Why are Americans so prudish?

[cleric of the order]

Not much to add but it is a thing of concern.
See Americans were largely Calvinists when they departed and have a more center right tendency...i think.
Perhaps it's an empire thing.

 

[KyuubiNoKitsune-Hime]

Just on the subject of "Kingsmen: the Secret Service" and why it got an R rating by the MPAA. In all fairness if you use the word fuck more than a few times in any movie it basically disqualifies it from being rated anything less than R, with the exception being that it depends on the context but the word being used in the movie in question came up at one hundred and eleven times... To the MPAA's standards it's not the sex, nor the violence, but the very fact they used some variation of fuck so many times.

I understand the mechanisms for why it got an R rating, what I don't understand is why the MPAA is so strict about that sort of thing. But it goes beyond that, even on telivision the regulations seem to be pretty strict. Outside of HBO and AMC I can't think of any show that isn't an adult cartoon that has more then 'bull' for cursing. Hell, the only reason BSG has 'frak' was because they couldn't get away with using 'fuck' with the frequency that it would be used in the setting given how people act. Though things have gotten better over the past two decades, by this point anything airing after 10 that is censored is because the creators think it's funnier that way and not because they need to.

But it's still a pretty sharp contras to Canada's side of the boarder where between 6PM and 6AM censorship of vocabulary is basically non-existent, with censor bleeps only being added because it makes it funnier, highlights the fact someone even swore (since it's easy to miss when they don't) or because its an imported work from the US.

Well if you have the right sentence nothing is funnier than a bleep placed in the right spot. Even if the original dialogue was far more filthy.

Television has to be careful because of FCC rules on what kind of swear words are considered okay on cable, and what's regulated by air wave broadcast material, like all network television still is. Basically there is a list of words you absolutely cannot say on anything broadcast over the airwaves, in any format. You can't really even swear on CB, or HAM radio broadcasts, if you do there's a chance the FCC will find you and fine you. So on all network television swearing is absolutely verboten and it's been that way for a very long time.

 

[Dizchu]

Probably because there's more conservatism. Religion's got this nasty hold on American culture and education which hinders social progress. I mean, don't around 50% of Americans believe in young Earth creationism? Like, the percentage is so high that they rank #1 or #2 in the most religious developed countries?

Though I wouldn't call the USA prudish about violence. What they're most prudish about are things that are completely normal and healthy like gay relationships, subcultures, science, education and the dreaded female nipple. They also like to sensationalise everything to an insane degree, which is why you have news broadcasts talking about smoking a joint as if it were the same as injecting heroin into your eyes.

I don't hate the USA or its people, but if I went there I can't say I'd be very comfortable. Well, depends on the state and the city really.

We were founded by the religious zealots that the British couldn't even tolerate?

I thought it was the other way around? Wasn't the USA specifically founded to be secular (unlike most European countries)? That's why the constitution explicitly states that religion and state should be separate? Correct me if I'm wrong, I'm not an American.

It's very odd because some of the most atheistic countries in Europe are those with official state religions. Some have suggested that due to the secular nature of the USA it made religions more competitive and extravagant while in the UK for instance, we just stopped caring. Also there's an alarming amount of US politicians that have no idea what is in the constitution (Sarah Palin is the most obvious example I can think of).

 

[Zetatrain]

We were founded by the religious zealots that the British couldn't even tolerate?

I thought it was the other way around? Wasn't the USA specifically founded to be secular (unlike most European countries)? That's why the constitution explicitly states that religion and state should be separate? Correct me if I'm wrong, I'm not an American.

I think hes referring to the people who first settled on the eastern coast of the United States, like the pilgrims, long before it became the United States of America. The people who first came to North America certainly didn't do so out of a desire to create a secular state. Most came here either for opportunity or to escape religious persecution and form their own religious communities.

