512 réponses à ce sujet

[Banana Muffin]

Whist Darkblade wrote...

The reason sex is shunned in media and entertainment is buecuase it was once considered a "private" act, and would be DEEPLY embarrasing to both the male and female involved if it was found out. It was worse than if someone walked in on you if you were in the restroom.

Sex isn't shunned in the media, it's only shunned in video games. Playing video games, in contrast to watching a movie is usually a private thing, so it should an excellent media for consuming sex. It's also interactive so it should be more fun than just  watching porn.

[Darpaek]

Templar Vilmon wrote...

I'll agree with you about the nudity part when it comes to adults. Having visited topless beaches in Greece, I don't see why Americans are so hung up about adult nudity.
 

Because we don't want to see naked, hairy Greeks!!!

[Dark83]

The more you oppress something the more tempting it is, and the more ignorance of how to do such a thing safely.

Hence the relatively high teen pregnancy/STD issue in America, as well as underage/college alcohol problems.

[-Area51-Silent]

I am American, I just don't completely understand the problems Americans have with sex in general. I've travelled around quite a bit through Europe and Asia, seen things I wish I could unsee lol, and to be honest there are much worst things out there than sex.



Final point, Parents! BE PARENTS! It's utterly annoying that parents complain about video games and movies, TV etc.. "taking the innocents of their children" when they have full control over filtering said content, they choose to be lazy or irresponsible not to. The video game industry puts ratings on games much as the movie industry does with movies, and record companies do with records, even Televison shows have ratings these days.

[Whist Darkblade]

-Area51-Silent wrote...

If the only argument is that "but my kids own an Xbox360/PS3/PC they should be able to play anything they want, and I shouldnt have to worry about it," you probably own a DVD player too, but you wouldnt buy your kids somthing R-rated if they werent at a maturity level to handle it now would you.

my 2 cents.

AHHH good point!!!!!!!!! What this whole issue comes down to is the sick fact of life now that at least in America parents have grown complacent, bordering on lazy, with an "i dont care" attitude.

In other words, parents would rather drop their idiot kid in front of the tv or monitor for hours on end then interact poersonally with them, and that is a HUGE problem.

Movies and video games are the same thing, except for the fact that movies are passive, and video games are aggressive in the fact that they involve the viewer, who in turn is the player.

So anybody who is a parent let me ask you this. How can you sleep at night when the hypocrasy of your life is so blatantly obvious that it is IMPOSSIBLE to not see it?

How can you police movies, and not let your kids watch mature content but turn a blind eye to video games, saying that there should be nothing, content-wise that i should have to worry about, BUT you still let your offspring, who are not able to comprehend the ramifications of mature content, play mature games?

In other words, read the back of the game. If you see a big black "M" inside of a white box, dont let your kid play it unless he or she is over 16 AND you feel that he/she is MATURE ENOUGH TO HANDLE THE MATURE CONTENT OF THE GAME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[johnnywillow]

Templar Vilmon wrote...

Banana Muffin wrote...

Damar Stiehl wrote...

Funny thing is, it's not just crazy fundies and dedicated puritans that are leading the moral crusade against sex and nudity; the bulk of it are regular joe schmoes and their soccer/security mom spouses. Nobody wants their "little angels" to see the naughty bits, and funnily enough, the "little angels" buy into it wholesale as they grow up.

It's not just in the US, either (though the good old US of A is the easiest target to pick on). Look up Saint Tropez sometime and read up on the recent demise of nudism where it was once a social norm... Young(er) people choose bodily shame and chaste virtues over the 70s concepts of freedom, it is everywhere and probably won't change within yours, mine or our children's lifetime.

Suck it up.

Well I can't speak for the rest of Europe but there is a very big difference between how Americans and Swedes view nudity at least. For us nudity doesn't have that much to do with sex at all really. Americans think it's pervertet to let children be naked, we think that americans are perverted for thinking about sex when they see a naked kid.

I'll agree with you about the nudity part when it comes to adults. Having visited topless beaches in Greece, I don't see why Americans are so hung up about adult nudity.
 
Completely disagree with you about child nudity. Maybe a lot of American parents (myself included) just don't want to take chances when it comes to attracting sex predators. Normal adults do not think about sex when they see naked children - but a few perverts do.

You'll have to excuse us over here in the west Banana Muffin. The media has done an excellent job in making everyone think there is a pervert on every street corner today. Therefore be afraid, be very afraid.

[Templar Vilmon]

Darpaek - many of the younger Greek and Italian women I saw on those beaches were HAWT. Of course, I also saw some overweight German grandmas that I'd rather have not seen. At any rate, topless beaches would be great in places like Miami.



