How I think vulgar humour is more influential then violence in pop culture

[sidetrack]

In my opinion I think vulgar humour is more influential then violence in pop culture.When I was little in the 90's I remember hearing so much stuff about how bad the influence of violence is but relatively by comparision not that much on how bad vulgar humour is (at least as far as I can remember).Then again this probably mainly due to the fact that I was little and likely to imitate violence.Keywords there being "likely to imitate violence". Most grown ppl have better sense then to drive at dangerous speeds,imitate a flashy but totally impractical fighting style or quickly use force to resolve something that is an apparent threat that will cause conflict.However humour,esp.the verbal sort is much easier to imitate even when not in the context that you first saw it in.Humour is far more versatile (and is even quite a good teaching tool when used well) while violence largely is a means of destruction or a vivid response to some sort of conflict or violation.Thus it can leave a deeper impression then violence which can more easily be shrugged off as unreasonable.This leads me to ask what's more influential?.The violence of a show like Dexter or CSI and the gruesome gore and blood that results from such violence or vulgar humour from a show like Two and a half men or South Park where things are subject to be satirized (humour with the intention of teaching or sending a message:good or bad) as well as parody (making fun of something b/c it's apparently game) along with particulary in the case of the latter blood and gore are played and presented for gags and the object of a crude dark humour that takes everything too lightly and cruelly/indiscriminately makes a spectacle of it?.Thanks for your time.

[Bartolome Casas]

You are correct. You are wise.
Keep up your campaign against humor and comedy. Or at least keep these poisons out of your household.
Jesus did not indulge in joking, comedy or humor.
Joy is good. Jesus had joy. But joy is very different from joking, comedy and humor.

[Neildown]

Originally Posted by Bartolome Casas

You are correct. You are wise.
Keep up your campaign against humor and comedy. Or at least keep these poisons out of your household.
Jesus did not indulge in joking, comedy or humor.
Joy is good. Jesus had joy. But joy is very different from joking, comedy and humor.

Seriously?

[3DOCTORS]

I think - correct me OP if I'm not on the same page - the idea is that although violence in the media might be copycatted by some, it would be a smaller percentage, since violence is more external of a behavior and there are more witnesses and penalties for committing it?

Whereas impurity learned from the media, if it corrupts one's morals, would usually be acted out in a private venue (though not always) and therefore more people can sneak off and commit impure acts, and not get "caught" a lot of the time?

Also violence is something that most people agree is bad, but sexual morals are so varied and we're taught "don't judge" and all that? Unless there are consequences that can be tracked such as teen pregnancies and diseases.

[Seira]

Originally Posted by Bartolome Casas

Jesus did not indulge in joking, comedy or humor.

I don't buy that for one minute. I think Jesus did have a sense of humor. You can't be a lover of mankind & not have humor. It's one of God's gifts. God obviously has a sense of humor. Just look at the platypus.

[sidetrack]

Originally Posted by 3DOCTORS

I think - correct me OP if I'm not on the same page - the idea is that although violence in the media might be copycatted by some, it would be a smaller percentage, since violence is more external of a behavior and there are more witnesses and penalties for committing it?

Whereas impurity learned from the media, if it corrupts one's morals, would usually be acted out in a private venue (though not always) and therefore more people can sneak off and commit impure acts, and not get "caught" a lot of the time?

Also violence is something that most people agree is bad, but sexual morals are so varied and we're taught "don't judge" and all that? Unless there are consequences that can be tracked such as teen pregnancies and diseases.

Actually I wasn't thinking about what you were saying in your first paragraph at all but it's an interesting point,nethertheless.Same goes for the second paragrah which I understood a bit less.I didn't mean to get anything sexual but you've got a point.Sexual morality is something that varies so much that I guess it's one of the ways some shows get away with seemingly expressing their views and making jokes about sexuality.It also explains how they justify and/or defend that,if the writers of the show or whatever such staff actually do have such personal convictions.Do you mind teaching about what you were trying to get at in your last paragraph so I can know rightly and have it clarified in my mind?.

[SurlyMermaid]

3Doctors: one of my favorite posters!

[bri89]

This is very true, there is something to be said of the "nothing is sacred" attitude. Most of the humor on tv, comedy central, is not only crude, but idiotic and obnoxious. There is also an excess of sarcasm and I've noticed my own siblings have learned this kind of snide sarcasm that undercuts everything. That being said, I'm not opposed to comedy, I enjoy light jesting and sometimes irony, just not that heavy sarcasm because the heart of it is contempt.

