censorship

[Grisu]

Now is it really that much to ask to leave three or four terrestrial TV stations without that, or to at least reserve a block of time for decent programming?

decent, eh?

I have no problem, if a TV station decides for itself that it does not want to show nudity, it's their station after all. And I guess you'd agree here, since you're usually such a fervent supporter of a free market. What I disagree with is, when it's somehow mandated that a terrestrial station doesn't show nudity, or only at certain times....that's so, ummm, socialist

 

[AL_DA_GREAT]

Well in Islam woman shouldn't show their hhair because it is considered to be sexually appealing to men. Aren't we all getting a bit paranoid about somrthing we all have?

 

[warpus]

There are literally hundreds of other television outlets availible on cable and satellite where you can find all of the sex and violence one could ever imagine.

Now is it really that much to ask to leave three or four terrestrial TV stations without that, or to at least reserve a block of time for decent programming?

By decent you mean without any sort of violence, right?

The human body can be beautiful - let's not cover it up.. let's celebrate it

 

[Ethics]

By decent you mean without any sort of violence, right?

The human body can be beautiful - let's not cover it up.. let's celebrate it

You know, this sort of argument reminds me of when they legalized abortion in the Soviet Union. "Free the women, they should not be under the demands of men," which soon turned into the men pressuring women out of having children and having abortions for some fun times.

Be careful what you're suggesting. Do we really need to create a situation where our children freely convort in sexual pleasure, and do we need to create a situation where women are seen as nothing more then sexual objects (I really have no interest of seeing more girls gone wild commercials on tv, do you?).

There are consequences to even looser sexual expression. We see them in the breakdown into single parent homes, stds, and wild sexual behavior becoming even more commonplace.

 

[tomsnowman123]

You know, this sort of argument reminds me of when they legalized abortion in the Soviet Union. "Free the women, they should not be under the demands of men," which soon turned into the men pressuring women out of having children and having abortions for some fun times.

Be careful what you're suggesting. Do we really need to create a situation where our children freely convort in sexual pleasure, and do we need to create a situation where women are seen as nothing more then sexual objects (I really have no interest of seeing more girls gone wild commercials on tv, do you?).

There are consequences to even looser sexual expression. We see them in the breakdown into single parent homes, stds, and wild sexual behavior becoming even more commonplace.

If people want to have sex, they should have a choice. Of course, this issue of censorship could go both ways. With looser restrictions, perhaps people could spend more time talking about sex, safety and health, birth control, etc., and better educate the American youth.

 

[Ethics]

If people want to have sex, they should have a choice. Of course, this issue of censorship could go both ways. With looser restrictions, perhaps people could spend more time talking about sex, safety and health, birth control, etc., and better educate the American youth.

Well the problem with this logic, is most children, and teenagers cannot see consequences beyond 30 minutes. Its probably one of the reason the teaching profession destroys you mentally and physically so quickly.

People have the choice to have sex now, but it does not mean the problems of unplanned pregnancies, single parents homes, the spread of STDs, and the decay of morality in this country magically dissapear.

I'm saying, that the extreme of sexual liberalism is just as bad as any example you can give in the Muslim world. It creates exepectations on people to behave a certain way. TV is a powerful tool that "normalizes" behavior whether its normal or not in society. Thats why we have 13 yr old girls dressing likes hoochies, and 13 yr boys trying to find sex like its air... regardless of whether they can emotionally or economically handle the consequences of such behavior.

Telling them how to use a rubber isnt going to solve those problems. Sexually liberating network tv is not going to help them cope with what they see any better.

 

[Narz]

Well the problem with this logic, is most children, and teenagers cannot see consequences beyond 30 minutes.

Wow, that's the biggest bunch of hooey I've read all day (which says a lot - I've read a half a dozen MobBoss posts ).

The infantilization and presumed incompetence of the adolesent is a purely modern phenominon. Up until the last couple hundred years or so teenagers were rasing familes, going to war and making all sorts of important decisions requiring long term planning.