Of course, I'm just waiting for the European posters to come on here and tell me that overweight people do not exist in their wonderful utopias.

[Aidunno]

Final point, Parents! BE PARENTS! It's utterly annoying that parents complain about video games and movies, TV etc.. "taking the innocents of their children" when they have full control over filtering said content, they choose to be lazy or irresponsible not to..

As a parent, couldn't agree more. It's always easier though to blame someone else rather than yourself.

[Banana Muffin]

Templar Vilmon wrote...

 
Completely disagree with you about child nudity. Maybe a lot of American parents (myself included) just don't want to take chances when it comes to attracting sex predators. Normal adults do not think about sex when they see naked children - but a few perverts do.

Sex predators are attracted to children whether thay are clothed or not. I'm a mother and I let my girl run naked on the beach in the summer as do almost all swedes. Obviously I watch her so that nothing happens to her, but I  do that when she's clothed aswell . I would however never ever let her parade in front of an audiance dressed up as a miniature beauty queen as a lot of american mothers seems to think is fine. It's a lot more sexualizing to put on adult clothes and makeup on children than to let them be naked.

[Darpaek]

Yeah, you guys aren't helping our cause here when you're chanting the Dateline themesong...  BEWARE!!!  LOL

Templar Vilmon wrote...

Of course, I'm just waiting for the European posters to come on here and tell me that overweight people do not exist in their wonderful utopias.

Hilarious!  I LuL'd!

[F-C]

the way i see it is it generally has to do with kids and how they play video games.



in general most parents want their children to at least graduate high school, and have some common sense about the impact a pregnancy can have on your life before they get too sexually active. young children wont really understand the repercussions having a child will cause, and will just think its cool. it will be like a real live baby doll, how sweet.



they wont stop to think that for all intents and purposes their life will be over. you have a year of pregnancy then 18 years of raising the child. unless you belong to a wealthy family that can afford to take care of your child for you, this is probably going to ruin your chances of finishing high school, getting in a college, or developing a career where you can take care of yourself.



in comparison getting a broken nose, or even a broken arm, you can just go to a doctor and in a few months you are fine, life continues as normal. no long term adverse affect in most cases.





so parents see them in a different light from one another. one is life ending, one is an annoyance.



until you can come up with a real way for children not to play video games that have sex in them, then it will always be an issue of controversy for parents who want the best for their children. its not about keeping them away from sex forever, or that sex is bad.



its about them getting old enough and far enough in life to have developed some common sense and to understand the affect its going to have on their life.



did you know that many of the clinics for the poor have reduced the age that girls can get anonymous birth control from to 10 years old? thats scary when you think about it. if women are getting pregnant at that young of an age they will never develop a real self sufficient life of their own. they will doomed to be forever poor.

[Darpaek]

Completely off-topic, but once a nose is broken, it's always broken.

You could take a look at my crooked snout as an example...

Edit:  And... clinics giving 10 year old's birth control...  the whole point is to AVOID the life of endemic poverty...  the act of giving birth control is not an indictment upon the evils of teenage sex.

Modifié par Darpaek, 01 décembre 2009 - 06:29 .

[johnnywillow]

Dark83 wrote...

The more you oppress something the more tempting it is, and the more ignorance of how to do such a thing safely.
Hence the relatively high teen pregnancy/STD issue in America, as well as underage/college alcohol problems.

I agree 100% with you. When I was in italy ( the country where so many start drinking wine with thier parents at dinner at such a young age ) I don't think I ever saw one kid hammered on alcohol when I went out drinking. In fact some of them asked my friends why they drank so much, to the point of being hammered out of thier skulls. Most of them didn't seem to understand the need to get that drunk or drunk at all. Honestly the only ones I ever saw hammered were the tourists. I have many friends that have said the exact samething from returning from italy.

[Creature 1]

Banana Muffin wrote...

Well in Sweden teenage pregnancies are virtually nonexistant, make of that what you want.
As for STDs it's a kind of stupid argument as to why sex would be bad for young people as you are as likely to get it when you are adult. Also it has nothing to do with sex itself it's not different from getting other contagious diseases. It's important to know that you can use a condom to prevent STDs in the same way it's important to know that you should wash your hands after you've been to the toilet or to shower, sneeze in your armpit and shower on occation. Even more important is what you eat and that you exercise (sex is good excercise). There are a lot more americans dying of obesity than of STDs

Do they not teach debate in Sweden?  They seem to do everything else so well!  

