Sex VS. Violence?

Question

I just read a question about when should a child be allowed to see sex and kissing on television--I don‘t think there is anything wrong with that question, by the way. I have always questioned that and violence. It seems in America it is okay to watch violent things on the television. For God's sake--cartoons are more violent. Why do we take so much time and effort trying to shield our children from sex? In my eyes sex is natural. It is something people do--if you have talked to your kids about sex, explaining when two people love each other they have sex then why is it that big of a deal? Why do I see so many American children watching Pulp Fiction--before they are allowed to watch Titanic? If kids know they are just movies--not to get confused with real life--then why is sexual content so considered much worse then violence? Before you jump to conclusions--no I’m not talking about full fledged porn--just movies with sex scenes.

Answer 1

I see your point and I think you proved your case well. Yes, many cartoons that kids watch today are super violent. Even cartoons from back in the day...take Tom & Jerry for instance, they spend the entire half hour trying to kill eachother. But God forbid Minne and Mickey sleep in the same bed! I think kids should be shielded from both sex and violence until they're old enough to full understand them.

Answer 2

Why aren't you talking about porn?



As you say sex is natural.



Let me answer your questions:



First things first, around the time Reagan took office the AIDS epidemic took center stage in Hollywood. Celebrities began dying and Hollywood was upset. Meanwhile, Reagan and the religious right were trying to ignore the problem by not talking about it. Gays were coming out of the shadows to get help. Sexual orientation was becoming a topic of discussion all over the country. So in a knee jerk reaction Hollywood, not wanting many of its celebrities to come under fire changed directions and went with a proviolence antisex format. This started about 1983. Between 1969 and 1982 it was all about trying to press the sexual envelope. As a matter of fact, it was during that thirteen year period that selling and distributing porn became legal and that the line between mainstream movies and porn became all but non existent. We're talking Caligula and Emmanuelle as well as Last Tango in Paris. It was the sexual revolution.



Second, why has it held up since then? Answer, it is easier to put the genie back in the bottle with violence than sex. At least that is the way censors see it. Children emulate what they see adults do. If they see you fight they fight. It they see you have sex they have sex. You mentioned love. For children love is a simple emotion, giving, open, pure, not selective. So if you tell them people who are in love have sex then they will wonder does that include siblings, parents, neighbors, friends. They love them all so then they can have sex with them all. It makes sense if you are a child, just like it makes sense that you can hit other people because they do it on television. The big difference is that hitting someone is not going to get them pregnant. There is such a thing as being a little injured but no such thing as being a little pregnant.



And third, the longer you spend as a parent the more you will come to realize that you are not only setting rules for your child but for everychild your child comes in contact with. Before you know it your little sex talk has made it to the ears of every child in the neighborhood and some if not all of their parents and that is when the fit hits the shan, so to speak.



But getting back to porn, I give you this thought that porn is better than "Titanic" which sells sex as romance rather than what it is a physical interaction between two people that is not as beautiful as romantics would like you to believe and if it were seen for what it truly looks like children and some adults might have second thoughts about having a one night stand or in the case of "Titanic" a sweaty romp in the backseat of a stranger's car. You might as well let them watch "Monster's Ball" as well. Then you can answer buggery to the kiddies. "Gone with the Wind" you can explain about rape. "Nine and a half Weeks", let's talk about fettish. Lord knows how you will explain "Pretty Baby".

Answer 3

I agree that exposure to violence (not so much in cartoons- most kids won't confuse that with real life), but more realistic violence in horror movies etc. at a young age- is far more damaging.



Sex is a natural thing, and movies with characters that have healthy sexual relationships aren't horrible things from which youngsters must be shielded at all costs- yes it's utter stupidity to disallow that, yet cheerfully say o.k. to the utter gore of Kill Bill or Pulp Fiction. Those are far more problematic than Janet Jackson's wardrobe malfunction.



Certainly parents have to exercise good judgement in dealing with both- make sure kids are of the appropriate age before allowing them to watch anything too adult. But I think in looking at which is the greater problem, censors have it wrong.

