The Naked Scientists

The Naked Scientists Forum

Author Topic: WHY IS MURDER & VIOLENCE JUST DANDY, BUT SEX FORBIDDEN ON TV ?  (Read 7176 times)

Offline Karen W.

  • Moderator
  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *****
  • Posts: 31653
  • Thanked: 5 times
  • "come fly with me"
    • View Profile
Why is incredible violence, rape, murder, represented on TV and in the Media, so readily, and yet the simple beautiful act of making love so taboo?

I find it distasteful as a society that there is so much violence being allowed on, over something as beautiful as sex?

Not that I think that TV should be Porn you know what I mean.. It's the thought that some of our priorities seem a bit out of place sometimes.
As a parent I am a strong believer in monitoring your children's  television viewing.. absolutely.. but I think a that we cannot always prevent our children from the media and can't possibly monitor everything they see. The violence killing raping and things of this nature I do not find entertaining as often as some. I like good action movies, but some are way over the top and I even find them difficult to view.


 

Offline DoctorBeaver

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 12656
  • Thanked: 3 times
  • A stitch in time would have confused Einstein.
    • View Profile
I quite agree. I often wonder at the classification of videos in this country. Some that I've seen rated as suitable for 12 years & over have swearing and gratuitous violence in them.

I also don't agree with censorship, but the classification system, and what falls into which classification, seems to be a total mess.

But it's not just cinema, TV & DVDs. What about the internet? Yes, there are parental filters; but if a clip doesn't have tags that identify it as for adults only it will slip through the filter.

I tried to download a video of Cradle Of Filth live. I tried 5 different versions and got a porno vid every time. How can a parent control that sort of thing?

And some of the videos on sites such as YouTube are horrible; but all you have to do is enter a date of birth that shows you to be old enough and, hey presto, you have full access to them. On some sites you don't even have to enter a date of birth; just click on a button that says "I am over 18" (or 21 for some US sites).
 

Offline Karen W.

  • Moderator
  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *****
  • Posts: 31653
  • Thanked: 5 times
  • "come fly with me"
    • View Profile
I agree whole heartedly! I don't get it.. the rating system stinks and they are not blocking anything when your child can read the sc reen and comprehend you must me 18.. What do they think the child is going to do?

Say, "OH SHUCKY DARN!!  I
 
CAN'T GO THERE CAUSE I AM NOT 18.. I GUESS I WILL PRESS

THE NO I AM NOT 18 BUTTON... LOL! LOL !

Who do they think we are raising? Morons chimps??

It's a joke!
 

another_someone

  • Guest
The problems with the Internet, as raised elsewhere, is how far down the road to censorship do you want to go, and how much do you want to undermine the anonymity of the users.

The only way to actually prove someone's age is to prove their identity, which means removing their anonymity.  Certainly, there arguments for this (not only with regard to access to underage site, but also in reducing fraud, and reducing spam - although proof of identity for emails is even more difficult that it is for web users).  The problem is that the greatest impact that the removal of anonymity will have is in the sphere of politics, particularly in some countries that rather like to restrict what their citizens are allowed to say when online (or in any other context).

The issue of the relative moral values of sex and violence though is broader than simply a matter of what the censors think, it is also what society and the courts think.  One can still end up being punished more severely for having illegal consensual sex (e.g. with an underage person, or in certain countries, or even within our own countries in times past, homosexual sexual activity) than one can for aggravated violence.
 

Offline DoctorBeaver

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 12656
  • Thanked: 3 times
  • A stitch in time would have confused Einstein.
    • View Profile
George - I agree with what you said. I said earlier that I don't approve of censorship.  But I do find the preponderance of readily-accessible porn & violence sites a bit worrying.
 

another_someone

  • Guest
George - I agree with what you said. I said earlier that I don't approve of censorship.  But I do find the preponderance of readily-accessible porn & violence sites a bit worrying.

I don't disagree, but how do you square the circle?
 

