Recommended reading:
Why sexual identities shifted during the pandemic - BBC Worklife
Are smartphones serving as adult pacifiers? (msn.com)
The Internet certainly does wonders to keep us focused on sex. We can watch people have sex (ad nauseum), we can admire sexy people and their well-documented salacious lives, we can read about sex & chat about sex. As such, the Internet has the market cornered on sex.
This begs the question: Does the contents of the Internet accurately / proportionately reflect humanity? Our overall interests / wiring? Our modus operandi as human beings? Or, did it become what it is in response to our consumer-fueled, hyper-individualistically customized culture? And lastly, if an individual never utilizes the (that "portion of") Internet to consume sexualized (explicit) content, might they still be impacted indirectly? In other words, is there such thing as "secondhand Internet"?
-------------------------
The first item to explore here, in an attempt to answer these questions, is the western world's primary focus: That being amassing bookoodles of material wealth. And the Internet celebrates / rewards this feckless pursuit in line with its primary motives / reasons for being.
It cannot be understated that never has there been such a force of material wealth reckoning (redistribution) than has been seen since the dawn of the Internet. As such, the Internet is most certainly not an accurate holistic reflection of humanity. Instead, it harnesses / exploits / distorts / trivializes / purports any and all aspects of our western, free enterprise CULTURE in light of its greater purpose (to make people $$$$$$).
As such, nothing online can be wholeheartedly trusted in spite of the Internet's ubiquity / convenience / pervasiveness. Yet, we as consumers do not care about this. For it's the consumer-fueled, hyper-individualistic customization that keeps us hooked / deceived. Deceived into believing that each serendipitous click seemingly controls the degree to which we're exposed, thereby, by default, defining our time online via our own, perpetually darkening, browsing standards.
All in all, the Internet typically speaks with authority, yet does so only to keep its users glued to their screens. And the reputation therein continues to gain credence as URLs fine tune their interface to consumer preferences.
-------------------------
Overall, consumers who're obsessed with sex, sexiness consume more readily (are more confident consumers). Sexually stimulating the brain proportionally reduces feelings / concerns over fear.
Cheapskates typically aren't obsessed with sex, sexiness (though they may still think an awful lot about it). Therein, most cheapskates are thrifty because they're not at all confident that they're necessarily going to be employed, have good health, be married, etc. tomorrow. Confident consumers are convinced otherwise.
-------------------------
It wasn't long after I'd arrived at last weekend's Samson Society Gulf Coast retreat that I met my favorite co-retreater. He was about my age and came to the retreat without knowing anyone else. This was one brave dude, and it was my privilege to bunk with him.
As we chatted Friday evening, standing there beside our beds, he cited recently listening to a podcast featuring a pastor who was now owning up to his previous marriage to / exploitation of the Internet (I featured that pastor within a previous post).
Here's that pastor:
What I'm trying to wrap my head around today is this (& it points back to the notion of "guilt" by association): Is there no purity left in this human (online) experience that we now embrace? No place - that the Internet hasn't touched - that's free of this jaded decline in our outlook?
By asking those questions, I'm not condoning this pastor's attempt to evangelize via his own story, but to hear my new very intelligent, very articulate Samson friend talk of this dude, and now realizing how truly bizarre this very photogenic pastor's story is...it just makes my brain hurt to think about where we've come (pun intended).
-------------------------
A previous Silas got off repeatedly throughout most weeks via salacious online imagery (accessed via his smartphone), yet never, under any circumstances, utilizing hardcore, explicit porn. He and I walked together for years, and I watched as he justified this behavior, within his own mind, by downplaying his association with explicit content. This young man had served as a deacon, Sunday School teacher (within the country church he grew up in) as a teen in small town Mississippi which spoke clearly towards his whitewashed image. And this guy was obsessed with the Internet. His smartphone / Apple Watch were of paramount importance to him, commanding his attention over everything else on planet Earth via each buzz and sound.
As I've thought back through that relationship, I'm now convinced that his circumstance may be far harder to pivot away from than I originally assumed. And this, I would argue, is presumably the case due to the association piece / "secondhand Internet" influence I've attempted to speak to here.
-------------------------
One thing that can be said for Pastor Joshua Broome is that he's no doubt descended to his very bottom of (what's legally permissible) the Internet's deep well of reliable revenue streams. And by doing so, there's no semblance of sin by association whatsoever. Hence, there's no direction (for him) but up from here. Plus, Pastor Broome didn't just dabble in his former career. He actually made history.
That being the case, I worry far less about him returning to his vomit than I do my former Silas.
God redeems but only those who can clearly see why they are in need for redemption. I'm convinced that there's so much more contrast in black & white versus grey.
No comments:
Post a Comment