Whats Wrong with a Culture of Hedonism

[Tony]

I’m watching Bill O'reilly right now, he is talking to Tom Green about MTV and its influence on young people. He takes issue with the Britney and Madonna kiss, saying that MTV is pushing a "libertine" lifestyle. I, for one, am all for a "libertine" culture.

What’s your take on the issue?

Is a "libertine", or hedonistic culture a bad thing?

[toddjh]

Originally posted by Tony
Is a "libertine", or hedonistic culture a bad thing?

I don't think so. A society which acknowledges the pleasure in life is one that appreciates its value and is more willing to defend it. It's the puritanical guys who seem to cause most of the problems.

In another sense, you could argue that people have a sort of responsibility to enjoy life. With all the suffering and problems in the world, if people have the opportunity to be happy and don't take it...well, isn't that an awful waste? Everything can be taken too far, of course.

As for sex, I just don't see the big deal. Even sex for its own sake is as good a form of recreation as any. It's certainly a lot more constructive than sitting in front of the TV.

Jeremy

[RSLancastr]

Originally posted by toddjh
As for sex, I just don't see the big deal.Then you're not doing it right! :D

[corplinx]

I am not a believer but I am more prudish than any southern baptist on my block (you live in the deep south and they grow on trees).

I see madonna kissing britney spears on tv, I am royally grossed out. Not because its two women. I don't dig seeing tongues twirling period on TV.

I don't think that sort of things promotes a hedonistic culture as much as an exhibitionist culture.

For god's sake, keep the passionate tongue kisses off live TV, espeically when the two people involved are of age to be grandma and granddaughter.

[toddjh]

Originally posted by corplinx
For god's sake, keep the passionate tongue kisses off live TV

Why? If you don't like it, don't watch it. I like watching women kiss. Yes, even Madonna (she's old but she's hot!) Should the producers of TV shows be in the business of catering to every group that doesn't like something? Why not just offer what they think will appeal to people and let things work themselves out?

If you're watching Madonna on MTV and you didn't expect her to pull some shocking stunt, then I think the problem is with you. :)

Jeremy

[American]

The part where you get splashed with something nasty. "The money shot" is what smut bandits call it. Now that's just wrong.

[Jet Grind]

I have no problem with a "libertine culture". That's just O'Riely's latest newspeak term for "I SOOOO totally virtuous and you're not so you have to do what I say you peons!" anyway.

[American]

Smothering is wrong also.

[EvilYeti]

Originally posted by Tony
I’m watching Bill O'reilly right now, he is talking to Tom Green about MTV and its influence on young people. He takes issue with the Britney and Madonna kiss, saying that MTV is pushing a "libertine" lifestyle. I, for one, am all for a "libertine" culture.


Man Tony, you are like the worst Republican ever! :D

[Pyrrho]

Originally posted by Tony
I’m watching Bill O'reilly right now, he is talking to Tom Green about MTV and its influence on young people. He takes issue with the Britney and Madonna kiss, saying that MTV is pushing a "libertine" lifestyle. I, for one, am all for a "libertine" culture.

What’s your take on the issue?

Is a "libertine", or hedonistic culture a bad thing?
I laugh every time someone acts as if "the good old days" were any less "libertine" than today. The only difference is, back then, they just pretended it wasn't happening.

On a side note, that kiss was a brilliant ploy. Look at all the free publicity they're getting...and all these commentators are pretending to be shocked. What a bunch of hypocrites.

[Tony]

Originally posted by EvilYeti


Man Tony, you are like the worst Republican ever! :D

I'll take that as a complement. :)

[EdipisReks]

Originally posted by American
Smothering is wrong also.

not a fan of Waffle House, eh?

[Cleopatra]

Originally posted by toddjh


Why? If you don't like it, don't watch it.

Yesterday I heard on the radio about a survey according to which 1/3 of kids under 5 years old in UK have a TV set in their room...
( I can look for it in BBC if you are interested).

The incident with the kiss happened in the concert. Those who wanted to see Madonna's extravaganzas ( I like very much Madonna BTW ) could go to her concert expecting to see things like that.

