Cultural Musings

No really deep things here; just some thoughts drifting through.

Anti-Social Media
I am really amazed these days at the reach of social media in general and Twitter in particular. It seems as if it is not possible for news outlets to write a news story on their own; they must include Twitter's response. It's disturbing, too. If you've ever looked at or read about Twitter stuff, it can be pretty nauseating. It is an outlet for the worst of the worst of us to express hate and evil freely and anonymously. It seems as if nothing can occur without someone being angry and/or abusive about it. It's as if no event can cross the newsfeed without someone threatening murder. Recently I saw the story of the actress who played a character in the latest Star Wars: The Last Jedi who had to eliminate her social media accounts because of the online bullying, hate, venom, and threats she was receiving for the role she played in the movie. That's just crazy.

When did anonymous, unbridled, untethered hate become a good thing? They call it "social media" but there is a lot of anti-social behavior going on there. But try to speak out against it or suggest some sort of controls and ... well ... social media will crucify you.

The Left End of the Pool
It appears that there are new rules on thinking that weren't there before. I will illustrate with a few questions. Is it possible to oppose sexism while encouraging women to consider men's weaknesses when they dress and act? Is it possible to oppose racism while pointing to the large problem of black-on-black crime? Is it possible to love people who identify as homosexual while still maintaining that the behavior is sin?

Today, the answer to all of the above is a resounding "No!!!" They tell us that men are responsible for their shortcomings (sexual harassment, rape, abuse, etc.) (and they are) and no one -- no one -- should have to give them another thought, the slightest support, the smallest concern (1 Cor 8:8-13). The simple recognition of so-called "black-on-black crime" is racist by its nature and any wish or urge to assist in such a problem is not welcome because it's racist. And, clearly, agreeing with biblical notions like "love your neighbor" and the clear presentation of homosexual activities as sin is hate, bigotry, homophobia. Well, they had better hope that's all it is, because if people are responsible for considering the weaknesses of others and if there are actual efforts that could be expended on decreasing crime perpetrated by people of color on their own people and if God was serious about excluding from His kingdom those who make a practice of homosexual acts and we exclude them all because of our cultural prejudices, it will not go well for us on Judgment Day.

No Standards At All
It's easy to track the changes in standards over time. In the late 19th century it was scandalous for women to show their ankles. In the mid-1950's into the '70's it wasn't right to show knee. I guess it could be said that it's a "higher standard," but that would only be in terms of literal altitude. Now a school district in California makes the news with its new school dress code. Alameda County requires, and I quote, "Clothing that covers genitals, buttocks, and areolae/nipples."

I think, "Did they actually have to make that a rule?" But, worse, as someone else pointed out, they now have "standards slightly below a 1970's era burlesque show." I mean, even Jeannie from I Dream of Jeannie had to meet higher standards than that.

So, clearly, standards are changing. And not for the better. And here's the real problem. My wife went to Catholic school and she was telling me about her day. "We would roll those skirts up at the waist so we could make them a little shorter and roll our bobby socks down so we could show more ankle." That is, whatever the standard is of the day, it will be the line that is being pushed for that generation. Today's standard is literally such a very thin line that it's not hard to see where that will be pushed to.

There's another issue in play here. In a culture where nudity is normal -- say, the jungles of the Amazon or the like -- nudity has very little sexual weight. Like drinking wine in France because that was the drink at the table every day, it's not a big deal in those cultures. You would like to think that sex and nudity will not be a related issue in ours, but you know that's not the case. Walking the mall the other day, I saw signs at Victoria's Secret advertising their new lines. One is a perfume called "Tease," because "Remember, ladies, your constant job is to be a tease." The other is a line of bras entitled "Sexy Illusions," because it's all about "sexy," isn't it? Oh, no, with our hair-thin current dress standards and our ever-present "sex, sex, sex" mantra, this cannot end well.