Sex vs. Violence in entertainment

freeman801 · Oct 6, 2009

I was in my comic book store the other day when a twelve, maybe thirteen year old child wanted to buy a horror comic. I had already read the book since it had been out a couple months and remembered it being VERY violent, with torture, blood, guts, you name it.

My comic book guy, Matt, looks at the kid, looks at the comic, and says. "I hate to be a pain, but I don't think I should sell this comic to you."

The kid rolls his eyes. "Why? It‘s not illegal."

"We can’t sell Mature rating comics to minors without parents permission. Its store policy. I also know what is in the book, and I just don't feel good selling it to you."

He rolls his eyes again, shrugs, then walks out the door.

Five minutes later his mom comes in, walks up to the counter with her son, and hands Matt the money. "My son can buy this comic. He can buy any comic in here except those with nudity or sex in it. But other than that, sell him anything." She said the bolded words like they were curse words.

Matt nods, shocked. He rings up the book and the customers leave.

We both looked at each other, our mouths hanging open. This comic even made me squeamish at parts, and she is letting her twelve year old son read it!?

Matt and I then ranted. God forbid he gets a look at a nude body. God forbid he looks at something that everyone has done or will do in their lives, which is completely natural and wonderful. Instead he is aloud to look at torture, murder, and abuse. It doesn’t even have a happy ending! He is allowed to witness anti-social behavior where the killer goes after females more than males, and mutilates them. But he can’t read/see a comic with one scene of brief nudity, even though the rest of the comic could be the best written comic ever?!

Needless to say, it confused us.

And still confuses me.

Yesterday I came upon something like this again.

I was watching Stargate: Universe. And in the first fifteen minutes of the show there is a sex scene, no nudity, just some groans and breathing and revealing skin. It seems they like each other a lot, may be in love. It lasted ten seconds maybe? The rest of the show didn’t have anything else like that.
After the show I read a review. The person complained that Stargate is a family show, and it was no longer family friendly due to the sex scene.

Never mind that in Stargate SG1 the first episode ever had full frontal nudity. And the rest of the series had people being murdered, tortured, and enslaved. That’s family friendly? And its not just the aliens killing, torturing, or enslaving us. Its we humans killing other aliens, sometimes with no moral implications.

I am by no means saying I don’t like this stuff. I love Stargate, my favorite TV show! I am also a comic nerd. I enjoy everything, from the violence to the sex to the nudity. That’s life. Deal with it.

I am against censorship in all forms. But censoring your kids to well done brief nudity and feeding them mutilation and torture? But saying a television show is a family show and it is ruined due to an alluded sex scene where the WHOLE series has been about people, humans, being murdered, enslaved, tortured? (Of course there are humans fighting against this also!)

Doesn’t make sense to me.

Your thoughts?

Wayne K · Oct 6, 2009

"Excuse me mam, but a parent must accompany him to buy this material for each purchase."

"But..."

"Next."

Williebee · Oct 6, 2009

my thoughts?

just one.

yup.

Jcomp · Oct 6, 2009

I still sort of abide by my idea that violence is more familiar to kids than sex just by the nature of life itself, and that's why we are generally more accepting of kids viewing / reading about violence than sex. I do think people often take it to extremes, there's a lot of violent stuff I wouldn't allow my kid--whenever he or she may come into existence--to read, watch, interact with via the medium of video games.

But from as far back as I can remember, violence was easier to understand than sex. Not always confrontational or deliberate, but it was present. It can appear in the sports children play--even the less / non-violent ones like basketball and baseball. You can see it in an accident on the playground where a kid breaks his or her arm. Its aftermath is visible in the roadkill on the highway, the broken neck of a bird on the ground after it's crashed into a window. There's even, I think, a vague understanding at a fairly early age amongst non-vegetarian kids that some violence was committed upon the formerly living slab of meat now resting on their dinner plates.

Violence, at that age, is more readily present than sex. It's understandable, in my opinion, for parents to be more tolerant of violence (within reason) than sex.

GraysonMoran · Oct 6, 2009

But from as far back as I can remember, violence was easier to understand than sex.

Not to mention easy to come by.

Strange Days · Oct 6, 2009

I don't see what's wrong with nudity in violence. Period. Kids do start talking about women in sexual way probably around the age of 11-12. As far as I remember my own childhood, at least. And kids do enjoy it. What's wrong with that?
But then- what's wrong with violence either? Comic books? Ha! Most famous classic children book (for ages 4-7) - "Shockheaded Peter". I don't remember what century it belongs to, but way before 20th. Kids (and people around) die there. Horribly. One bleeds to death after his fingers get chopped off. The girl burnes to ashes after playing with matches. And kids stomached it all right. And Hauff's and Hoffman's tales too. Yes, including the one where a Man Eater butchered a girl, pickled her body and ate it... Modern comics are by far weaker than those CLASSIC tales... And yes, now what- prohibit kids from listening to Alice Cooper, too?

Celia Cyanide · Oct 6, 2009

Jcomp said:
But from as far back as I can remember, violence was easier to understand than sex.

