> I never said that all sex in entertainment must be missionary position under sheets with the lights off between a Christian husband and wife.
I don't think I've said that you said that either? My point was that they mostly show things that are relevant, and that since most movies focus on the extraordinary, regular sex is shown less and extraordinary sex is shown more.
> First of all, it's rather interesting that you equate sex to taking a shit.
Is it? I don't really see how.
> But also, what have you been watching to conclude that they don't show people eating on-screen? It's rather common, especially in film, to have characters eating real food. the primary reason it's not as frequent as in real life is because having actors eat food is actually a complicated thing to with multiple takes while maintaining continuity.
Again, food scenes are show when they are relevant. If you see a movie that happens on three days, you won't see people eat 9 times. You may see them eating once in the morning to show that the father doesn't have much time for his family, or something like that, but you won't see everything. The "ordinary stuff" is a small part of what happens in movies, because most movies aren't made to show it, they are made to show extreme things.