Jump to content

Why are so people so "sensitive" when it comes to nudity, porn etc?


Justin579

Recommended Posts

7 hours ago, Eai said:

I heard that Japan laws were made by pressure of the western countries heavily influenced by Victorian morals and prudery at the time

And Victorian morals were a reaction to the debauchery, and (let's be frank) quite unhealthy (disease ridden for example) 'loose living' of the Monarchy Restoration period. Which was in turn inspired by the uptight nature of Oliver Cromwell's puritan rule (puritans ... they do sound familiar. I wonder if any Yanks on the board would know :P ) These things tend to go around in circles. It hasn't been all that long since we last cycled around.

For all those wondering why public nudity and YOLO isn't a thing, there was a reason why there was a backlash to 'free' living. However these things tend to be forgotten with time. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, ratboi said:

Well, lets be honest. What woman would show her tits on camera? I mean, im a woman and honestly dont see why no one make a big fuss when men wear no shirt. It is kinda fuckin stupid. Although I personally wouldnt XD

A lot of woman since there is a million porn videos out there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, I think steam should allow h games on steam. I think its ridiculous that GTA is allowed on steam but not a game a couple of scenes with CONSENSUAL sex? I mean come on!! Also I dont think theres anything wrong with children of 13 upwards to play these sex games as most of them have probably seen porn before.  Also it can teach that consensual sex is best and you should never have sex with anyone without there consent. Females AND males.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Justin579 said:

It does vary? Isn't it usually just moaning and slurping noises? And saying "fuck me harder" and "fuck my pussy" and "ohhhhhhhhhhh yaaaaaa" when she cums "my pussy feels good?" etc?

The contradiction is, that in that case it would be a lot more easier to tackle H scenes, because the translation could be seen as simplier, and not the reverse right?

And yes it does vary, but then it depends of the scenes in question...japanese is a language with a very extensive register to express erotical and sexual situations...

2 hours ago, Rooke said:

And Victorian morals were a reaction to the debauchery, and (let's be frank) quite unhealthy (disease ridden for example) 'loose living' of the Monarchy Restoration period. Which was in turn inspired by the uptight nature of Oliver Cromwell's puritan rule (puritans ... they do sound familiar. I wonder if any Yanks on the board would know :P ) These things tend to go around in circles. It hasn't been all that long since we last cycled around.

For all those wondering why public nudity and YOLO isn't a thing, there was a reason why there was a backlash to 'free' living. However these things tend to be forgotten with time. 

Well what these people said about debauchery was very probably something which would be considered as perfectly common occurences in our today world... and also it was already influenced by the way sexuality was already diabolized in western countries upon this time: restoration ruler was considered a womanizer, because he had several mistresses at the time, and his court too, but yet it was not really something uncommon at the time and even if they didn't claim it, a lot of monarchs were in that case. as a contrast, countries like japan at the time had the Emperor having official concubines and mistress and as such it was not considered a licencious behaviour... also what they says as unhealthy is probably not the behaviour in themselves, but the general poor hygienic conditions of the time, and of course contraception was inexistant at this period...

sexuality was already heavily repressed at the time even before the advent of victorian morals. Sex was not seen as something which should be considered pleasurable, it had to be done through mariage only, and only one sexual position was 'allowed' and all the other ones were considered wrong and condemnable. For what i heard restoration came up as a period of a little more sexual liberty but it was still probably very very far of today standards...in general Europe was very prude about sex, but i don't think there were worst ones that the englishmen of the time...they were the ones coming up with such inventions as these ones...http://cdn1.historybuff.com/images/2015/10/26102226/Chastity_belt_Heyser_0-1024x963.png

Btw, i'm not even a 'yank' but i do know a lot of the puritans were among the first immigrant to settle into american soil...so a considerable part of american people could have come from these guys...:makina:

