American Sex vs. Violence Hypocrisy: A Double Standard of Culture
There
is a paradox at the heart of our popular culture here in America—one
that emphasizes deep cultural contradictions regarding what we choose
to censor and what we glorify. This contradiction is most theatrical
when we compare how sex and violence are treated in movies,
television, and other media. Why is it socially and legally
acceptable for minors and other viewers to witness graphic violence
enacted in front of them and not nudity or consensual sex, which are
typically censored, stigmatized, or simply forbidden?
Consider
the following: a film can feature someone getting shot in the head
and still receive a PG-13 rating. Exploding intestines, hacked-off
limbs, and bloody battles can appear on screen without rating
commissions or much public outcry. But if the same movie depicted a
consensual act of oral sex, or even full-frontal nudity, in a
non-exploitative context, it would easily get an R or even an NC-17.
In extreme cases, it might not be released, but it would have to be
censored. The insertion of a bullet into a skull is okay for
teenagers. A penis in a mouth is not.
This double standard is
more than an oddity of the MPAA (Motion Picture Association of
America) rating system. It is an expression of a deeper cultural bias
in the U.S.—a deep discomfort with the human body, sex, and
intimacy, coupled with an almost callous tolerance, even enthusiasm,
for violence. The implications of this paradox extend far beyond the
cinema. They set our social norms, shape our laws, and influence the
psychological development of children and adults.
The
Rationale: Protecting Innocence?
The
most common explanation of this inconsistency is that sexual content
is worse for children's minds than content that deals with violence.
This has been the basis for America's moral furor about protecting
children from "indecency" for so long. Nudity, sensuality,
and representations of love or pleasure are represented as corrupting
innocence, whereas violence is defined as entertainment, heroism, or
even justice.
But let's put that on. When, exactly, is
anybody—kid or adult—*ready* to deal with graphic violence? A
13-year-old can lawfully view dozens of human beings being murdered
in a war film or action film, replete with fake blood effects and
suffering. But that same youngster cannot lawfully view two adults
having sex, even in a tender, loving situation. The result is a
generation more jaded to death and brutality than to affection,
tenderness, or physical intimacy.
And what are the
psychological consequences? Studies have again and again shown that
repeated exposure to media violence can create increased aggression
and desensitization in children. Conversely, studies of sex content
show that, if presented healthily and respectfully, it doesn't have
the same adverse effect, and can result in better knowledge of
consent, relationships, and body image when handled sensitively.
Sex
Brings Life, Violence Ends It
Sexually,
at its core, is an affirming act of life. It is how life continues.
When sex is consensual and ethical, it is an act of connection,
vulnerability, trust, and pleasure. Violence is typically the
opposite of these. It is disunifying, destructive, and traumatic. But
in our American culture, our media—and by default, our social
norms—so often romanticize violence while stigmatizing sex as if
it's profane or dirty.
This turnabout in values points to what
some have termed a "cult of death." Rather than celebrating
life and the human body, our culture increasingly seems to value
domination, aggression, and retribution. This cultural pattern does
not stand alone; it is supported by centuries of puritanical
religious heritage, rigid gender roles, and political motives that
have shaped American attitudes since the country was founded.
A
Global Outlier
The
United States, on so many levels, is an exception to the Western
world in these attitudes. In most of Europe, for example, nudity on
TV is not something to comment on and is not handled as taboo but
instead in a typical, educational situation. Advertisements or public
service announcements featuring nudity or sexual references are
routine in France, Germany, the Netherlands, and Scandinavia. These
nations also have far more open media rating criteria.
Most of
the same nations, however, more heavily regulate portrayals of
violence, particularly portrayals involving guns. In other words,
they have gone out of their way to prioritize protection of citizens
from brutality desensitization over protection of citizens from
ordinary expressions of intimacy.
This global comparison only
serves to make America's stance all the more perplexing. Why do we
continue to condone violence, normalizing, but clutch our pearls when
we glimpse a sex scene or a nipple?
Consequences
of the Double Standard
The
repercussions of this cultural disparity are not hypothetical. They
are concrete, tangible in the way we interact with sex education, for
instance. Large parts of America's education system continue to
employ abstinence-only classes, avoiding open examination of sexual
health, consent, or pleasure. Kids are seeing violent imagery on the
internet, in games, and on television, often with little or no
parental control.
This contradiction engenders confusion and
shame regarding sexuality, while simultaneously dulling sensitivity
to violence. It may go some distance towards accounting for the fact
that America continues to struggle with sexual repression, sexual
violence, and an obsession with guns and militarism.
Even
within our justice system, this double standard persists. Sex workers
are stigmatized and criminalized, but companies that celebrate
violence—the production of arms and violent sport—are not only
legal but idolized. A woman who breastfeeds in public can be removed
from a restaurant, yet a gun show may be conducted in the same
restaurant without protest.
Toward
a Healthier Balance
In
other words, this is not an argument that one must shove lurid sex
down the throat of all media and get a healthy dose of it handed out
to kids at a whim. Parental discretion and age appropriateness are
needed. But today's system overwhelmingly tips toward bashing into
one bad lesson: violence is acceptable and normal, and sex is
dangerous and stigmatizing.
If we care about the well-being of
children and the health of our communities, we must challenge our
moral values. We must question ourselves as to why we glamorize death
and recoil from life. And we must demand a more honest,
life-enhancing response to the stories we tell, the images we
present, and the ideals we hold dear.
Since such a society as
one that frightens at the naked body yet not at the bullet is a
society that is out of contact with what being human means.