When you put it that way, it makes sense. I guess it's not that hard for people to let their kids see movies or drawings depicting violence and still teach them that violence is bad. Maybe they want to protect their kids from seeing sex because while sex is good and natural, it is also for adults. I don't really think that telling kids, "you're too young to see this" is the same thing as teaching them that it's bad. Likewise, allowing them to see something is not the same as teaching them that it's good. Especially if the kid is 12, as opposed to a very young child.

I know that when I was an adolescent, I had a hard time understanding why certain sexual behaviors were for adults, because I was "mature for my age" and all that. But yeah, it IS for adults, and not 12 year olds.

As for the nudity, I don't really agree with that. But I will say that when I was 12, any comic book that had nudity in it was usually pretty sexual. There were some skimpy outfits, but there wasn't a lot of artistic nudity. Nudity in comics usually meant porno comics. Likewise, most sex scenes were implied unless...well, you get the idea.

veinglory · Oct 6, 2009

Isn't nudity easier to understand than violence. I mean we are born nude.

Jcomp · Oct 6, 2009

Celia Cyanide said:
When you put it that way, it makes sense. I guess it's not that hard for people to let their kids see movies or drawings depicting violence and still teach them that violence is bad. Maybe they want to protect their kids from seeing sex because while sex is good and natural, it is also for adults. I don't really think that telling kids, "you're too young to see this" is the same thing as teaching them that it's bad. Likewise, allowing them to see something is not the same as teaching them that it's good. Especially if the kid is 12, as opposed to a very young child.

Great, great point as well. Hadn't thought about that really, but you're right.

As for nudity, I'm actually with you on that, but it is indeed fairly rare to find examples of nudity (or even--dare I say--just examples of female characters nowadays) in mainstream comics and other forms of mainstream entertainment media that aren't primarily there for titillation as opposed to authenticity or some other pursuit.

veinglory · Oct 6, 2009

To a viewer who doesn't understand sexuality, nudity really can't be titilating--no matter how it is depicted.

Toothpaste · Oct 6, 2009

So sex is for adults, but violence is for everyone?

I think the idea that sex and nudity are less prevalent when you are younger speaks more to our society than to a general truth about humans. There are tribes out there where the people are basically nude all the time. And the greatest of art deals often in the beauty of the human form. There are many other cultures who can view nudity as simply that. The idea that nudity is tied in with sexuality is one that western society likes to push forward, and has made a naked body little more than a sex object.

The idea that kids come across violence more easily than sex is also kind of untrue. I'm not talking about watching two people go at it, though again, I have to wonder, what would be wrong with that really - showing two people who love each other demonstrating that love? But I'm talking about it in the same way as someone describing violence as kids roughhousing or seeing a dead animal. We have examples of sexuality on that level all the time too. Kids playing kissing games (I did when I was 5), kids hugging. The girls chasing the boys around the yard. Parents showing affection towards each other by holding one another and kissing.

Let's face it. Violence is more acceptable because it has not been as stigmatised as sex. It's very simple. Heck look at religion. Catholic priests aren't allowed to have sex, for example, but the church has no problem giving a sermon beneath a man nailed and bleeding on a cross. This idea that we have some universal truth that violence is easier to accept than sex is wrong. Our society has created that division. Now of course we have to function within that society, and make our own decisions as to how to raise our children. But I utterly disagree that violence is just more innately palatable.

katiemac · Oct 6, 2009

I think what it comes down to is very few parents forsee their kids partaking in deeply violent behavior, but sex and all of its negative ramifications (disease, pregnancy) is a much more imminent possibility, more and more at a young age.

Toothpaste · Oct 6, 2009

katiemac said:
I think what it comes down to is very few parents forsee their kids partaking in deeply violent behavior, but sex and all of its negative ramifications (disease, pregnancy) is a much more imminent possibility, more and more at a young age.

Depends on where you live. I'd say actually most kids on the planet have a far more intimate acquaintance with violence than we'd like to think.

katiemac · Oct 6, 2009

Toothpaste said:
Depends on where you live. I'd say actually most kids on the planet have a far more intimate acquaintance with violence than we'd like to think.

I agree. But it's all about the perception in our society. Will little Tommy be more likely to grow up to imitate the murderer he sees in the movie, or have sex like he sees on TV? I think most parents are resigned to the fact their kids are going to grow up and have sex, but it's a matter of when.

Celia Cyanide · Oct 6, 2009

Toothpaste said:
So sex is for adults, but violence is for everyone?

Uh, no. Just because you let a kid see something doesn't mean that you automatically teach them that it's a good thing.

Celia Cyanide · Oct 6, 2009

veinglory said:
To a viewer who doesn't understand sexuality, nudity really can't be titilating--no matter how it is depicted.

I don't think that really applies to 12 year old boys.