And to come back to the topic, i also do not understand why they can't allow H content in steam whereas games like gta and others are perfectly fine...like i said, there is a huge demand for eroge there and the likes as Sakura series are only popular because a lot of people don't know there are much better games in this regard...if H content was allowed on steam, then it would be a win-win situation for both companies and players, it would multiply distributors revenues and provide people with what they want...the only ones who will be unhappy will probably be previously mentionned game developpers, because they would have to work a lot harder to bring audience to them if games with superior content quality were allowed on steam. I'm pretty sure the sales figures would be a lot more different:P

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, FrozenRaven said:

I agree with @ratboi if games where you can to kill hundreds of people are allowed on steam then there really shouldn't be a problem with Vns that have vanilla romance sex scenes in them. But then again i could see it becoming a slippery slope. Like people wanting nukiges and stuff on steam too. 

yeah :/ Like I can never see something like euphoria ending up on there. Im not banging euphoria btw. Its one of my favorite VNs and tbh I think it isnt just porn for people with those kind of desires to fap to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Eai said:

Well what these people said about debauchery was very probably something which would be considered as perfectly common occurences in our today world.

It wasn't. Remember today's morals were influenced by the Victorians which were a response TO debauchery. Public sex wasn't uncommon in the past, because law and order was terribly lacking in the past. The only rules worth enforcing were those deemed serious enough by officials to warrant punitive punishments (remembering beyond a certain point there was no jail. Jail was just a place to hold you.) Thieves and crime were rampant at night, and the authorities didn't and couldn't do squat, yet sex was punished was it? And remembering there was no jail, only sentences to death or gross disfigurement, exactly what was the punishment for the crime of 'not adhering to the proper sexual position'? The texts religious people sought to put out, which is where you're getting most of your information, and what actually happened were two different things. Which is part of the reason why prostitution was so rampant and accepted.

It goes all the way back to the Roman times, you know. Public orgies were quite common in their mixed bath-houses.

EDIT: I meant physical, not punitive. Death, hand chopped off, that kind of thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, ratboi said:

yeah :/ Like I can never see something like euphoria ending up on there. Im not banging euphoria btw. Its one of my favorite VNs and tbh I think it isnt just porn for people with those kind of desires to fap to.

Seriously, Euphoria has very strong emphasis on H content...you can't deny it's a game you are not only playing for the story but also (let's say it) to choke you chicken.:P Tbh, the story may seems interesting but i'm not sure it would have the same impact if you remove the h from it. there is suspense and background into the game, but i think it's rather the general atmosphere and characters which make people say that it's not only 'porn'. But by the way it is designed with varied fetishes in it, and the way the story is made, you cannot deny the fact you cannot play solely this game for the story...

Also, i think that because a game has a lot of H scenes, doesn't mean that it couldn't have a great story, good characters and such. I think that the fact that visual novel can mix the two (sex and story) is what constitute it's charm, because having the time to know the characters and being involved with the protagonist makes things a lot more erotic for a lot of people...basically a lot of moege purpose are about 'catching' up the girls and finally have sex with them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Contrary to popular belief, witch doctors and magic weren't always looked upon as evil in medieval times. Consulting witches was quite common, even among the nobles and God-fearing folk, and yet what does it say in the Bible? Usually witch burnings were done if the witches were said to 'harm' folk with their magic, otherwise they were more trusted than doctors (I believe.)

Crime being so high at night because the water supply in cities were filthy, so most people drank a ton of ale instead. Combine angry young men, with almost perpetual drunkness, with that most of them were poor, with the ease of getting their hands on weapons, and the night was a pretty terrible place in Middle Age towns. Even for guards and the watch.

Of course their strict adherence to all things Godly combined with their superb police system (which was almost non-existent,) would generally prevent this situation, I’m sure. Does it not say in the scriptures that thieving, and murder were not allowed? 

I mean, look at how King Henry the Eighth was meticulous in his adherence to good, Catholic policy. And because the King is chosen by God, as was considered to be the case in those times, his interpretation of the religious texts must of course be correct. As was Charles the Second during the Restoration, he may be a womaniser but was he not chosen by God? 

