the punch line didn't come until the very end. Of course, you've actually not seen any of those to pass judgment.
I'm not talking about extremism ... just self-discipline and 'moderation in all things'.
I think it's common to all spiritual paths. I can't think of one where detachment is not practiced?
Oh, hang on, I think you're lumping everything into one uncomfortable pot here?
All of the quotes in #51 are from GK, not NJ
Oh dear ... I've touched a nerve and you're back-peddling now.
What other intention is there that necessitates some 'some poor hapless lass' (un-named, I assume, and thus objectified), 'winds up on display in just her undies'? (Perhaps if you give us the titles, we could look around and decide for ourselves?)
I watched Benny Hill as a kid, and I laughed. And and the show always finished with Hill's Angels.
I also watched 'Love Thy Neighbour', a programme about a black family who move next door to a white one, and all the casual racist jokes that stemmed from that.
Why not just accept that times have moved on, and what was OK yesterday might not be so OK today?
Thomas, we're just going in circles here. As I've said all along, the intention of these films was and still is humor. You obviously see it differently and that's ok. Not everyone gets that type of humor.
All of the films I worked on were fully scripted and told a story. One of the most popular was entitled, "Automated Fantasies" and told the tale of 'Cindy 5' and 'Charley 7' domestic robots. Unfortunately, the company that distributed these films is no longer operational due to health issues.
I don't know where race comes into this. You lost me on that one.
Yes, times have changed and films like this are no longer made. They've been replaced by cheap smut and hardcore pornography. That's one of the reasons the bawdy humor I was evolved in was so popular. I can't tell you how many times customers thanked us for bringing back this lost art form.
Yes, I think we are. I have just watched the trailer for "Automated Fantasies".
This is just more cheap smut.
You are certainly entitled to your opinion. Curious though, where did you find the trailer? They've been off line for quite some time.
I got "This video has been age-restricted based on our Community Guidelines"
Thought that was kind of funny
Thanks. That was posted by a fan. The films I worked on were originally posted on YouTube and were pulled when nhmovies shut down. There's a couple trailers still up however, that were in the works when the producer took ill. Sadly, these were never completed.
They tend to do that whenever someone complains, justified or not. Just scroll to the bottom of the page and set the age gate to off.
Separate names with a comma.