SYMBOLISM!!!!
(Warning: notorious left fielder. Following text may jump from one thought pattern to the next.)
IMHO, it's both to do with a pendulum movement in society and the moral values of the age. Be it artistic currents,philosophical schools of thought or general media and fashion trends, a component is more than often the reaction to what was already existing - to reject the status quo out of a desire to innovate and to define yourself as separate and unique. As time goes by, these trends become antiquated and their flaws appear more clearly, so you try the alternative. What prevents this from being a simple back-and-forth is the concept of progress, be it technological, philosophica or whatever. Game-changing elements appear all the time, which means that suddenly there are other fields in which to ask moral questions, new dilemmas that didn't exist before. And, every now and then, someone does something truly innovative, or takes a third option. So all in all, even though society as a whole tends to oscilliate between a relatively limited series of trends and thought schools - after all, stuff written 2500 years ago in Greece can still be relevant today, clear sign that the human condition hasn't changed that much - evolutions in mentalities and the realities people face trigger evolutions and keep the system in motion and evolving. Medias, globalisation - all that changed the way we look at ourselves, connected us more and made us feel less alone. Seeing that there are big groups out there sharing the same ideas, beliefs, fetishes etc. made them more acceptable and forced many to face the existence of large groups with lifestyles, habits and customs far different than theirs. What wasn't possible in a small village where everyone knows everyone, or in an environment where keeping face is paramount is now possible, because the world is now more aware of the existence of those groups and because nowadays, so many things are being shown on tv or discussed in the media that the shame isn't there in the same way that it used to be. Plus, the internet allows for anonymity and easy access to information, meaning aternative lifestyle communities can build a network and exchange ideas and experiences far better and thus blossom up and even get mainstream recognition. Bottom line for the original question: while society tends to go back and forth between, for example, more liberated and playful as opposed to chaste and sober sexual attitudes (not that combinations of the two in some proprtion is impossible), progress in society also plays a part in redefining the limits and possibilites in the field.
(*Deep breath* Phew. Hope that's followable. ^_^)
Change, my dear, and not a moment too soon.
A younger generation has certain relaxed expectations, and they become the norm while the old people think it's outrageous.
Well, those new expectations become the norm, the young become old, and suddenly the next generation has these outrageous new demands... And the cycle continues.
There's always going to be variation though, I don't have an issue with non-hetero sexuality, but I'm extremely squicked by all this genderbendiness that's been faddish lately, and the idea of gay sex squicks me out pretty badly.
Which is why I don't surround myself with any of those things. -shrug-
![[up]](https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/smiles/arrow_up.png "[up]"){kind=icon}
I know that feel bro. Well, it's not exatly "disgust" so much as "estrangement"/"alienation"/"feeling wierded out". You know, like, Uncanny Valley style. How's your "bi" roommate?
But I'd also say it's not just the young going always further than the old. On one hand, the young go backwards as they grow older: they start virtuous, they become corrupt, they start free, they become stuck-up. On the other, the young generations themselves might go back on their parents' accomplishments.
I finally grew the courage to read this. Pretty awesomely stated.
edited 26th Sep '11 2:18:45 PM by JesusSaves
An action is not virtuous merely because it is unpleasant to do.
My roomate and I get along fine, he's gay, but he isn't into the gay "culture" of grandstanding and attention whoring, he despises that.
His boyfriend on the other hand could really use some self-awareness training, he's such a frigging fop.
Is that cake frosting?
But they seem to
know where they are going, the ones who walk away from Omelas.
Until they start drilling new ones and saying it's a lifestyle choice.
"Friggin' fop": as long as he's competent at his job... ^-i can actually see that happening... but not for sex.
edited 27th Sep '11 9:03:04 AM by JesusSaves
An action is not virtuous merely because it is unpleasant to do.
Raven Wilder
It doesn't always go in one direction; for instance, Victorian England was actually far more prudish than many previous eras in British history.
"It takes an idiot to do cool things, that's why it's cool" - Haruhara Haruko
I changed accounts.
Other people's sexual preferences don't bother me, most of the time. If I find it personally creepy/disgusting (i.e. like male homosexual sex), I'll just avoid it.
I am now known as Flyboy.
Why double standard? For a long time, I found having males in my porn to detract from its quality. Even now, I still enjo Girl on Girl Is Hot way more than anything involving penii. It's unfair, and I'd like to understand.
And yeah, that's why I said hegelian spiral rather than mere escalation. There's a back-and-forth.
An action is not virtuous merely because it is unpleasant to do.
I changed accounts.
Because girl-on-girl is hot. 
I dunno. It's probably psychological. We're hardwired, generally speaking, for heterosexual sex. That is quite simply the actual default. So, if one doesn't have whatever genetic variance (or perhaps neurological, or whatever) that creates a homosexual drive, I imagine biology kicks in to make you go "ew, not cool."
Conversely, with women, heterosexual males are wired to be attracted to that. Girl-on-girl is simply more dense with women. Whether or not they'd be inviting to one joining in is besides the point, as it's all about psychological and physiological reaction.
I am now known as Flyboy.
Never Ask Me the Odds
Not entirely sure where I'd fit in on this discussion. I'm a very much 'your personal business is your personal business, as long as it's consentual it's not going to bother me one bit' kind of person. I don't get squicked easily, and my response to others getting squicked at (non-explicit) sexual display would generally be, 'just deal with it'. So you don't enjoy seeing gays kissing... most people don't enjoy seeing fat people in skimpy bathing suits on the beach either, but they don't gripe about it (for the most part), same thing.