I would think if you went by what the Bible and religious teachings allowed and did not allowed, you'd get a pretty false impression of life during the middle ages.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, Rooke said:

It wasn't. Remember today's morals were influenced by the Victorians which were a response TO debauchery. Public sex wasn't uncommon in the past, because law and order was terribly lacking in the past. The only rules worth enforcing were those deemed serious enough by officials to warrant punitive punishments (remembering beyond a certain point there was no jail. Jail was just a place to hold you.) Thieves and crime were rampant at night, and the authorities didn't and couldn't do squat, yet sex was punished was it? And remembering there was no jail, only sentences to death or gross disfigurement, exactly what was the punishment for the crime of 'not adhering to the proper sexual position'? The texts religious people sought to put out, which is where you're getting most of your information, and what actually happened were two different things. Which is part of the reason why prostitution was so rampant and accepted.

It goes all the way back to the Roman times, you know. Public orgies were quite common in their mixed bath-houses.

Law and order were different at the time than today, but it doesn't change the fact sexuality was heavily repressed at these periods...a lot of the sexual behaviours and views about sex today will be for sure considered as debauchery or debauched behaviour back in the time...when you say that todays's moral were influenced by the victorian, it is certainly true to a certain extent, but today's morals have also detached a lot from these principles, actually thankfully, a lot of today standards since sexual liberation and the lessening of religious influence over sex were made to break the strict moral codes and repressed views of these victorian morals. There's a reason why some researchers and scholar call today Victorian period as a poisonous period for personnal freedom and liberty. Also this view comes from a 'english related country' perspective, people coming from other parts of europe or the world didn't get influenced as much as american and english by these Victorian morals.

i don't know what exactly your point is, especially by mixing a lot of unrelated things together like night insecurity into middle age an such, but the fact that public sex wasn't uncommon in the past, doesn't mean that they were more 'debauched' than today. if you talk about prostitution and places such as brothels and such, they are still existing today, but now it's mainly hypocrisy, because even if these places exist in the west, now you can't refer them as such. It has become illegal in many countries, whereas prositution can be still legal, and instead of calling them brothels, you call them by 'massage parlors', or other names, prostitution has become 'escort girls' whereas they still are the exact same thing.

As a difference, in Japan, these places are perfectly fine, and are by no mean rare, there is litterally one tokyo district, kabukicho, which is renowned for places like that. I think brothels, and places made illegal is a pointless thing, because that will not stop them to exist, and like you said they exist since roman times.

When i talk about 'authorized' positions, it was about religion which had obviously a very strong influence. Victorian morals were heavily tied with them. Basically that was which defined good morals than bad ones. Of course nobody could be punished for a crime of not having a 'correct' position at the time, but if they could, they wouldn't not have prived themselves to do so. Actually that's why at the time of victorian morals, a lot of people designed objects like the chastety belts in linked in my previous post, in order to guarantee people were conforming to 'adequate' moral standards such as limited sexual behaviour, and prevent them to do 'horrendous things' like masturbating.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Eai said:

Law and order were different at the time than today, but it doesn't change the fact sexuality was heavily repressed at these periods...a lot of the sexual behaviours and views about sex today will be for sure considered as debauchery or debauched behaviour back in the time...when you say that todays's moral were influenced by the victorian, it is certainly true to a certain extent, but today's morals have also detached a lot from these principles, actual thankfully a lot of today standards since sexual liberation and the lessening of religious influence over sex were made to break the strict moral codes and repressed views of these victorian morals. There's a reason why some researchers and scholar call today Victorian period as a poisonous period for personnal freedom and liberty. Also this view comes from a 'english related country' perspective, people coming from other parts of europe or the world didn't get influenced as much as american and english by these Victorian morals.

i don't know what exactly your point is, but the fact that public sex wasn't uncommon in the past, doesn't mean that they were more 'debauched' than today. if you talk about prostitution and places such as brothels and such, they are still existing today, but now it's mainly hypocrisy, because even if these places exist in the west,now you can't refer them as such. It is become illegal in many countries, whereas prositution is still legal, and instead of calling them brothels, you call them by 'massage parlors' or other names, whereas they still are the exact same thing.

