Top
200°

Sex or violence—Which is more harmful to children? (NSFW)

Practical Ethics says:

"Take another look at those images from Mortal Kombat. These cannot be regulated. They are forms of speech, and they are protected by the US Constitution. But make one change, using your imagination. See the tattered gray top that the woman—the one being dismembered—is just barely wearing? Imagine sliding it over by a few pixels, enough to expose a computer-drawn nipple. Constitutionally, that changes everything. The image is now obscene. Now you can ban it. Does that seem right to you?

Serious warning: this post contains nudity, images of graphic video-game violence, and detailed descriptions of rape and torture. The intended audience for this post is adults."

Read Full Story >>
blog.practicalethics.ox.ac.uk
The story is too old to be commented.
I_find_it_funny2266d ago (Edited 2266d ago )

both are there is no reason to point the worse, it's like saying what is worse me ****** your mother or sister, you gotta choose

Quagmire2266d ago

A crude analogy, but you're right.

NukaCola2266d ago

Both are themes that only mature people should partake in.

I do have to say that sex is probably a bit worse for younger crowd do to it's realism. Sex is real through and through, as opposed to violence which can be portrayed realistically or fictionally. Violence has the freedom to be punching a lego character into pieces, stabbing a guy in the eye, smashing a walking mushroom into the ground, or cutting a titans guts out from the inside.

Sex is sex and can't take to the gray area with it. Sex, Nudity, Love are all things that are emotional and physical and things children and immature people can't truly understand. I guess you could have nudity in a game that expresses art or history but it really comes down to the intent of the scene and sex and nudity are mature themes that should be for mature audiences. I know there is nude painting and art, but if they are in a game they of course are in a time period. Like nudioty in God of War. Yes it's the time period and art, history, mythology...but thost times were of war and violence, and torture, and death. So though the artisticness of it is fine, it's still M rated because the theme reflects a mature one.

Yi-Long2266d ago

... when it comes to entertainment.

Bad/lazy parenting is harmful. Good parents can explain the context of violence and sex, why it's there, the difference between real and fake, etc etc.

Lazy/bad parents don't bother communicating to their kids and investing in them, and then blame TV/videogames when it's too late....

deadpoole2266d ago (Edited 2266d ago )

Ill tell u whats worst ... killin the damn polygon on screen or jerkin off on asymmetric tessellation less boobies ... thats the real worst and sad thing.

captain-obvious2266d ago

just stick to the ratings if you are buying something for your kids

is that hard to do ??
are ppl really that dumb ?

Computersaysno2266d ago

Sex or violence? The only way to find out is to FIGHT!

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 2266d ago
Ares842266d ago

Violance is more harmful. Sex is a natural part of life and it creates life. Obviously children should not be show either but if you think about it seeing someone murdered can be more demaging than seeing two people having sex.

Just my opinion.

jimmywolf2266d ago

in till said sex create a kid neither wanted, now the parents fight each other an someone take it too far an wants too kill someone or they live a broken family till kid grow up hating life an does the violence himself. sex is to common an use as a tool for lust which people mask as love an when the disillusion happens, they turn too violence. so both are equal in the sense that they need too be controlled

insomnium22266d ago

Kinda stupid coment really. It's much easier to explain violence to a child than to have him/her see a pornfilm (like Sloppyheads for example) and trying to explain that. I think Nukacola up there pretty much nailed it.

theonlylolking2265d ago (Edited 2265d ago )

Violence is just as natural if not more natural than sex. What does a child that has not been taught right do when they get angry? They punch, slap, etc... someone. So if anything is the most natural it is violence.

As long as the child is taught what is right from wrong then they will be fine.

kreate2266d ago

whether ur children plays games with nudity or not. most likely, they're already watching porn or having sex. i dont think video game violence and game sex is doing much to children. this is in general.

and of course, many people will disagree cuz they think children are some innocent beings in 2011 with the widespread relaxed access to the internet.

news4geeks2266d ago (Edited 2266d ago )

Article is spot on. I remember arguing that this california ruling would be a good thing, then of course some of the n4g community went on a disagree frenzy saying kids should be allowed to buy any game they want and that Arnold was a hypocrite for supporting the ruling... idiots. In the UK it is illegal to sell games to kids if they don't meet the age restriction. I really don't see why it should be any other way.

@I_find_it_funny - the article is not saying one is worse than the other, it's demonstrating the double standards of how horrific violence is permissible in the US whereas mild sexuality is disapproved of.

LightofDarkness2266d ago

Regardless of legality in California, Gamestop and any other store are not legally allowed to sell these games to minors in most states. It is a strict company policy as well.

kneon2266d ago

I've been saying the same thing from the beginning, they can't have it both ways, restrict both or neither. Trying to argue that a picture of boobs is in any way more harmful than the over the top graphic violence in some games is just hypocritical.

In the US a flash of breast during the super bowl results in congress and the supreme court getting involved. But showing murders every 5 minutes goes on without notice.

palaeomerus2265d ago

That was in primetime on BROADCAST TV and relates to rules set up in the agreements where the US government leases the broadcast frequency to the network. the network agreed not to do that in exchange for the right to use the frequency. If they do it anyway they risk losing their right to use the frequency and fines per their agreement. It's contract law not criminal law.

Meanwhile cable TV and satellite TV, and fiber TV all show programming with plenty of nudity and since the government does not own the cable services or their lines and so it goes without any penalty or interference because IT IS NOT ILLEGAL.

palaeomerus2265d ago (Edited 2265d ago )

The article is stupid.

