Good point. There could have been much more graphic footage of various disasters, natural & otherwise… for me, the most horrifying thing I have ever seen on TV was watching people dropping from the top of the towers on 9/11, and that was from several blocks away…
re: stuff you can talk about with your kids… absolutely! I can watch a fight scene and tell my kids (teenagers now) how somethings would work and others wouldn’t, and not have a lot of problem, but discussing a makeout scene? I think not. “See, that’s just not practical, because, you know, sand…”
A kid can really shoot someone, but what I was saying is that not that many kids are going to think they can imitate what they see in a Schwarzenegger or John Woo movie. That said, it’s just a guess.
Several people in this thread have posted that they would have no problem talking with their kids about violence seen on TV, but that it’s not as easy talking about sex seen on TV. The question that comees to mind for me when I see that sort of position is “Why?” Why is talking with kids about sex so hard, but talking about violence is easy? What’s the difference?
As a not quite related question, why are people so convinced that their kids wouldn’t emulate any of the violence on TV, but so afraid of the kids emulating sexual behaviors?
For one thing, it’s much easier for children to understand when violence is appropriate. Even a child can understand, for example, that you don’t shoot someone unless the situation is dire – in self-defense, for example, or during times of war. Similarly, decent people don’t just go around hitting other people unless they have to.
In contrast, it’s much harder to explain the propriety of sex. Children can understand the basic of good vs. evil, but they lack the emotional maturity to deal with romance, lust and sexual relationships.
I imagine that if I were beating the hell out of their mom every night, I’d be hesitant to discuss violence with them, too…it would avoid awkward questions.
Plus, TV violence is quite often tied up with either justice or depravity- it’s easy to distinguish good guys (and the proper use of force) from bad guys. How often is sex presented in any sort of framework like that (healthy vs. unhealthy)?
I would think that those who oppose depictions of sex from a religious point view do so because illicit sex is a threat to the immortal soul, whereas violence only threatens the temporal body. Therefore sex is worse than violence.
That strikes me as a simplification of the reasons for violence, and it especially seems to avoid the necessary, to me, discussion of the consequences of applied violence and the motivations people can have that lead to violence. After all, one person’s self-defense is another person’s unreasonable and inappropriate response.
In order to talk to children about violence, it seems to me, you have to reduce its complexity. This is a valid approach, but it has to be revisited as the child grows in understanding of the world. Violence, like much else, is not black and white.
Again, I see a simplification here. Violence is almost never about good vs evil, in the real world. It’s the result of a host of complicated motivations. However, I see the utility in reducing the complexity in terms of discussing it with a child.
So why can the same approach not be used for discussing sex? Reduce the complexity. A child doesn’t need to understand the details of romance and how a sexual relationship works in full detail. That same child does need to know that sex is inappropriate in certain circumstances, and that certain behaviors are “good” and others are “bad”.
One thing that I can see contributing to the fact that violence is easier to talk about is that many people begin discussing violence with their children much, much earlier than they discuss sex. After all, who doesn’t remember telling the kid “Don’t throw that!” and “Don’t hit!”? So from that perspective, I can see the difference. To me that suggests that starting to discuss sex earlier would help the issue.
Another take on why it’s easier to talk to kids about violence than sex: if you’re talking about self-defense, it’s something that you want your kids to do. Tomorrow, if necessary. Even if they’re eight years old. Sex, not so soon. Not even if they want to.
Now that makes sense to me. I wouldn’t agree that talking about sex with a child would lead to them doing it any more than not talking to them about it, but I can definitely see how it could factor in to the reasons for having certain discussions earlier than others.
You’re right. Us Canadians watching movies on the American channels laugh at this type of censorship - can’t say a bad word, can’t see a naked boobie, but you sure can blow people up. That’s part of what made this Onion article so funny.
Although “think of the children” is often cited as a rationale for censorship of television, the bottom line is that it’s the adults whom the advertisers are targeting and who really matter, and far more adults have a problem watching depictions of sex on TV (because their moral or religious values oppose it) than have a problem watching violence. While religions may condemn violence in a broad sense, they generally accept its existence in the world and that it is sometimes necessary (if not violence against humans, at least hunting and man-vs.-nature struggle-for-survival type violence). On the other hand, many, many religions, and in particular some religious beliefs which have a strong foothold in the U.S., have very strict rules regarding engaging in sex and even the depiction of sex. For that reason, the number of adult viewers who are going to complain about “that filth on my TV” when sex is shown is far greater than the number who will complain about “that violence on my TV.” Extreme violence just doesn’t generate the negative response that sex does.
This traces back long before television. The Hays Code for motion pictures focused almost exclusively on sex. The main objection to violence was that specific criminal methods shouldn’t be depicted, and that brutality shouldn’t be shown. But as long as the good guys won, and the bad guys weren’t glorified, violence was O.K.