I do have a problem when this image invades people's houses that they didn't choose to go the concert. Think about the kids that saw the scene more than once. Regardless if they are in the position to evaluate what they saw, they must have realized that it was something important because it was repeatedly shown and one way or another they were affected by it.

If you think about it by impossing cultures to young people you deprive them of the right of free choice. Someone can follow as a libertine lifestyle as he wishes after a certain age and after experimenting first with a couple of things. This is what choice is about.

[toddjh]

Originally posted by Cleopatra
Yesterday I heard on the radio about a survey according to which 1/3 of kids under 5 years old in UK have a TV set in their room...( I can look for it in BBC if you are interested).

I believe you. I think that's terrible. Children that young should not be allowed to see everything on TV indiscriminately. Their parents should be filtering it and making sure it's appropriate. That is the problem here: parents unwilling to take responsibility for the upbringing of their children, and expecting everyone else to pick up the slack from their laziness.

The incident with the kiss happened in the concert. Those who wanted to see Madonna's extravaganzas ( I like very much Madonna BTW ) could go to her concert expecting to see things like that.

I do have a problem when this image invades people's houses that they didn't choose to go the concert.

The image didn't invade anyone's house. They chose to turn their television on, tune in to MTV, and watch. How is that different from choosing to go to the concert itself, except that it's cheaper?

Think about the kids that saw the scene more than once. Regardless if they are in the position to evaluate what they saw, they must have realized that it was something important because it was repeatedly shown and one way or another they were affected by it.

So they saw two women kiss. Big deal. That's better than seeing people get shot, and that happens ten times a day on U.S. television.

I just don't buy the "for the chiiiiiiildren" argument. It's not society's job to protect your kids from things you don't like! You should be doing that yourself! If they're too young to handle the stuff on TV, they shouldn't be allowed to watch it unsupervised. It's as simple as that.

Jeremy

[Rayn]

When did we reach the consensus to treat young people as "children" as opposed to "people" anyways? Just wondering.

[Cleopatra]

Oh yes. I couldn't agree more that parents have the obligation to protect their children but as somebody who has quite "marginal" tastes regarding Art and Entertainment I believe that there are things that should not be displayed in public TV stations but only in cable ones.

For example I saw "the kiss" at the 8 o'clock news and not in MTV because I do not see MTV.

I strongly support the right of people to live their private lives as wildly as they wish but I am strongly against the public display of the particular style that dominates Media.I won't call it hedonistic though.

I believe in restrictions in age, young people should be protected by the adult practices and lifestyle because this is the only way that they will have the opportunity to live a healthy and pleasant hedonistic lifestyle as adults.

[toddjh]

Originally posted by Rayn
When did we reach the consensus to treat young people as "children" as opposed to "people" anyways? Just wondering.

Well, as long as a parent has legal responsibility for the actions of a young person, I think it's fair to treat them like children. If you're going to take the blame, it's only right that you should have the authority to control their actions.

Jeremy

[toddjh]

Originally posted by Cleopatra
Oh yes. I couldn't agree more that parents have the obligation to protect their children but as somebody who has quite "marginal" tastes regarding Art and Entertainment I believe that there are things that should not be displayed in public TV stations but only in cable ones.

For example I saw "the kiss" at the 8 o'clock news and not in MTV because I do not see MTV.

I strongly support the right of people to live their private lives as wildly as they wish but I am strongly against the public display of the particular style that dominates Media.

Take that logic a step further, though. The media wouldn't show such things unless more people wanted to see it than not. By saying that the media shouldn't show it because you don't like it, you're saying that your preferences should overrule those of a greater number of people. Is that really a fair thing to do? Would you like it if a vocal minority pushed for something you think is worthwhile to be taken off the air, just because it didn't fit in with their personal preferences?

I'm all for letting things work themselves out on their own. The social acceptability of something will be determined by the number of people who want to see it versus the number of people who don't; anything else will move the system away from equilibrium and end up being unfair to more people than necessary.

