Why Sex & Nudity is Down in Movies
This is the title of a post by Phil Cooke on his blog "The Change Revolution". Phil is a Christian media consultant (that is, a consultant to Christian media) and has had some big name clients. His bio is impressive.
But I think he’s not giving churches and other Christian organizations enough credit. As to why the changes in movies are happening, why the reduction in sex and nudity, this is his answer:
Wal-Mart.
That’s right. In 2007, the major Hollywood studios made $17.9 billion in DVD sales. The catch? $4 billion (nearly 25%) was made from selling to Wal-Mart, the largest retailer in the world. But Wal-Mart actually has a policy that forces any movie with high sexuality and nudity away from the areas of highest visibility in their stores. They take those DVD’s and put them in an "adult" section that’s much harder for customers to see.
Why do they do it? They don’t want to offend moms. They know mothers are there to get family oriented DVD’s for their kids, and they represent a huge market for Wal-Mart.
OK, fair enough. And here’s what he says isn’t working.
Although it might be hard to believe, sexuality and nudity is actually going down in movies today. And a number of Christian organizations are taking the credit. Some raise money based on telling the public they work in Hollywood "consulting" the studios, and others say they boycott or apply pressure from the outside. I don’t need to mention them, but they jump to the forefront when statistics indicate that sexuality in movies have dropped over the last number of years, and are the first in line to take credit. But the truth is, that’s bunk.
His conclusion:
Is it religious ministry organizations making the difference? Nope. Studios are discovering that it’s simply good business.
I’m not sure that the conclusion necessarily follows. He zeroes in on Moms making good choices, but if we zoom out just a tad, isn’t it very likely that many of those moms are actively participating in a boycott of some sort? Isn’t it at least possible that knowledge of certain religious organizations’ views influence their choices?
And what of Wal-Mart itself? The Walton family has a background in the Presbyterian Church USA and have given millions to that church. I find it highly likely that their decisions for the stores is influenced by their church and other religious ministries.
Are bees responsible for the production of fruit on trees? Nope. Each individual bee is just hungry. OK, not the best analogy, but hopefully it serves to show that if you look too closely, you can miss a much larger picture. I’m surprised that a guy like Cooke can miss something like this. Perhaps the influence of religious organizations isn’t as big as those organizations themselves think. But Cooke’s analysis by no means proves they have no influence.
Salt and light work.
Filed under: Christianity • Culture • Doug • Economics & Taxes • Movies • Religion
Like this post? Subscribe to my RSS feed and get loads more!
Such policies are just immorality dressed up as religion and they are forcing it on the rest of the world. Prudery results in widespread and often very serious harm. The teenage pregnancy rate in the most prudish western country (USA) is about ten times that of the least prudish (Denmark, Netherlands, etc). The research shows that that is not coincidence. The pattern is the same for the related indicators. So, do Walmart approve of abortion? Do they like young people dying from AIDS and other sexually transmitted infections? Is arbitrary body prejudice really worth the life of even one young person? Those are the facts and Walmart, and the other body censors in the USA, must take a large part of the blame.
And then they call the section with sexual material “adult”. Hey kids, here is the part of the store to aspire to when you are older. It isn’t as if the bible even supports what these religious groups are doing to society.
Such policies are just immorality dressed up as religion and they are forcing it on the rest of the world.
By this statement, then, are you disagreeing with Cooke and agreeing with me that churches and religious organizations do have influence? That was the main topic, and I’d be interested in knowing where you stand
Regarding “forcing it on the rest of the world”, I’d be interested in knowing what companies or industries this influence has taken down, such that “the world” cannot indulge in whatever it wants. I’d also like to know how such non-legislative actions constitute a bad sort of “forcing”, whereas I’m sure you (as do I) agree with civil rights laws that force KKK members to treat African-Americans properly. One is the law of the land, the other is much less far-reaching. Or is it only bad if you don’t care for it?
So, do Walmart approve of abortion? Do they like young people dying from AIDS and other sexually transmitted infections? Is arbitrary body prejudice really worth the life of even one young person? Those are the facts and Walmart, and the other body censors in the USA, must take a large part of the blame.
So you really think that showing kids more nudity is going to solve all these problems? The much smaller markets of Denmark and the Netherlands aren’t really a fair comparison to a country which is a melting pot of many nationalities, cultures and religions. As it is, for example, the abortion rates per 1000 women of child bearing age are pretty much equivalent (~15 in Denmark, ~19 in the US). “Prudishness” doesn’t seem to have much affect there. And while there is quite a teen pregnancy disparity, I’m betting that prior to liberals “forcing” the 1960s “free love” on the country, making promiscuity mainstream, the numbers were much lower. Stigma works.
And if you’re going to hold them up as examples, perhaps we should decriminalize bestiality, as it is in Denmark. Take the bad with the worse.