Though I sometimes wonder exactly how much settlers like the pilgrims influenced America's culture considering that there were several other settlements long before the United States and I'm sure many of them weren't Puritans.

 

[EternallyBored]

We were founded by the religious zealots that the British couldn't even tolerate?

I thought it was the other way around? Wasn't the USA specifically founded to be secular (unlike most European countries)? That's why the constitution explicitly states that religion and state should be separate? Correct me if I'm wrong, I'm not an American.

GOAT is likely talking about the Pilgrims and subsequent puritan migration to North America, they came over before the U.S. was founded, but they were generally very religious. It was, at least partially, the existence of such puritanical sects, that pushed the initial founding of the U.S. into its secular stance.

There was quite a bit of tension between various Christian denominations prior to the founding of the country, and a number of letters written by the founding fathers basically consisted of them assuring churches from their state that some other denomination in another state wouldn't be able to come in and dictate their beliefs.

The founding fathers themselves were rather diverse, and a few were indeed spiritual without being religious, and founded the U.S. on a strong secular foundation.

As a final note, it is a common misconception that separation of church and state is explicitly laid out in the constitution, those words never appear anywhere in the constitution. The closest match would be the first amendment which forbids the creation of a state religion and guarantees free speech.

What people tend to forget is that until the early 1900's, the first amendment was only really applied to congress and the federal government, it wasn't until the Supreme court decided that it could apply the Constitution to the states that we started opening the debate on just how much religion state governments could endorse.

The "separation of church and state" lines originate from a series of letters written by Thomas Jefferson, one of the founding fathers, and it was only really brought to bear in the legal arena when the supreme court ruled on Everson Vs. Board of Education in the late 1940's, had to go to wikipedia for that one because I kept thinking it was Brown vs. BOE which is a different case.

Before the Supreme court started forcing incorporation on the states in the 20th century a number of state governments gave legal and constitutional deference to specific religious sects, things like banning people of certain religions from holding state government positions, or giving specific tax payer benefits to religious sects for things like schooling, zoning, and taxation. It wasn't until these laws started being challenged in court and appealed all the way up to the supreme court that the federal government started really pressuring the whole "separation of church and state" thing on the states.

 

[Dizchu]

snip

snip

Ahh thanks for the clarification you guys. I think with the "separation of church and state" thing I was confusing it with the "congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion" one that appears in the first amendment. I was guessing that they meant roughly the same thing (goverments can't promote one religious belief over others), which is what many politicians are either ignorant of or desperate to try to evade.

 

[Foehunter82]

There are a lot of ignorant people here in America. For the past 15 years, it's become fashionable here, apparently.

 

[Jake Martinez]

It's sort of a cultural thing that goes on in America as far as I can tell as an American. A surprising majority of people are conservative socially speaking on a lot of things when it comes to a group dynamic.

As a very non-conservative American, I'd like to point out that there is a significant amount of thought policing that has also gone on from traditionally "Liberal" sides. I will not mention the "G that shall not be named" but the idea that media can influence people to engage in anti-social behavior is a belief that these days is held almost exclusively by some of my fellow lefties who buy into the post-modernist thought on human nature.

Also, Canada is just as bad as the US. In fact, a lot of the most annoying media crusaders in recent times have come out of the Canadian activist circuit. There's a relatively famous one that gets a lot of digital ink spilled about her on this site and others for instance.

It's likely that we will always live with a portion of the population that believes that other people cannot differentiate between fantasy and reality and it's not intrinsically tied to someones political beliefs.

 

[Compatriot Block]

I mean, at least we don't attempt to ban certain types of porn. We definitely aren't perfect by any means, but we haven't needed a protest where we sit on peoples' faces outside of DC.

 

[Just Ebola]

Look at the sex education system in Texas and other states. They wish to ban it all and when kids ask questions about sex, the answer they give is either, "God wouldn't want you to do that until you are married", "Don't touch yourself because God is watching" or "Schools shouldn't teach sex ed and kids should stop asking questions". They are meant to ask questions to keep safe and blue balling is not safe.