Answer 4

Well my answer is simple enough. when kids hit the awakening years they should be allowed to view and question mild sex. If a household is forward it can lead to a secure and healthy upbringing in the understanding what is sex is all about. Violence can have effect on children. I remember watching old cowboy movies when i was young. I felt sad seeing so much shooting, i actually thought the actors died for real. Violence in films can be to graphic nowadays hence certification. But it is no guarentee of not seeing the film or show by younger vunerable audiences, who then ask friends the same age the questions they should be asking parents. Imagine some of the answers they recieve from them. Its just a matter of care and keeping children close to heart and also close to the subjects they no doubtedly see and ask.

Answer 5

well, in your argument that "sex is natural" you forget that violence too is a natural human behavior. in fact it is a natural animal behavior in almost every species.



sure there are certain ultra-violent movies and shows that can do major damage to a child's mind, and seriously mess them up for life, but violence in general is not such a bad thing, its just nature.



but, i do agree with your views on sex. why do we shield our children from sex?



why, because sex is no longer just an act of procreation or even love. sex is a drug, it is a vice. there are so many cases of immature sexual encounters these days, that it really has gotten out of hand. two years ago, one of the local ELEMENTARY schools had an EPIDEMIC of gonorhea of the THROAT, because 5th grade girls were charging 5 dollars for blow jobs in the bathroom. This is not a joke. this is a serious report. and, this is not a bad neighborood, it is an average suburban town on long island.



now, ask yourself this, would you rather your daughter caught an STD at school, or was shot to death in a school shooting?



neither of these are desirable situations, yet BOTH have happened in our lifetime.



so, maybe we should be shielding our kids from both of these things, but more importantly, we should be showing them the consequences of their actions, and the right way to live.





I strongly believe that health classes (especially those that involve sex and STDs) should start at an earlier age, around 4th grade, when kids are starting to mature physically, and think they know what sex is.

Answer 6

I think as a whole, we are so used to seeing violence that violence really isn't a big deal. I remember watching Nightmare on Elm Street when I was 8 years old, but I also grew up watching my mother's soap operas where everyone had sex constantly. Now I have two nieces - 10 and 14, who are totally emabarrassed by sex scenes in movies and will close their eyes when they come on or look away. Sex is seen as more of a private matter, where as violence is as common as anything else. At least to my nieces it is.

Answer 7

Somehow violence is accepted in the US but the fact humans are sexual beings is not. Young people are humans and humans are sexual beings, but no one seems to have a problem with something that is not natural, killing one another, etc. US seems to be the most messed up country as far as teen violence, teen pregnancy, drop outs, etc. If we keep our present attitudes on everything and treat our young people as other than human and individuals nothing will ever improve. Make sure young people never see a bare female breast on TV but keep up the body count is the norm. I think this country brings on it's own problems and needs to look more at the european way etc.

Answer 8

I believe strongly that all we have to do is educate our children properly on sex education. I am an advocate of sex education, once that is done children are free to watch love movies where there are scenes like kissing and smooching but I am completely against pornography for children. The violence situation we allowed them watch freely has more negative effect on them than sex scenes.

Answer 9

I can see where you are coming from. When I was growing up my parents never restricted me from anything. However my mom always watched them with me. She would explain things sometimes or answer things if I had questions and we were very opened about it. I grew up knowing the difference between real and just made up TV. I think thats what half the problem is now, no one explains anything to their children. They either completely hide things and let their kids learn on the bus ride home from school or they just completely ignore it altogether.



I still think one should be careful as to what they let their children see or hear but lets face it sometimes what they see in their own homes from their parents is sometimes far worse then what is on TV.

Answer 10

Gonna go against the grain here and say, sex/nudity is infinitely worse. Here's why:



Kids

Young kids are more ready to see violence in the media than sex. Yes, that's right! I just said I'd rather my three-year old son see someone getting their head blown off than to see two people having sex. Why? Because while neither image is necessarily good for a child to see, violence in general is a very simple lesson for kids. "You don't hit", sometimes "You don't hurt people". This is not only simple but consistent with his understanding of the world as he grows up. Telling him "Sex is bad" is not only untrue but a very literally Puritan way of addressing the topic; yet it's the only way of addressing it to a toddler who needs to somehow know what they're doing on screen he's not supposed to do.