Offline Nobody's Confidant

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1802
  • So loud silence can be.
    • View Profile
What's with all the "whys" Karen?
 

Offline Karen W.

  • Moderator
  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *****
  • Posts: 31653
  • Thanked: 5 times
  • "come fly with me"
    • View Profile
 Hi Ben!I was in a why mode we needed new topics so why not! how do you feel?
 

Offline JimBob

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6564
  • Thanked: 7 times
  • Moderator
    • View Profile
Blame it on St. Augustine.

Before he wrote, there was no shame in the human body, original sin was just a little idea

"The Western tradition, both Catholic and Protestant, concerning original sin is largely based on writings by Augustine of Hippo, who famously concluded that unbaptized infants go to hell because of original sin." Wikipedia on original sin

And sex was an act of normal bodily function.

As a result of Augustine, we now have fig leaves on statues of nude men but not women - This has never made sense to me as it was EVE after all, whom Augustine blamed for everything.

"Cate" the word translated as sin in the King James version is actually "shortcoming, fault, offense" NOT transgression against God. So it can be argued that Augustine invented "sin" as well.

But then, "Joshua fit de battle of Jerico" David killed Goliath (and Saul, by the way) so Christianity and the other semitic religions (Yes you heard that right) have probably done more to mess up the psyche of the human race than any other one-source religion on the world.

It does have its good points, too.

Go figure.
 

Offline Karen W.

  • Moderator
  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *****
  • Posts: 31653
  • Thanked: 5 times
  • "come fly with me"
    • View Profile
It is interesting isn't it! It amazes me the reasoning in the media and how ratings are determined and how violence and murder etc. seem so acceptable but making love is unacceptable!
 

Offline m.levert

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 28
    • View Profile
WHY IS MURDER & VIOLENCE JUST DANDY, BUT SEX FORBIDDEN ON TV ?
« Reply #10 on: 12/09/2007 00:59:18 »
how is it that a feature film full of brutal violence is said not to affect viewers behaviour, but a 15 second advert is intended to do just that - influence our behaviour?

even if it`s only to buy a certain soap powder, the advertisers invest a lot of money with the specific idea that they can make some people do what they want.

why doesn`t this apply to violence on the same media?
 

Offline Karen W.

  • Moderator
  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *****
  • Posts: 31653
  • Thanked: 5 times
  • "come fly with me"
    • View Profile
WHY IS MURDER & VIOLENCE JUST DANDY, BUT SEX FORBIDDEN ON TV ?
« Reply #11 on: 12/09/2007 01:50:33 »
I don't know but I do know that the repetition of these movies and commercials most certainly make and impact in ones mind. One must be careful and it is particularly hard to do with your children as well as yourself because as we adults are exposed to it often enough over time we become less phased by it also, and then it becomes the norm, and that is what worries me. That not only our children but for ourselves we have then become numb to what we are viewing as entertainment. Is watching a women or man being raped entertainment??? What about brutal murders with all the gratuitous violence and the horror... Thats not entertainment!
 

Offline Mirage

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 2733
  • Dry Hump anyone?
    • View Profile
    • http://brokenzanymind.blogspot.com/
WHY IS MURDER & VIOLENCE JUST DANDY, BUT SEX FORBIDDEN ON TV ?
« Reply #12 on: 12/09/2007 19:14:10 »
Yes, I agree, I think there should be more sex on tv, why not, more sex.....................now I'm off to buy some shampoo I don't need  ;)
 

Offline Karen W.

  • Moderator
  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *****
  • Posts: 31653
  • Thanked: 5 times
  • "come fly with me"
    • View Profile
WHY IS MURDER & VIOLENCE JUST DANDY, BUT SEX FORBIDDEN ON TV ?
« Reply #13 on: 12/09/2007 19:31:23 »
Making love (sex) in the right way between two people is a beautiful thing because there are or is generally a passion a love and a caring and respect between them, but when its used  as just fill for a movie thats way different! I mean there are ways to show it without making the act seem some how meaningless.
Thats not to say that people don't have sex just for the fun of it, but I refer specifically of the violence and such. It Bothers me.