The sex ed system in Texas isn't actually that bad, I grew up there and I had a full understanding of all the different bits and pieces by the time I was in fifth grade. As far as I remember, all you needed was a parent's signature and off you were. Astonishing as it is, sexually repressed isn't the norm, and I've never met anyone who considers "touching thine self" a "sin". If Texas were the place everyone seems to think it is, people would be blowing their loads if someone so much as brushed against them in the streets.

I would say, the fact that any country has what is know as the "Bible Belt" should make it rather obvious.

Interestingly enough, the Bible Belt is considered the most promiscuous place in the US. This is based entirely on the reported cases of Gonorrhea and other STDs though. Those guys are a lot of things but prudish isn't one of them.

The best way I can put it (at least as far as I've seen) Americans are very vulgar and open when it comes to our personal lives, but very conservative when it comes to the media.

 

[Smooth Operator]

What was the statistic, I believe 73% of the US population said they were Christian. And if we need to repeat Christian ruling on this, sex out of wedlock is sin and lust itself is the very first on the list of seven deadly sins... you can probably work out where that leads.

 

[FirstNameLastName]

I would say, the fact that any country has what is know as the "Bible Belt" should make it rather obvious.

Interestingly enough, the Bible Belt is considered the most promiscuous place in the US. This is based entirely on the reported cases of Gonorrhea and other STDs though. Those guys are a lot of things but prudish isn't one of them.

The best way I can put it (at least as far as I've seen) Americans are very vulgar and open when it comes to our personal lives, but very conservative when it comes to the media.

While it is possible this is true, the fact that they have higher STD rates in highly religious areas seems more likely due to inadequate sexual education (abstinence-only education) and the shunning of contraceptives (condoms).

 

[Just Ebola]

While it is possible this is true, the fact that they have higher STD rates in highly religious areas seems more likely due to inadequate sexual education (abstinence-only education) and the shunning of contraceptives (condoms).

I brought that up to make the point that the dreaded "religious states" aren't prudish, not to say that they aren't misinformed. Yes, condoms would help reduce the number of diseases transmitted, but the point is that premarital sex with multiple partners is abundant.

And from what I understand, the sex education system in states like that are just outdated, not intentionally restrictive. I've never heard of a system where condoms are shunned.

 

[Zykon TheLich_v1legacy]

I mean, at least we don't attempt to ban certain types of porn. We definitely aren't perfect by any means, but we haven't needed a protest where we sit on peoples' faces outside of DC.

Here's the amusing thing about that, they haven't actually banned that kind of porn, they've just banned it's production in the UK. The only thing this legislation does is make the British porn industry less competitive. It's like, WTF is this? Health and Safety legislation?

OT: Eh...are they? I think there's a pretty good answer in the first couple of posts in that on their own, in private, people will get up to whatever the fuck they want but when in a group they socially expected modes of public behaviour take over, plus different social groups having the lions share of certain media attention. It's like the Victorians, on the surface its all starched collars and genteel conduct for the upper classes but behind closed doors they were into some freaky shit.

 

[DeaDRabbiT]

I think it's because in the western world America is one of the few countries were religious moralists are still taken seriously in some areas by people in power. And according to religion sex is EVIL! And we get this weird spot were moral America abhors sex in media yet corporate America thinks that it sells, so they shove it everywhere.

Yeah, we're a mess.

Morality doesn't always equal Religiousness.

I'm not pro-life on religious grounds
I'm not pro-monogamy on religious grounds
I'm not anti-liberal on religious grounds.

Some people wake up and just know in their own heart what is right or wrong according to their own scruples.

America is this fun place where we just try out all kinds of shit and what works works, and what doesn't becomes law.

So what.