As a difference, in Japan, these places are perfectly fine, and are by no mean rare, there is litterally one tokyo district, kabukicho, which is renowned for places like that. I think brothels, and places made illegal is a pointless thing, because that will not stop them to exist, like you said they exist since roman times.

When i talk about 'authorized' positions, it was about religion which had a very strong influence at the time. Victorian morals were heavily tied with religion too. Basically that was which defined good morals than bad ones. Of course nobody could be punished for a crime of not having a 'correct' position at the time, but if they could, they wouldn't not have prived themselves to do so. Actually that's why at the time of victorian morals, a lot of people designed objects like the chastety belts in linked in my previous post, in order to guarantee people were conforming to 'adequate' moral standards such as limited sexual behaviour, and prevent them to do 'horrendous things' like masturbating.

Sexuality was only repressed (compared with today's standards, all things being relative) in the past for women and alternate gendered folk. That law and order was different than today, meaning almost worthless, led to an ability to ignore a lot of what was considered law. That a woman's word was not considered as important as a man's led to an inability to convict sex crimes. That we have started to wind back on Victorian principles doesn't compare to the Restoration period which threw out many established principles.

Prostitution was legal in the past, yet illegal in many places today. Yet one more way sex was freer in the past than it is today. And yet, it still goes on under the law's nose, because as was the case 500 years ago, it's hard to stop sex crimes.

Religion was a part of Europe's Governance for almost 2,000 years. That there was such VARIETY in the standards of behaviour throughout Europe at a time when religious influence was fairly constant means you'll have to look at other things beside solely religion to explain the morals of today.

Chastity belts are believed to be a myth, created by the Victorians (the myth) and designed to highlight the barbaric nature of past medieval citizens. There's zero evidence they were historically used for anything other than a joke.

EDIT: The other information was to give you some background information to the lawlessness of Europe, and how people of the Middle Ages discarded religious teachings quite often. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Rooke said:

Sexuality was only repressed (compared with today's standards, all things being relative) in the past for women and alternate gendered folk. That law and order was different than today, meaning almost worthless, led to an ability to ignore a lot of what was considered law. That a woman's word was not considered as important as a man's led to an inability to convict sex crimes. That we have started to wind back on Victorian principles doesn't compare to the Restoration period which threw out many established principles.

Prostitution was legal in the past, yet illegal in many places today. Yet one more way sex was freer in the past than it is today. And yet, it still goes on under the law's nose, because as was the case 500 years ago, it's hard to stop sex crimes.

Religion was a part of Europe's Governance for almost 2,000 years. That there was such VARIETY in the standards of behaviour throughout Europe at a time when religious influence was fairly constant means you'll have to look at other things beside solely religion to explain the morals of today.

Chastity belts are believed to be a myth, created by the Victorians (the myth) and designed to highlight the barbaric nature of past medieval citizens. There's zero evidence they were historically used for anything other than a joke.

EDIT: The other information was to give you some background information to the lawlessness of Europe, and how people of the Middle Ages discarded religious teachings quite often. 

About your first statement, i'm sorry but it's wrong. Sexuality was still repressed in every bit of society at this period if you compare it to today standards; repression here has to be understood as a general background, general cultural standards and such; women had an harder time than men because women were considered inferior to men in every aspect. There was more indulgence toward men, but it doesn't change the fact that sexuality in itself was repressed and restricted (e.g. stupid things like the fact couples were advised to not have too much sexual relations in a week).