You know what I mean?
« Last Edit: 12/09/2007 19:35:58 by Karen W. »
 

another_someone

  • Guest
WHY IS MURDER & VIOLENCE JUST DANDY, BUT SEX FORBIDDEN ON TV ?
« Reply #14 on: 12/09/2007 23:06:51 »
how is it that a feature film full of brutal violence is said not to affect viewers behaviour, but a 15 second advert is intended to do just that - influence our behaviour?

even if it`s only to buy a certain soap powder, the advertisers invest a lot of money with the specific idea that they can make some people do what they want.

why doesn`t this apply to violence on the same media?

The argument goes that 80% of advertisement is a waste of money, but nobody knows which 80%.

Certainly there seems to my mind ample evidence that government health warnings on cigarette packets (which is a form of advertising) has made no discernible difference to cigarette consumption.

On the other hand, there is no doubt that crimes (and other violent actions) come in fashions, as one is generally reported, so other copycat instances occur (I say it also occurs also in none criminal activity because in most western countries suicide is no longer a criminal act, but is subject to copycat activity).  It seems reasonable that fictional violent acts can also create copycat activity (I believe the film of Clockwork Orange was withdrawn for fear of copycat crimes).  Ofcourse, what has also been suggested is that the graphic nature of violence has far less impact on copycat crimes than the mere act of violence itself (i.e. it does not matter how much blood you see on the film, but if you see an act of murder on the screen, however sanitised, may still create a basis for a copycat crime - after all, if one looks at copycat crimes from news reports, the crime itself is almost never shown, since it is rarely capable of being captured in real time, but is merely reported, and yet is able to stimulate copies).
 

Offline m.levert

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 28
    • View Profile
WHY IS MURDER & VIOLENCE JUST DANDY, BUT SEX FORBIDDEN ON TV ?
« Reply #15 on: 17/09/2007 02:12:02 »
i share a deep concern about this subject, and it`s effects on individuals and sciety as a whole.

in fact, i have stopped watching t.v altogether due to the vacuuous and usually irrelevant nature of the programming. after no t.v for 2 years or more, i can no longer sit and watch because i bacome so angry and disappointed in the world.

radio is a much more agreeable source of entertainment.

the thing that stopped me watching was looking away from the screen one night at my fellow viewers, and noticing the blank, dead eyed expressions,like lobotomised patients, and realising that i looked just the same.

no...no more tv for me thankyou.

maybe we could start a campaign to get people`s eyes away from the ``idiot lantern`` by posting photo`s of them watching, catching their vapid, mindless stares might put some off a bit.

t.v is a wasted medium. surely we can use it to educate and inform in an entertaining way.

surely we are better than ``blind date`` and ``eastenders`` -??

 

another_someone

  • Guest
WHY IS MURDER & VIOLENCE JUST DANDY, BUT SEX FORBIDDEN ON TV ?
« Reply #16 on: 17/09/2007 03:08:02 »
i share a deep concern about this subject, and it`s effects on individuals and sciety as a whole.

in fact, i have stopped watching t.v altogether due to the vacuuous and usually irrelevant nature of the programming. after no t.v for 2 years or more, i can no longer sit and watch because i bacome so angry and disappointed in the world.

Join the club - I have not owned a TV for almost 10 years, and like you, much prefer listening to radio (but then, we did not have a TV in the house during the first 10 years of my life, but always had radios, often including at least one short wave radio).
 

The Naked Scientists Forum

WHY IS MURDER & VIOLENCE JUST DANDY, BUT SEX FORBIDDEN ON TV ?
« Reply #16 on: 17/09/2007 03:08:02 »

 

SMF 2.0.10 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines
SMFAds for Free Forums