STDs are of great importance for adolescents.  Adolescents have different brain function from adults that results in generally poor planning and problem-solving skills and impulsivity problems.  This leads to more irresponsible sexual conduct when they do have sex.  Teens are less likely to use condoms than adults.  Additionally, when teens do get STDs, they usually have worse access to healthcare than adults.  True, some because they don't want their parents to know they were having sex, but also because they try to address symptoms by visiting Yahoo Answers instead of the doctor.  Additionally, many women in the US get screened regularly for cervical cancer and common STDs because their insurance requires an annual exam in order to cover oral contraceptives--if teens are not on contraceptives or obtain them by a different route they're likely to miss this screening. 

Most STDs do not kill people, but the most common bacterial STDs, chlamydia and gonorrhea, can lead to sterility if untreated--and these STDs also commonly do not produce symptoms.  Teens tend to pass HPV around like it's the common cold, which in most cases does not matter, but can result in cervical cancer.  The recommended frequency of Pap smears decreases with age because older women tend to have settled down to a long-term partner, while younger women have more partners, increasing their risk of exposure to HPV.  Having sex at an earlier age increases risks of cervical cancer, some of this is probably due to an increased number of partners, but it's thought physiological factors may be involved (perhaps an immature cervix is more prone to colonization by HPV?)  HPV vaccination should decrease the prevalence of cervical cancer, but at the moment we don't have a vaccine for all oncogenic strains of HPV. 

Condoms do reduce odds of transmitting STDs, but they do not totally prevent them.  Some STDs, like HPV and herpes, are not effectively prevented by condom use.  I'm personally interested in HIV-1, and odds of transmission for HIV-1 are cut by 80% with consistent condom use--true, a big decrease, but that extra 20% is an extremely significant gap when it comes to a historically terminal disease.  And of course if a condom is not used, it can't help at all. 

So, yes, if we move the average age of first sexual activity further on, we should see a decrease in STDs in the population, and we should see the cases that do appear being treated more rapidly. 

Teen sex is not shockingly awful, but it's also not something to dismiss by saying sex is natural, so it must always be good. 

[Lominia]

i think it's pretty sad for all of our societies where a little bit of nudity is frowned upon (you don't even see the shagging in the game) but killing hundreds of people including graphic decapitations isn't even a concern.



hell, let's be honest, every one of us is trying to get a high bodycount in this game but a little bit of flesh on show, and it's like the end of the world.

[johnnywillow]

[quote]Banana Muffin wrote...

[quote]Templar Vilmon wrote...

 
 I would however never ever let her parade in front of an audiance dressed up as a miniature beauty queen as a lot of american mothers seems to think is fine. It's a lot more sexualizing to put on adult clothes and makeup on children than to let them be naked.

[/quote]

oh damn I wish I brought up that one.

[Templar Vilmon]

Banana Muffin wrote...

Templar Vilmon wrote...

 
Completely disagree with you about child nudity. Maybe a lot of American parents (myself included) just don't want to take chances when it comes to attracting sex predators. Normal adults do not think about sex when they see naked children - but a few perverts do.

Sex predators are attracted to children whether thay are clothed or not. I'm a mother and I let my girl run naked on the beach in the summer as do almost all swedes. Obviously I watch her so that nothing happens to her, but I  do that when she's clothed aswell . I would however never ever let her parade in front of an audiance dressed up as a miniature beauty queen as a lot of american mothers seems to think is fine. It's a lot more sexualizing to put on adult clothes and makeup on children than to let them be naked.

I think you have a major misunderstanding about what most Americans consider acceptable behavior. Unfortunately, our reality TV shows show the worst side of American culture. A very, very small subculture of American parents are into toddler beauty pageants. The reason that shows like Toddlers and Tiaras are so popular is because those parents are seen as cultural train wrecks. It's not that most Americans approve of this behavior - they're just morbidly curious.

I respect what you choose to do with your kids, but have to agree to disagree,. I'm still going to take basic precautions with my kids, which doesn't mean that I'm afraid of molesters jumping out of the bushes in front of my house. I live in Seattle, one of the safest big cities in America and probably the world. Yet sometimes whein I'm out drinking with the guys, I'm not going to take a shortcut through certain dark alleys.

[Banana Muffin]

F-C wrote...



they wont stop to think that for all intents and purposes their life will be over. you have a year of pregnancy then 18 years of raising the child. unless you belong to a wealthy family that can afford to take care of your child for you, this is probably going to ruin your chances of finishing high school, getting in a college, or developing a career where you can take care of yourself.

Or, you know, you could have an abortion.

But the point is that there is absolutely nothing whatsoever that points to kids having more sex if they see it in video games. If anything it's the opposite.