ChristineR · Oct 6, 2009

Comic book nudity is light years away from "It's 110 degrees and raining so we all walk around naked" nudity. Comic book nudity is (almost always) designed to titillate. It has huge inflated breasts on tiny little stick figure girls who would fall over if they actually existed. It has enormous butts sticking out so far that the girls would have trouble walking. And there's almost no male nudity in comics at all, but when there is, it's just as titillating and unrealistic, maybe more so, what with guys with triceps so huge that they couldn't actually even use their arms.

I don't know, I do agree that our society has strange ideas about sex and violence, but people will usually do things like point to porn movies and horror movies, and say something like "I'd rather have my kid watching and imitating the porn than the horror!," when porn itself is so constricted and unnatural that it's ritualistic.

veinglory · Oct 6, 2009

I think you are stereotyping comics. Graphic novels are a format--you can by sexually demeaning one, violent ones, or ones that won literary rewards. Remember in respecting out fellow writers that some of us write comic books.

Also you can't have it both ways, either sexuality it hard to understand or it isn't. Developmental studies demonstrate that nudity has no meaning to kids until the onset of sexuality. I had to sit through a very long presentation on this when comics were considered for a rating system in NZ. In the end voluntary systems were deemed sufficient.

Celia Cyanide · Oct 6, 2009

veinglory said:
Also you can't have it both ways, either sexuality it hard to understand or it isn't. Developmental studies demonstrate that nudity has no meaning to kids until the onset of sexuality.

"the onset of sexuality" does not equal "complete understanding of sexuality."

Chasing the Horizon · Oct 6, 2009

I'll never understand censoring what kids read and watch, probably because my parents always let me read and watch whatever I wanted. I'm sure not seeing sex as something mysterious or forbidden contributed to me being so much less interested in it than most of my friends. All the exposure to violence seemed to have little effect either way. I enjoy violent books and movies, but am not particularly inclined to violence in real life. *shrug* I've tried for years to understand what the big deal is, but apparently it's just beyond me.

GraysonMoran · Oct 6, 2009

I mean we are born nude.

We're born violent, too.

Alpha Echo · Oct 6, 2009

I didn't read all the posts, so someone may have all ready said this, but...

I don't read comics, however, my thought is this. Violence, for most humans, is so obviously wrong. I doubt there are many parents that even have to teach that the blood and gore is bad. I mean - a fight on the playground is one thing. Whether to fight back is one thing. But as far as the violence on TV, in movies, in comics and other books - it's obviously wrong. It's usually the 'bad' guy who initiates it.

Sex and nudity, on the other hand, is something that is desired by everyone. It's something everyone get curious about at some point. I mean, boys are very young when they realize touching themselves feels good. I'm a chick, and I was pretty young when I realized touching my body felt good. And sex is for adults.

So perhaps, the reason adults seem to be more against their children seeing nudity and sex is because those are things the kids are going to want. Violence - for most - is something no one wants to really be a part of. Some might think it's cool to see - we all crane our heads as we drive by an accident. We're curious. But do we want to be a part of it? Hell no. Unless we're the "good" guy.

virtue_summer · Oct 6, 2009

My parents didn't censor and I have never understood all the controversy. I mean none of us would exist without sex, right? So why not recognize it as just another aspect of life, which it is? Then parents could focus on discussing the real issues surrounding it with their children rather than trying to hide its existence altogether.

maestrowork · Oct 6, 2009

That's something I don't get about American values: graphic violence is fine, even a family value for some, but nudity and sex? That's like "you go straight to Hell." Compared to the Europeans, I really do think we have it backwards.

But that's just me.

Apsu · Oct 6, 2009

katiemac said:
I agree. But it's all about the perception in our society. Will little Tommy be more likely to grow up to imitate the murderer he sees in the movie, or have sex like he sees on TV? I think most parents are resigned to the fact their kids are going to grow up and have sex, but it's a matter of when.

I'm with katiemac on both of her posts. As a parent, I avoid sexually explicit tv and movies. I avoid over-the-top violence as well, but don't have a problem with your average action movie.

Why? My wife and I had children as teenagers. It totally dominates the course of your life, limiting your options, and, for the most part, who will even be friends with you.

I don't regret it, and if my children choose that life that's fine, but sex in movies, on all levels, moves you toward something that is a very common direction you can easily pursue. Barring the odd case of a child sociopath, the options to choose if you are highly driven emotionally from watching violence on tv and movies are joining the military or police or some such, which are not limiting your options, offer a large social base, and are more difficult and deliberate to pursue.

That's completely ignoring disease of course, but if my children want to grow up and serve their country as a soldier or cop, that's fine. It's their decision. If they end up with diseases and unwanted pregnancies, their options start to be dictated for them rather than pursuing their dreams.

I don't know if that was that clear, but it's time to go work on my book.

Sex vs. Violence in entertainment

Capeless, wingless, & yet I fly.

who cares, anyway?..

Joker Groupie

volitare nequeo

volitare nequeo

THE RECKLESS RESCUE is out now!

Five by Five

THE RECKLESS RESCUE is out now!

Five by Five

Joker Groupie

Joker Groupie

What happened?

volitare nequeo

Joker Groupie

Blowing in the Wind

I should be writing.

Always learning

Fear the Death Ray

Orange