 

[lionsprey]

Religion. Mostly that. It's always violence versus Sex and violence always wins. I mean, have you read the bible? God, "told" a lot of his believers to do some horrid things. When I said "told" I mean, they claim God told them to do those things but maybe it was just their ego at play. Also when I hear religious folks say, "giving a women the pill is against God... but Viagra is perfectly okay", I just wonder who that supports most. Just can't put my finger on it.

Seriously, any kind of female sexuality being talked about or shown in US programming and movies gets a lot of heat compared to a movie about a guy who just "bangs" left, right and double centre down the middle. And they both get heat.

Look at the sex education system in Texas and other states. They wish to ban it all and when kids ask questions about sex, the answer they give is either, "God wouldn't want you to do that until you are married", "Don't touch yourself because God is watching" or "Schools shouldn't teach sex ed and kids should stop asking questions". They are meant to ask questions to keep safe and blue balling is not safe.

Yeah, the US is strange like that. For example with 50 Shades of Grey, France wanted to have no ratings for that movie because they thought it weren't the "sexy". I've seen many French movies and they are correct. 50 Shades would look tame compared to other French/euro movies. While in the US, news media and mothers with a lot of complaining, will try to ruin a woman's reputation if she is seen on the beach topless, a naked selfie or their nipple just slips out during a dance and demand a nationwide apology.

"Women are mean't to have self respect". So talking about their sex life and wearing what they wish is having no self respect. Thanks 1950's attitude that is, for some reason, still in the 21st century.

Sorry for the rant. Most of the prudish area is targeted towards women and whether they are open sexually or not. Heck it's not even the US. The UK government banned, or are planning to ban, female ejaculation in porn. FEMALE EJACULATION!! And yes, something tells me that BDSM acts will be banned next or in the future at some point.

Religion and very conservative views creates a very prudish environment at times and when things don't go to blame, the teenager is either punished or "blame the liberals".

if i remember correctly the reason female ejaculation is getting banned is becouse watersports are getting banned and the "squirting" ejaculation has been proved to be pee

 

[TwiZtah]

In my personal experience the line between what is and isn't prudish (or perverted for that matter) is very fuzzy, arbitrary, and tends to zig zag around quite a bit no matter what part of the world you are in. Even if I were to accept that the US is generally more prudish than other Western nations, I don't see why that is particularly noteworthy or potentially problematic.

Side Note: It drives me crazy when supposedly open minded, tolerant, and/or progressive individuals are so quick to resort to stereotypes, most commonly when talking about Americans or Christians

It is problematic because every kind of media comes from there, be it games or movies. This means that movies very rarely dare to go beyond PG-13, which means we get a very lackluster action movie, same with games, they don't dare to take risks with blood, nudity or language that people usually use in fear of getting a rating that isn't PG-13.

 

[Maphysto]

Puritan colonial ancestry, backed up by the revivals and "Moral Majority" of the 80's inserting themselves into politics.

 

[GundamSentinel]

So what gives, is there something I'm missing or am I going insane again?

I would say, the fact that any country has what is know as the "Bible Belt" should make it rather obvious.

The Netherlands has a Bible Belt as well, doesn't make it a prudish country. Quite the contrary. Can't have a Dutch movie without a graphic sex scene. Also: Amsterdam.

 

[SecondPrize]

Well, a couple of years ago, the A-Team film was released, and a bunch of people were bitching about the "graphic violence" in that film. I had a discussion with my dad about how I thought it was pretty stupid to complain about it, seeing as how the movie itself is pretty low-key violence wise for a modern film.

My dad said something like: "That's why our country is kind of crazy like it is. We abhor showing the reality of warfare to the public, and yet we glorify violence to justify everyone's desire for guns and warfare." He then added: "If we showed more of what this sort of violence really does, fewer Americans would be eager to rush to violence when dealing with others (both here and abroad)."

Your pops is right, but have you never watched the A-Team series? Damn near every episode had gunfights and nobody ever died, it was just dudes jumping and diving around.