[Catholiccore]

Originally Posted by Bartolome Casas

You are correct. You are wise.
Keep up your campaign against humor and comedy. Or at least keep these poisons out of your household.
Jesus did not indulge in joking, comedy or humor.
Joy is good. Jesus had joy. But joy is very different from joking, comedy and humor.

Really? Jesus didn't joke or have a sense of humour?

Have you ever read "The Road to Emmaus"?

Jesus seems to have had a very dry sense of humour, I'm suprised they didn't nickname him "The Sahara"

[sidetrack]

Originally Posted by bri89

This is very true, there is something to be said of the "nothing is sacred" attitude. Most of the humor on tv, comedy central, is not only crude, but idiotic and obnoxious. There is also an excess of sarcasm and I've noticed my own siblings have learned this kind of snide sarcasm that undercuts everything. That being said, I'm not opposed to comedy, I enjoy light jesting and sometimes irony, just not that heavy sarcasm because the heart of it is contempt.

If it helps I've heard it said that sarcasm is a sign of a lack of wit

[edwest2]

Originally Posted by sidetrack

In my opinion I think vulgar humour is more influential then violence in pop culture.When I was little in the 90's I remember hearing so much stuff about how bad the influence of violence is but relatively by comparision not that much on how bad vulgar humour is (at least as far as I can remember).Then again this probably mainly due to the fact that I was little and likely to imitate violence.Keywords there being "likely to imitate violence". Most grown ppl have better sense then to drive at dangerous speeds,imitate a flashy but totally impractical fighting style or quickly use force to resolve something that is an apparent threat that will cause conflict.However humour,esp.the verbal sort is much easier to imitate even when not in the context that you first saw it in.Humour is far more versatile (and is even quite a good teaching tool when used well) while violence largely is a means of destruction or a vivid response to some sort of conflict or violation.Thus it can leave a deeper impression then violence which can more easily be shrugged off as unreasonable.This leads me to ask what's more influential?.The violence of a show like Dexter or CSI and the gruesome gore and blood that results from such violence or vulgar humour from a show like Two and a half men or South Park where things are subject to be satirized (humour with the intention of teaching or sending a message:good or bad) as well as parody (making fun of something b/c it's apparently game) along with particulary in the case of the latter blood and gore are played and presented for gags and the object of a crude dark humour that takes everything too lightly and cruelly/indiscriminately makes a spectacle of it?.Thanks for your time.

All of the following degrade the human person and can and do lead to a truly distorted picture of what a human being is/should be.

1) Comedy is often not funny. Take Chris Rock. He revels in profanity and graphic sexual references while trying to get a laugh out of his audience. Or Louis Black who, on his own authority, said the following: "There's no such thing as bad language." Or comedian Whoopi Goldberg, as amateur Bible scholar, explaining Leviticus to her audience as part of her "act."
A) Satire is meant to be clever and funny but not in a mean way.
B) Parody is meant to imitate and exaggerate some genre or literary form, but it need not be cruel, just a bit over the top.

Examples: South Park. A little girl goes up to her teacher at the end of class and says, "Stay away from my man, b***h!"
Or Family Guy. In the opening song, it refers to "those values on which we used to rely." Which values? Normal Christian values. Jesus is mocked. Peter is injected with the 'gay gene,' tells his family he's leaving them and gets a boyfriend. A little later, at his boyfriend's place, Peter is told he is going to get a big surprise - an 11-way, as 10 young men trot out of the bedroom in their underwear.

Violence has gotten too graphic. We don't need to see a realistic simulation of horrible burns or a bullet traveling through a body.
Dexter, as a TV show, is sick. A man whose hobby is kidnapping people and cutting them to pieces. After several episodes, what do you think? Poor guy. Traumatized as a child, he just can't help it. But thanks to his police officer adoptive father who convinced him that murdering 'bad people' is OK, he can lead a fuller life than being locked away for life for being criminally insane.

The character template for most TV shows is "the dysfunctionals." Human beings who don't care if they get divorced, commit adultery, fornicate or do a whole lot of bad things because "who cares"? "I'll do whatever I want just because I can." Like a married woman having sex with the young garden boy. What's the big deal?

When we become less sensitive to sin or get convinced that sin and bad role models don't affect others, since most sins involve more than one person, it's time to wake up. We must say, "No. This is wrong and politely explain why."




Peace,
Ed