[Darpaek]

My mother, on the other hand, thinks it's completely acceptable to dress up my poor baby nephew as a turkey for Thanksgiving and then take pictures and send them to me in the email.



I'm going to traumatize that poor boy when he's 16...

[johnnywillow]

Creature 1 wrote...

Banana Muffin wrote...

Well in Sweden teenage pregnancies are virtually nonexistant, make of that what you want.
As for STDs it's a kind of stupid argument as to why sex would be bad for young people as you are as likely to get it when you are adult. Also it has nothing to do with sex itself it's not different from getting other contagious diseases. It's important to know that you can use a condom to prevent STDs in the same way it's important to know that you should wash your hands after you've been to the toilet or to shower, sneeze in your armpit and shower on occation. Even more important is what you eat and that you exercise (sex is good excercise). There are a lot more americans dying of obesity than of STDs

Do they not teach debate in Sweden?  They seem to do everything else so well!  

STDs are of great importance for adolescents.  Adolescents have different brain function from adults that results in generally poor planning and problem-solving skills and impulsivity problems.  This leads to more irresponsible sexual conduct when they do have sex.  Teens are less likely to use condoms than adults.  Additionally, when teens do get STDs, they usually have worse access to healthcare than adults.  True, some because they don't want their parents to know they were having sex, but also because they try to address symptoms by visiting Yahoo Answers instead of the doctor.  Additionally, many women in the US get screened regularly for cervical cancer and common STDs because their insurance requires an annual exam in order to cover oral contraceptives--if teens are not on contraceptives or obtain them by a different route they're likely to miss this screening. 

Most STDs do not kill people, but the most common bacterial STDs, chlamydia and gonorrhea, can lead to sterility if untreated--and these STDs also commonly do not produce symptoms.  Teens tend to pass HPV around like it's the common cold, which in most cases does not matter, but can result in cervical cancer.  The recommended frequency of Pap smears decreases with age because older women tend to have settled down to a long-term partner, while younger women have more partners, increasing their risk of exposure to HPV.  Having sex at an earlier age increases risks of cervical cancer, some of this is probably due to an increased number of partners, but it's thought physiological factors may be involved (perhaps an immature cervix is more prone to colonization by HPV?)  HPV vaccination should decrease the prevalence of cervical cancer, but at the moment we don't have a vaccine for all oncogenic strains of HPV. 

Condoms do reduce odds of transmitting STDs, but they do not totally prevent them.  Some STDs, like HPV and herpes, are not effectively prevented by condom use.  I'm personally interested in HIV-1, and odds of transmission for HIV-1 are cut by 80% with consistent condom use--true, a big decrease, but that extra 20% is an extremely significant gap when it comes to a historically terminal disease.  And of course if a condom is not used, it can't help at all. 

So, yes, if we move the average age of first sexual activity further on, we should see a decrease in STDs in the population, and we should see the cases that do appear being treated more rapidly. 

Teen sex is not shockingly awful, but it's also not something to dismiss by saying sex is natural, so it must always be good. 

I don't see how banning rock and roll or a mild softcore sex scene in a video game is going to solve these problems. Like someone else said, parents need to start parenting and stop blaming rock and roll.

[F-C]

Banana Muffin wrote...

F-C wrote...

they wont stop to think that for all intents and purposes their life will be over. you have a year of pregnancy then 18 years of raising the child. unless you belong to a wealthy family that can afford to take care of your child for you, this is probably going to ruin your chances of finishing high school, getting in a college, or developing a career where you can take care of yourself.

Or, you know, you could have an abortion.

But the point is that there is absolutely nothing whatsoever that points to kids having more sex if they see it in video games. If anything it's the opposite.

considering the options you presented here and the things youve said in other posts im just going to have say you have a very narrow minded view of things and its fairly useless in trying to argue anything with you.

i also wouldnt touch the option you presented here with a 10 foot pole, you do realize that many people dont consider that acceptable, at all, right?

[Banana Muffin]

Templar Vilmon wrote...

Banana Muffin wrote...

Templar Vilmon wrote...

 
Completely disagree with you about child nudity. Maybe a lot of American parents (myself included) just don't want to take chances when it comes to attracting sex predators. Normal adults do not think about sex when they see naked children - but a few perverts do.

Sex predators are attracted to children whether thay are clothed or not. I'm a mother and I let my girl run naked on the beach in the summer as do almost all swedes. Obviously I watch her so that nothing happens to her, but I  do that when she's clothed aswell . I would however never ever let her parade in front of an audiance dressed up as a miniature beauty queen as a lot of american mothers seems to think is fine. It's a lot more sexualizing to put on adult clothes and makeup on children than to let them be naked.

