I am trying to be better.

Its pretty safe to assume you're referring to this post: https://www.tumblr.com/thatfunkyopossum/820975968779911168

Which I tagged with the following: (cleaned up, as it was originally tags)

Now, i’m not saying that sex scenes can never say anything, but i do feel like the vast majority of sex scenes i’ve encountered in classically published media don’t say anything at all with the sex scenes they include. There is borderline never any information that could not have been gathered by the mere implication or build up to and fade to black of a sex scene. The only sex scenes I can think of that have ever given me more information about a character or felt thematically important are found in the shape of water. [...] but yeah sex is a neutral thing that people do, but personally i don’t want a sex scene in a movie/tv show/whatever unless you’re going to use it to say something.

Firstly, in art there is no hard rules and nothing /has/ to be anything. My opinions are simply opinions and I'm not here to tell anyone what to do or what to enjoy. I'm also going to make it clear that I never said "relevant to the plot", and I was vague about various meanings for a reason.

That reason is that while I do not believe every single scene should forward the plot, I believe every single scene should have a reason for existing other than just showing us ordinary and expected human behavior. For example, the movie Birdemic starts with an extended scene of the main character driving somewhere. Absolutely nothing is learned about the character besides the fact that he drives to work which would be easily assumed if it was plot relevant since that's the most common mode of transit in the United States where the film was both shot and set. This scene is considered shitty and bad for numerous reasons, most importantly that it says nothing over a long period of time.

In my opinion most sex scenes in film and TV are exactly the same as this driving scene. We are shown the most expected, typical, heterosexual sex possible. We are shown the exact activity, with the exact tone, performed in the exact way, in the exact place, that you would expect it to. The characters are almost always male and female, and we cut to the man on top of the woman, or with her pressed against something. Everything is tastefully shot because its not pornography and not titillating, but the characters probably act like they're in Pornography Lite and make the generic motions, make the generic sounds, and usually don't say anything.

Two examples I can think of off the top of my head that defy this are actually villain sex scenes. In American Psycho we see Patrick Bateman having sex with two prostitutes in a very sexually graphic scene that shows us a lot about him. This scene isn't necessarily "plot relevant", but it is CHARACTER relevant. It illustrates how highly he thinks of himself, how little he thinks of these women, and in a way also illustrates how pathetic he is.

The second, in The Shape of Water, is the lead villain Richard Strickland having sex with his wife. This one actually is plot relevant in a way, as it illustrates that Strickland's ideal sexual object is a woman who cannot make any form of noise, hence why he acts so perversely towards the lead who is a mute woman.

If the sex scene develops the plot or develops the characters, I'm fine with it. If a sex scene exists for no reason other than to tell me the characters had sex, then why aren't you also showing me all the times the characters eat or go to the bathroom. Its a normal thing that people do, its crime is not being an abnormal evil thing, its crime is that its fucking boring.