Well, since there is a thread on on Feminism in literature, and in the media in general, there needs to be one violence and sex, specifically I think an interesting relationship between each other. To start off, notice how the United States, as a culture, minds sexuality much more than violence, while in Europe, this is reversed. Why is this? Well, I think it's because in the U.S., violence has become a sort of, acceptable substitute for sex, not saying that the U.S. doesn't utilize sexuality a lot in media, however for some reason we hide it in a sense. In Japan, both violence and sex are fine, judging by what's allowed in shonen(which means media meant for boys I think in Japanese kind of). To elaborate a little bit, in France I saw a picture of a woman topless on a city street, very open. That would never be allowed in the United States. Why? Just food for thought. I have to go somewhere, but when I get back, I'll elaborate on my case much more. I do hope I get some thoughts on both of these subjects while I'm gone. Sorry if this is way too broad striking for a single topic.
I think that some parts of the US are still under control of religious groups that view sex as sin (the so called puritanism) but they don't mind guns and violence in the name of the God of the Old Testament. In Japan everything was open but I heard that the government wanted to pass a new law on censorship, causing the outrage of most of the manga authors. In Europe...it depends, in countries like Italy, France, Germany, Holland etc... nudity is related with sexuality, but in the northern countries like Sweden they have a more "naturalistic" approach to the issue. For violence, take into account that the europeans had two world wars in the last centuries and the memories of the events are still vivid in the subconsciousness of the people, so generally there isn't any kind of "glamourization" of violence, gun porn, superior firepower etc... because the last destructive war the US had on its territory was over in 1865, long time ago.
Ah, very interesting. This is the kind of discussion I've been looking for. But anyway, okay, in reference to Japan, I picture that censorship law being struck down in time.
I don't know if they'll pass the law, IMO it's unlikely, and BTW there already is censorship in manga: they cannot depict sexual organs. That was the only limit they had since WWII. Interesting enough, in the japanese media there's a lot of sex and violence (at least to our standards) but Japan is one of the countries with lowest rate of crimes and rapes pro capita.
I think actually that's partially because it's in the media. In a sense, it's like they "let it out," there. Also where perhaps they allow themselves to be weird in a sense. It would only be partially, but still. Yeah, I know, they can't show that. However, if that's like the ceiling for them in a sense, then they are in a room that's 50 feet tall, while we are in one that's like, 5 feet tall.
I noticed this thread because I saw the word "sex." I came into this thread because I saw the words "Violence and Sex." What does that say about me? I wonder if your reaction was the same. What does that say about you, you filthy pervert!? On the topic of censorship etc, I don't fully understand how that came about. I can understand censorship of violence, but not censorship of nudity. When you think about it, primitive prehistorical cultures probably would have been very open about sex and nudity, as evidence of this I cite the actions of every non-human animal species we know of, and those of naturalists. Restricting knowledge of sexual activity to young children is a purely human trait. Think about the psychology of a culture where clothing is used as a portable shelter to protect one from the elements and to generally be comfortable. Initially, that would have been the primary purpose of clothing. For example, things similar to bras would have been used to support the breasts, but not cover them. Why, in a culture where nudity is not a problem, would you waste such a valuable resource as hide on covering the human form in a situation where warmth is not a relevant issue? Somewhere along the line nudity did become an issue, and it is my belief that religion had a large part to play in this.
^I think you're spot-on with thinking religion played a part. I can't speak for all religions or everyone who practices them, of course, but I find watching my family members really entertaining. They're all devoutly religious, and I was talking to my brother once about movies. I asked him if he would watch rated-R movies if I saw them and recommended them to him, and he said as long as there was no nudity. So...movies with violence are fine, but if you see someone's boobage or butt, it's a no-go. Interesting... I know a lot of people who are like that, and I don't really understand what makes one worse than the other, but to each his own, I suppose.
I think it's different for everyone. Maybe people can deal with violence because they're desensitized to it through the news or video games, etc., but they feel squeamish with sex because of the intimacy of it.
Why did this title appeal to me to xD Guess I like violence and sex! I'm currently in Germany and I have to say they're alot more open about sex. Especially during shower advertisements. Also erotic channels are free here and start at around midnight. Something that you have to pay for in England.
I don't think that's it at all. For one, the sex as a sin thing long predates Puritanism. But that's beside the point. One point to remember is that a lot of violence isn't glorified in it's presentation. It's shown either as the workings of an evil person, used against the evil person, or shown as an act of desperation that typically brings it's user lots of trouble. It's rarely shown to be GOOD to use violence against innocent people, and the times when it is, it's usually often accompanied by a tolerance of sex as well. On the other hand, sex is almost always presented as a GOOD thing. It makes people happy. They do it for pleasure and often, it's there to titillate the audience. There's a clear difference between the purposes of violence and sex in average media. I think another huge difference that people overlook is that the average sane person knows that the violence in films and the like is fake. It's actors acting out a scene. They aren't really hurt. With sex on the other hand, while the actors aren't often actually engaging in sex, they're still in some various state of undress and often, the nudity is really their body. Quite often, the nudity is also much less relevant to the plot than violence. SO I think there are clearly a lot of facts overlooked when trying to say that people don't mind violence but do mind sex. They are different things done for different purposes and IMO, people often end up making a lot of rash assumptions without really standing back to look at the big picture.