I think you have a major misunderstanding about what most Americans consider acceptable behavior. Unfortunately, our reality TV shows show the worst side of American culture. A very, very small subculture of American parents are into toddler beauty pageants. The reason that shows like Toddlers and Tiaras are so popular is because those parents are seen as cultural train wrecks. It's not that most Americans approve of this behavior - they're just morbidly curious.

I respect what you choose to do with your kids, but have to agree to disagree,. I'm still going to take basic precautions with my kids, which doesn't mean that I'm afraid of molesters jumping out of the bushes in front of my house. I live in Seattle, one of the safest big cities in America and probably the world. Yet sometimes whein I'm out drinking with the guys, I'm not going to take a shortcut through certain dark alleys.

A child is just as likely to fall victim of a sexual predator with clothes as without. If you think that a pedophile can't be attracted to your kid as long as he/she wears clothes you are living in false safety.

[-Area51-Silent]

F-C wrote...

the way i see it is it generally has to do with kids and how they play video games.

in general most parents want their children to at least graduate high school, and have some common sense about the impact a pregnancy can have on your life before they get too sexually active. young children wont really understand the repercussions having a child will cause, and will just think its cool. it will be like a real live baby doll, how sweet.

they wont stop to think that for all intents and purposes their life will be over. you have a year of pregnancy then 18 years of raising the child. unless you belong to a wealthy family that can afford to take care of your child for you, this is probably going to ruin your chances of finishing high school, getting in a college, or developing a career where you can take care of yourself.

in comparison getting a broken nose, or even a broken arm, you can just go to a doctor and in a few months you are fine, life continues as normal. no long term adverse affect in most cases.


so parents see them in a different light from one another. one is life ending, one is an annoyance.

until you can come up with a real way for children not to play video games that have sex in them, then it will always be an issue of controversy for parents who want the best for their children. its not about keeping them away from sex forever, or that sex is bad.

its about them getting old enough and far enough in life to have developed some common sense and to understand the affect its going to have on their life.

did you know that many of the clinics for the poor have reduced the age that girls can get anonymous birth control from to 10 years old? thats scary when you think about it. if women are getting pregnant at that young of an age they will never develop a real self sufficient life of their own. they will doomed to be forever poor.

You can try to pin this on sex in video games, but you better get out there and stop sex on the web too then. If you really think about it Sex in video games is less accessable than sex on the web, I had to pay 50 bucks for my game, I am fairly sure you can find sex on the web for free. Oh and it won't be pixles and polygons it will be the real deal. So which do you think is more impactful? seeing ACTUAL SEX or seeing it in an animated in a way that is relatively tasteful with limited nudity?

I know I already state this, but you can avoid this whole problem, actually be responsible for YOUR KIDS! (not you as in just the poster I am referencing, but YOU as in All you parents reading :-P ). The media should not have the right to censor video games, and video games shouldnt take fire for having animated nudity in them, I could list a ton of movies that have real nudity, Its tastefully done (we arnt talking pornographic movies) that doesnt take this kind of fire because it is a reflection of the human condition.

Just because people cannot be responsible for their kids does not mean that the rest of us who are mature and responsible should not be able to play a game that delves into a story that is told as if REAL people were involved and reactions from those people were similar to those reactions if REAL people were reacting.

[ninjamaster_255]

LovelyMover wrote...

"Young boys may see women as sex toys"...Boys shouldn't be playing the game anyway its for 17/18+, I'm probably horribly abnormal by that age I'd had a steady g'friend for 3 years, & been chasing anything in a skirt for a year before that. Its ridiculous that violence in forms most people couldn't dream up in a million years is the norm in most games & is regarded as fine, but sex is some terrifying taboo that will turn everyone viewing it into a crazed siko.

Its is kinda ridiculous this double standard that surronds games. But there isn't much that can be done for know but to plod through and ignore it.

[Darpaek]

Again... not trying to jump on the Dateline bandwagon...



But, logically, if I let my child run around naked outside it would seem that it would make my child more appealing to the abduction/molester-type (as incredibly rare as they may be...)



It's also logical, that if I am in constant supervision of my naked child outside, that it is very unlikely that an abduction molester-type would be successful. However, despite my vigilance, the latent abduction/molester type may also become aroused and therefore more willing to engage in their certain depravity.



Ergo, if I allowed my child to run around naked outside - even under constant supervision - wouldn't I make it more likely for someone else's child to be abducted and raped by providing arousal to the abductor?