On the other hand, I am very much a 'your personal business is your personal business' type. I don't need to hear about anyone else's sex life, I think it's much more polite to keep public displays of affection to a minimum, and I think that for the most part people look more attractive clothed in a way society would call 'decent'.
edited 27th Sep '11 9:23:18 AM by TheGirlWithPointyEars
She of Short Stature & Impeccable Logic My Skating Liveblog
I changed accounts.
This.
One point to the Vulcan.
An action is not virtuous merely because it is unpleasant to do.
He works at Mc Donalds, not that his job matters, he can be absolutely obnoxious to have around the house. My roomate is working on domesticating him to the point where he acts like a normal human being, and not some energetic terrier attention-whore "thing".
On the double standard: Heterosexual men like women, and don't like other men(sexually). This means that cutting a man out of the picture in porn and putting in another woman makes things even more awesome, simple math.
As for squick.. I don't have an issue with most of the things I have gross existing, I just don't want to see them myself.
The Mod with the Migraine
That’s the epitome of privilege right there, not considering armed nazis a threat to your life. - Silasw
I changed accounts.
I must say, violence is never as bad as sex, in terms of Squick factor. Happy Tree Friends is hilarious to me, and yet I refuse to even look at Meatspin.
I am now known as Flyboy.
|like a boss|
Standards change over time, I don't think anyone on this board is qualified to say why they do, I'm certainly not, but that's what happens. Things have been trending toward the more liberal for a long time now.
also, I feel the need to correct something here—
That's not "gay culture", that's flamboyant culture. Straight people do it too, we just call them "metrosexual" for some reason.
on another note
I've always wondered why this is so. It's like people are paranoid that they'll "turn gay" if they watch two guys doing it for too long (and I've heard people say as much). I've never understood that, after all with violence the worst thing that can happen is y'know, dying.
go ahead and do every stupid thing you can imagine
I changed accounts.
Well, violence has a level where it's just "ok, that's not cool anymore." It's just that, at a certain, relatively moderate level, it registers less as "holy shit, bad," and more as "funny." It's all about how it's played, though.
I don't find Hostel to be something I want to see, but, say, Family Guy? Sure.
Conversely, there's nothing really appealing about homosexuality, since, well, duh, I'm straight. There's no redeeming factor to it, and therefore there is no threshold at which it's "ok."
I am now known as Flyboy.
|like a boss|
I don't find Hostel to be something I want to see, but, say, Family Guy? Sure.
Don't get me wrong, I find violent things funny too. I just wonder why that's the case, is all.
I don't have any problem with people avoiding it, really. But honestly, the cartoonish displays of disgust some people put on near anyone or anything that can be construed as "gay" annoys me thoroughly. I'm not saying you do that, and in fact wouldn't know if you did or not, I'm just explaining where I'm coming from here.
go ahead and do every stupid thing you can imagine
I changed accounts.
Because it's not real? Real, legitimate violence isn't funny, largely speaking. If Happy Tree Friends were real it would be far to the end of "holy shit, wrong, wrong, wrong."
I think some of its humor. We're the awkward, in-between generation where homosexuality is "yeah... ok... that's weird, but whatever," rather than "BURN!" However, it's not yet just "whatever." So...
I am now known as Flyboy.
|like a boss|
my posts are eating each other.
edited 28th Sep '11 2:48:23 PM by BlixtySlycat
go ahead and do every stupid thing you can imagine
|like a boss|
I'm aware, but don't you find the brain making such an apparently arbitrary distinction rather strange? I mean, I do.
I can see that, but people who still treat "gay" as some kind of virus (and there are a lot of them) make me want to rip my hair out. Much more than say, someone who just throws around the word "faggot" a lot.
edited 28th Sep '11 2:49:11 PM by BlixtySlycat
go ahead and do every stupid thing you can imagine
I changed accounts.
Does it strike me as strange? Not really. It probably isn't good, but...
~shrug~
I'm guilty of using "gay" as an insult. Never seriously, but, well, culture is culture.
I am now known as Flyboy.
Basically Squick. This effect it causes. Of rejection. Negative reactions. Inexplicable embarassment. Well, not inexplicable, more like unexplained. Like, there's so much we don't understand yet, about how people relate to sex. And, well, if we look at the last century, there's been quite the back-and-forth, sexually. Like, in The Roaring '20s, bordelloes were all the rage, and every respectable young artist or poet had to have been there. And then they were forbidden. And then you had the late sixties and early seventies, where you put out because it was what everyone else did, and you had nudity everywhere and stuff like Zardo Z. And then it was the eighties, and Reaganism and Thatcherism and stuff. And now it's the Noughties, and it's all about freaking vampires everywhere, and gay people becoming normal, not just tolerable-normal but accepted-normal, and half the Republican party coming out of the closet, and young people buying viagra before going In Da Club.
And that's just the USA. You also have similar stuff happening in Europe, and there's the case of Sweden which was sort of the vanguard of porn for a time, and now I'm told they've gone all conservative and prudish and stuff. And even here, there was the Troper Tales and the Fetish Fuel and stuff, and one time it was cool and this site was reputed for its "relaxed attitude to sexuality", and another people got fed up with it and we became reputed for our high standards of family-friendliness. Personally, I think of myself as a prude, and proud of it (to the point of being a little snobbish, but I do try to tone it down), so I like it when we're on a "repressive" move.
But...
How does this work? Is it like clothes and music? Fads that last until people are fed up at last, and then they're past?
Also, what's the relationship of "feeling like talking about sex" with "juvenile", "immature", etc? I mean, I see plenty of mature people talk about sex all the time, it's the kids nowadays who are incredibly blasé about it. Then again, the little bastards these days feel left-out if they haven't had sex by age fourteen so... So is it, like, change? What sort of change? And are we alyways returning to square one, or is it a Hegelian/Marzian spiral of thesis/antithesis/synthesis?
An action is not virtuous merely because it is unpleasant to do.