I believe in restrictions in age, young people should be protected by the adult practices and lifestyle because this is the only way that they will have the opportunity to live a healthy and pleasant hedonistic lifestyle as adults.

I agree. We just differ on whose responsibility it is to do the protecting. I say it's the parents' responsibility exclusively, and you seem to think society as a whole should censor itself to protect the children of others.

Jeremy

[Cleopatra]

Originally posted by toddjh

Take that logic a step further, though. The media wouldn't show such things unless more people wanted to see it than not.

This is a very interesting point and it deserves a separate discussion regardless if some people think that the discussion regarding who influnces whom ( Media influnce people or people determine what Media show? ) resembles a discussion about Colombus Egg...

By saying that the media shouldn't show it because you don't like it, you're saying that your preferences should overrule those of a greater number of people. Is that really a fair thing to do? Would you like it if a vocal minority pushed for something you think is worthwhile to be taken off the air, just because it didn't fit in with their personal preferences?

You are right, I belong to those that didn't find the kiss repulsive BTW but I think that we have a problem that we must address.

On a different tone but in the same topic. Some years ago, the Greek TV was showing a popular American serial. In one episode the heroine decided to take a PAP test. The next day the Greek hospitals were filled with housewives that wanted to take this test too... :)

I'm all for letting things work themselves out on their own. The social acceptability of something will be determined by the number of people who want to see it versus the number of people who don't; anything else will move the system away from equilibrium and end up being unfair to more people than necessary.

Frankly I agree with you, to be honest, I used to agree more, meaning that I have started changing my mind. I have started having questions about this policy. It seems that Media are more influential that we thought and in some cases we have some problems, I am just looking for the best way to address them.

[Regnad Kcin]

Tom Green? A spokesperson for cultural issues?

Shouldn't Bill O'Lie-lly (shout out to Al Franken!) be quizzing the former Mr. Drew Barrymore as to how someone so unfunny can become wealthy, famous, and... Mr. Drew Barrymore?

[American]

Originally posted by EdipisReks
not a fan of Waffle House, eh?


That's what I meant. :p

[Malachi151]

What's wrong with kids seeing women kiss?

My only real problem with any of this is the commercial way that this type of stuff is exploited. I think that its fine for any type of behavior to be acceptable, but then exploiting it for commercial purposes is another matter, and how do you draw that line?

I don't think that sex should be allowed to be used to sell products, but how do you regulate that?

Ideally I would say that all advertising has to be purely factual in nature. If it were uyp to me I would completely reform advertising law. Advertising should be able informing the public about the factual detials of your product, not building brand images and lifestyle associations, etc.

[shanek]

Is there something wrong with me (don't answer that) that I just don't care the least bit whose mouth Madonna shoved her tongue into? Maybe it's just me, but the only thought I have upon hearing that Madonna kissed anybody is, "Gee, I sure hope she's up to date on her shots!" And then I get on with my life.

What the &^%$ is the deal here?

[CapelDodger]

At least if we had a culture of hedonism it would mean that we'd got rid of the guilt-trips and control-freakery of religions. As long as you do no harm and don't live as a parasite, surely hedonism is the only rational lifestyle?

As for Madonna, I just don't like to see this stuff clogging up the "news". Same goes for anything concerning royalty (unless they've really embarrassed themselves).

[Cleopatra]

Originally posted by Malachi151
What's wrong with kids seeing women kiss?
.

If Media had some decency children wouldn't even have seen that kiss... Nothing is wrong with kids seeing women kissing Malachi, the problem starts when Media repeatedly show this scene and they show it until they persuade you that there is something wrong with that indeed...

Capel Dodger, I couldn't agree more with that :

As long as you do no harm and don't live as a parasite, surely hedonism is the only rational lifestyle?

When the Epicurians and Cyrenaics taught Hedonism as an alternative lifestyle to the devastating effects of the post-Alexander the Great hellenistic period they couldn't have imagined the way Christian scholars would interpret--and slander-- their doctrine some centuries later.

That's why I posted above that I wouldn't describe the lifestyle that is promoted by the Media as hedonistic.