Adults

There are a great many societal and legal deterrents of violence. It is almost always frowned upon if not punished in a big way. People understand (again from a very early age) that if they are violent, they almost certainly will be made to regret it. Sometimes even self-defense is punished, which is a testament of many things but one being our general intolerance of violence. Compare this to our general acceptance of sexual activity, including activity we can almost guarantee we'll regret! The media is chock-full of promotions of sexual promiscuity, or at least the promotion that it is normal, and so it is closer to being normal in the "real world" today than violence ever will be. This is why among both kids and adults, sexual misadventures are more common than acts of serious violence. Violence in the media stands to have far less influence on its viewers than sex/nudity. Because the former is consistently given less opportunity to be influential, seeming promotions of something horrible is actually better than seeming promotions of something merely bad.



Sometimes the first set of priorities is in fact the right one.

Answer 11

Personally i protect my kids from both. I explain and am not ashamed of talking about sex with them at their level. And when age appropriate they can decide for themselves what to and not to watch. Till then I'm in control. Love is a natural thing ....violence is int if i had to choose i would let them watch soft porn before violence. Sex is acceptable violence is not.

Answer 12

I have often asked that same question. My kids were allowed to watch movies on a case-by-case basis. They were allowed to watch some R rated movies but were not allowed to watch Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom cuz of the violence.

Answer 13

North American culture has so many hangs up when it comes to sex it's not funny. What I find interesting about this is sex is one of the big things in the advertiser's aresenal. I wonder if the ad-man has kept the prudish attitudes about sex that way strictly to keep the power in sex for his own (evil) advertiser's purposes. I wonder if we relaxed a bit--ie. talked to our kids earlier, openly--would this remove the power?

Answer 14

I don't think it should be dealt with as a whole, but on a movie to movie basis. Like, I wouldn't want my 3 year old(he's only 6mo right now) watching heavy kissing, deep petting etc.. but I wouldn't care if he saw a little kissing.



But just the same I wouldn't care if he saw wylie coyote fall off a cliff, but I don't want him to see a gangster shooting up someone.

Answer 15

I agree with you, The prolem with so many shows though is they show people having casual sex and I do not want my daughter or son seeing that. Also my daughter was watching cartoon network the other day Cartoons are HORRIBLE now adays!

Answer 16

I think a line must be drawn between lustful sex scenes and making love scenes. My kids know it's an adult thing to do and thats when communication is key.

Answer 17

I hardly ever get to watch TV and movies i only can see if my parents say it is OK. Father says TV is a bad influence so i hardly can watch anything even though i get see things at my friends houses because their parents not mind.

Answer 18

the significant challenge is -> The hotcoffee mod wasn't time-honored approximately by ability of ESRB so as quickly as that hacker got here across it BAM! watchdog communities & politicians pounced. i don't think of its that undesirable of a ingredient, intercourse or violence, in a marketplace the place customer sovereignty reigns we are figuring out directly to have that for the period of our video games. undesirable ingredient? i think of not. ought to that is stored far off from the child game enthusiasts? maximum quite, yet thats not our option to make. finally its the determination of the mother and dad and in the event that they're figuring out directly to enable their little ones play those video games, what can we do? as quickly as human beings start to realize that its not game enthusiasts fault or the industry's fault for making those video games or for enjoying them, in keeping with risk issues will quiet down. till then its merely going to proceed to be a huge mess...

Answer 19

Sex may lead to unwanted pregnancy while violence, initially, may lead to only a few bumps...and it is convenient to look towards immediate problems only

Answer 20

Because this country was founded by Puritanical groups who were more conservative than the groups they left behind in Europe...



This Puritanical beginning still influences many beliefs and values to this day...

Answer 21

i share the same sentiments

Answer 22

You look hot on the picture ;)

Answer 23

no