Also, sex scenes may be totally fine to see in a movie alone or with friends, but it's awkward watching a movie with a parent or older relative and then a long steamy scene comes on.
Haha I hear ya! Feels like the scene always goes on for ages! I think its miles worse if your watching a movie with a grandparent. Especially my grandma who got REALLY uncomfortable when a sex scene came on tv lol!
Hmm...there was a study done on violent video games in which after people played them for a specific length of time, they got into their car and drove. The study showed that there was a significant increase in "reckless" driving after having played violent video games. If I had to guess I'd say that had to do with an adrenaline rush....I'm curious if such a rush would be experienced if there was so much violence in media that you couldn't ever get away from it except by locking yourself up in your home and turning off the TV and computer. I think violence and sex in media is fine....in moderation. But I personally wouldn't want to be assaulted by it 24/7.
^ Well you don't exactly have to play video games. Or you could just look for the mildly rated ones, and avoid shows that have lots of violence in them. Or rent your own movies.
yes! But what if it came to a point where sex and violence was truly everywhere? As in you couldn't rent a movie without a sex scene and or a murder scene in it? Oh I know we are a long way from that, but back in say the 60's and 70's, movies like the original "Psycho" were Rated R and considered pretty violent. But if that exact movie (not a remake) were to come out today, I have no doubt that it would be a PG13. I find the idea of mass desensitization interesting because the premise of my book is very similar to this topic.
That's a good point...but I think that individualism and human innovation would be sufficient to combat such a scenario. If, say, in 10 years, an overrun of violence ended up being the case, there would be thousands of people such as yourself who think it's too much, and who want cleaner materials for their children. This would lead to people developing cleaner alternatives, new types of shields for little kids, possibly a new rating system, etc. I can definitely see the point of desensitization, but I don't think we have to worry about drowning in it, because there will always be people who don't like that and who want more family-value oriented options. That sounds like a very interesting premise for a book. I once wrote a paper on desensitization to sexual violence. There's some fascinating psychological concepts involved. EDIT: In many ways, the violence threshold has definitely risen, such as in horror movies. But also, I think many children's movies and TV shows have become overly sensitized or dumbed down. Don't get me wrong, I do not advocate violence or sex in kids' movies, but films such as "The Lion King," "Antz," Iron Giant" etc dealt with real issues in a way that kids could understand. They were mature, but not in a way that is euphamism for inappropriate adult content; rather, they were mature in a way that got kids thinking about issues in a way that's not preachy or political or exposing them to inappropriate material. However, many of the movies and shows I've seen with my best friend's small child seem dumbed down. I feel like if a movie like "Lion King" or "Bambi" were made today, many would put up a storm about the characters's deaths. Likewise, when I was young (maybe 9?) one of my favorite movies was "Homeward Bound" about two dogs and a cat traveling across the country to find their owners after lost on vacation; I feel like many poeple would object to that movie for small children now because of the fact that the animals were in danger (waterfalls, mtn lions etc) despite the fact that there was no gory violence and the movie promoted bravery, friendship etc and was rated G.
Hmm, you may find my song, "What's Wrong With You American Child," interesting Kontrast. But anyway, here's my take. Violence is fine, if it has a purpose. The problem is too much violence in media is now mindless. That's why I have less problem with a movie like Clockwork Orange than your average action flick in some ways. The former it serves more artistic purpose than the latter. The same goes for sex, it should have a purpose. It isn't really the amount, stories have had sex and violence in gratitious amounts since the dawn of time. No, it's the lack of meaning in it all that today that matters, not the exposure.
To be fair, in the 60s and 70s, the PG-13 rating didn't exist...this could be why more movies were rated R, versus the same movies being rated PG-13 today. My dad used to use that as an excuse to watch movies like Rambo back when I was a kid. His religion prohibits watching rated R movies, but he was always like "oh, this movie would have been PG-13 if they'd had that rating when it was made." He never did it with movies that contained sex, though...I kind of want to ask my parents what makes one worse than the other for them, but I feel like the resulting conversation would probably not be worth finding out the answer.
Ah, okay. I didn’t realize Joseph Smith had anything to say about R-rated movies. So I wonder who in the movement would have drawn the line there? Perhaps it’s just another case of someone making their interpretation of another person’s teachings a rule? I think that some parts of the US are still under control of religious groups that view sex as sin (the so called puritanism) but they don't mind guns and violence in the name of the God of the Old Testament. Yeah, I think Bible itself contains a fair amount of murder, mass killings and violence, either by or on behalf of God.. And though it contains incest, it also alludes to sexual pleasure as a forbidden fruit. I would say it has had a big influence on Westerners attitudes towards sex and violence.