For "sex" it has a glamour picture of a girl wearing a jacket with her tit out and implies that it is illegal and considered porn in the US.

Nope. It's not.

That's not sex that's nudity and nudity in glamour photography is NOT restricted to porn. It's often seen to have artistic merit. Fashion magazines have nipples and nudity in the ads on a pretty regular basis and are not viewed as porn or legally restricted from sale to a minor. Same with National Geographics that have pictures of nude people walking around. Same with National Lampoon.

Sorry.

It's not enough to be considered porn in the US. Does the article care? Nope.

Also, just because something is carried in the adult section of a news rack does not mean that it is classified as pornography. Sometimes newstands or bookstores simply have their own voluntary policies for the sake of their customers sensibilities that that are not mandated by any law.

In fact in the town I live in Austin, TX it is legal for women to walk around topless if they want to.

Next the author talks about a brutal gang rape scene including urination in a game and shows a scene from mortal combat of Noob Saibot ripping Sonya in half. Never mind that Sonya can kill the crap out of Noob Saibot and gang rape plays no part in the game. But whatever. What's a little obvious dishonesty from a website on a dumb crusade eh?

And can the case really be made that unrealistic over he top violence with silly cartoon people is the same as real sexual content (not mere nudity) with picture or video of REAL people ? I kind of doubt it. I see nudity in comics and it isn't considered porn any more than violence in comics is.

I don't know what game the author is referring to, or even if there is such a game (I kind of doubt it), and I don't much care because at that point the article has already gone way off into clueless assumptions taken for fact, and intentional dishonesty by associating an unnamed game with a Mortal Kombat fatality animation intentionally staged to show a woman being killed.

This article is stupid AND dishonest. It's the same kneejerk demonization crap that jazz, blues, rock and roll, comic books, heavy metal, D&D, skate-boarding, and rap have been all put through by scared little idiots who think their jittery bitching is the only thing holding society together.

When confronted with his accuracy problems the author tires to hide behind this:

" First, the opening of my post is, as I explicitly described it, a “thought experiment” — that means that it’s based on reality, but is a made-up scenario I used to make a point. That’s what a thought experiment means. However, the examples I used are not actually fictional. Yes, they don’t all exist in one single game, but every activity I described is a component of at least one actual video game, all blended together into one narrative, and then illustrated with images from one particular game — Mortal Kombat. The examples I used (raping, urinating, etc.) are taken directly from the Supreme Court ruling, which was based on a review of actual, existing, purchaseable-by-children video games. I do see that my post could be taken to imply that Mortal Kombat includes every disturbing act in the description of Option #2, but I don’t actually state this. "

So like I said, it's bullshit based on a made up game combining lots of elements from several uncited games supposedly outlined in the SC case and illustrated by a Mortal Kombat fatality.

But deceptive bullshit is apparently okay in the author's world when it's labeled as 'a thought experiment'.

LOL.

Kee2266d ago

Umm, its not just kids who play games.

Jihaad_cpt2266d ago

yes but what is the question? Eye on the prize please

Kee2266d ago

Its a gaming website. I'm relating it to games and saying it's irrelevant because violence and sex in video games are targeted to adult gamers. (Hence the rating system)

And both of these things are harmless in any form of media, assuming the child is not an idiot and realizes this is in fact a work of fiction and it is not the way to behave in real life.

Silver3602266d ago

Average age of today's gamers is 37. Don't you think those of us that are older deserve games that suit our maturity? You don't need laws like this if parents do their jobs. Pay attention to what their kids read and watch. This was all went through already with books and movies and these types of laws lost there also.

Alos882266d ago

Violence. When a young child sees a sex scene for the first time they probably won't know what's going on. When they see a violent decapitation for the first time they know exactly what they just saw.

Pozzle2266d ago

Tbh, I think parents forget that kids don't think about things like adults do. Kids don't really care about sex. They're curious about it, and the ones that are old enough to understand it might think it's funny, but if a parent explains sex to them they'll probably be like "ok that's cool, can I play on the playground now?"

TheDivine2265d ago

I ask my parents about sex when i was really young and they told me its how people get aids LOL. WTF right? I had no idea what it was but i knew what violence was. Its all in context though, looney tunes was violent but not in a bad way, seing somebody stabbed is violent in a negative way. I do think things like gta and movies are desensitizing our kids these days. Theres no empathy or compassion for people. Its just another shooting, fight, someone bullied exc. Its up to parents to judge whats age appropriate.

Tigerfist2266d ago (Edited 2266d ago )

Both are part of our existence, deal with it. But comparing sex to violence is pure stupidity... Watching a human beeing suffer compared to checking out a nice pair of jugs which are part of our body (which we shouldn't be ashamed of) or even sex which is a joyfull and pleasant thing that is part of everyones life's...

"Obscene"... How idiotic, the act of mating, bonding and life creation considered obscene.

Way to go prudes!!! Protect our children from that kind of harm so that they can one day be brainwashed by pseudo-patriotic and military propaganda bullshit.

Just get the fuck out of our lives and stop trying to protect us from every single thing. It is either the individual or his parents job to learn how to deal with the world.

PS: I do know it's not the article who is making this kind of comparison...

LightofDarkness2266d ago

"comparing sex to violence is pure stupidity"

Sigmund Freud would like to have a word.... :p

krauler2266d ago

very funny! I love it!

Tigerfist2266d ago

Yes indeed... God damn that old looney and his dick based theories! :P

Show all comments (56)
The story is too old to be commented.