You mention middle age in several of your posts, whereas what's talked about don't enter into this period. For example restoration period started in 1660, which is not historically middle age at all. I don't see also the point in insisting about background about lawlessness of Europe, because it is also not directly related to the subject.

I know people of these periods discarded religious teachings, but it doesn't change the fact that society as a whole was influenced by these very teachings. Society and moral at the time was very dictated by religious principles. The fact people didn't always conform to them is unrelated to the standards of these periods, because after all, people are still people, you cannot so easily kick some natural behaviour out of human nature even if you solely declare this or this is wrong or not. So of course people in every period and even in middle age were very likely not limiting themselves to one 'authorized' position! All the Sexual positions we can see today are as old as humanity can get, but officially if they deviated from the official "teachings" they were still seen as wrong. There are some sexual practices are seen as perfectly common today, but were considred taboo or just wrong at these periods. It's not about the individual people, but the culture and general views of the time.

As a side note, For what i've read, i agree that it appears that there was a big contradiction between how you should ideally act 'stay chaste until mariage' and such, whereas prostitution was accepted. However, it appears to mainly concern middle age (views about matters like that vary a lot depending the period), so i don't know what you are getting at about it; by using words such as 'sex crimes'. It always existed in history, and like i said, prostitution may be illegal in some places but may be legal in others despite places like brothels may be illegal. Which is pure hypocrisy too.  Also change prostitution for 'escort girls' and such and you have exactly the same thing with a different name. People were not more 'debauched' earlier than today, but now sexuality is much more liberated. Victorial morals are not what contributed to this, and it's rather the contrary, victorial morals are still at the origin of many problem related to prudery toward sex, nudity and such. Those victorian morals also influenced japan in such a way that they created contradictory laws influencing and contradicting their own original views about sex.

what you talk about regarding the servant cases, were abusive practices dating of this day not only related to the fact the servant were women, but also the fact they were poor. If you were a servant back to the old times, people considered that you deserved it, nature wanted it, and that you were of intrisically inferior extraction. In short, you were an inferior human being than those of higher birth and should respect and abide to those of superior social statute than you.

Chastity belt are real. You are right, they were maybe not especially created by victorians, their first design may have existed earlier, drawings depicting these devices existed at earlier periods. After documenting myself, i learned the myth about chastity belts is that there were used starting from the middle age to prevent people to have sex, which is probably innacurate. But even if Victorians were not the ones first creating it's original design, they were the ones greatly influencing it's purpose and at the origin of it's use later in history. By Victorian moral virtues, chastity belts were designed mainly to prevent masturbation. Medical reports describe the prescription of chastity belts (or similar devices, which might have no resemblance at all with a chastity belt) to prevent youngsters (of both sexes) from masturbating which in the 19th Century was thought to be wrong in every aspect. That fact that people still had sexual practices (you cannot stop people to refrain themselves from a perfectly natural behaviour) condemned at the time doesn't make the period less restricted toward sex relating to today. I don't know how you can say that.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quite a (surprisingly) good discussion going on here, I'll just pour in some different perspectives on how Sex was considered in recent history:

Arabs were a particularly conservative and jealous lot. Sex was restricted to be only between wife and husband, and husband and slave. Note that this was a cultural identity among Arabs that existed way before Islam, and Islam mostly strengthened this nature. 

However, you can see that it's quite different across other Muslim people. In West Africa for example, Ibn Battuta (an Arab traveler during mid-evil times) described the people's nature there as:

"Conditions among these people are remarkable, and their way of life is strange. The men have no jealousy. These people are Muslims, yet their women have no shame for men and do not veil themselves. Women there have friends and companions among men outside the prohibited degrees of marriage, and in the same way men have women friends in the same category. This is despite them being very pious, and many go out of their way to memorize the Quran.  A man goes into his house, finds his wife with her man friend, and does not disapprove."

Hehehe, category.

But that's only one part of the world, it's really impossible to generalize on a global scale regarding this topic. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...