 

[tomsnowman123]

I'm saying, that the extreme of sexual liberalism is just as bad as any example you can give in the Muslim world. It creates exepectations on people to behave a certain way. TV is a powerful tool that "normalizes" behavior whether its normal or not in society. Thats why we have 13 yr old girls dressing likes hoochies, and 13 yr boys trying to find sex like its air... regardless of whether they can emotionally or economically handle the consequences of such behavior.

Telling them how to use a rubber isnt going to solve those problems. Sexually liberating network tv is not going to help them cope with what they see any better.

Sexual liberalism does not force anyone to have sex, and it doesn't create expectations, it merely offers a choice. Sexual education could get more people to practice safe sex. If they are allowed to protray it truthfully for what it is, I would consider that a good thing.

 

[Ethics]

Wow, that's the biggest bunch of hooey I've read all day (which says a lot - I've read a half a dozen MobBoss posts ).

The infantilization and presumed incompetence of the adolesent is a purely modern phenominon. Up until the last couple hundred years or so teenagers were rasing familes, going to war and making all sorts of important decisions requiring long term planning.

Well, unless were living in the time of Charlemagne, you may have to accept the fact that our society socializes children differently than a world that has a life expectancy of under thirty, has no concept of behavioral growth, and uses the Lord (deific or physical) to fear a very ignorant and poorly educated population into moral complacency.

Shakespeare was writing about the problems of youth in sex, love, and violence. Interestingly, we still have these problems.

 

[Narz]

Well, unless were living in the time of Charlemagne, you may have to accept the fact that our society socializes children differently than a world that has a life expectancy of under thirty, has no concept of behavioral growth, and uses the Lord (deific or physical) to fear a very ignorant and poorly educated population into moral complacency.

Nevertheless, to say teenagers are incapable of making rational long-range decisions is still inaccurate, regardless of what MTV and the industries that sell crap to kids want you to think.

Shakespeare was writing about the problems of youth in sex, love, and violence. Interestingly, we still have these problems.

...among all age groups.

Also, most of those stuggles (like Romeo & Juliet) were not caused by love itself but the struggle of love against a repressive society.

 

[tomsnowman123]

Also, most of those stuggles (like Romeo & Juliet) were not caused by love itself but the struggle of love against a repressive society.

Narz has it right here. Often it's an overcontrolling society that causes such strong emotions such as violence to come out. If choice is given, people will learn to be more responsible.

And most society is repressive.

 

[IglooDame]

Narz has it right here. Often it's an overcontrolling society that causes such strong emotions such as violence to come out. If choice is given, people will learn to be more responsible.

And most society is repressive.

Would you mind naming some societies that are not?

 

[Lozzy_Ozzy]

Unfortunately, these days, sex isn't about love anymore.

You really believe that?

Why do you think people used to have such large families?

Admittedly (sp?) a lot of that was due to lack of contraception... But it was also a major form of entertainment!

Sex has ALWAYS been about intimacy AND pleasure... sometimes both, sometimes only one at a time...

 

[.Shane.]

Telling them how to use a rubber isnt going to solve those problems. Sexually liberating network tv is not going to help them cope with what they see any better.

ROFL, you have to be kidding.

Guess where the highest per capita rates of strip clubs are? The cities in the bible belt. Atlanta had the most per capita till the shut 'em down in the run-up to the Olympics. I've lived in LA, the SF Bay Area and the Dallas-Ft. Worth metro area and I can tell you that Dallas-Ft. Worth had ads EVERYWHERE for "Gentlemens clubs", etc...

I think, in general, people are worried too much about the ends and not enough about the means. What determines peoples behaviors is not if schools teach abstince or pass out bags of condoms in kindergarten. It starts at home w/ parents who reflect and loving, healthy relationship and attitude and who are unafraid to discuss all aspects of the body and sex w/ their kids. Every thing else is just window dressing for politicians to appeal to the masses or for people to rip on each other in internet forums.

 

[tomsnowman123]

Would you mind naming some societies that are not?

There aren't any. Just some that are more repressive then others. We mine as well break the pattern.

 

[Tycoon101]

Sex has ALWAYS been about intimacy AND pleasure... sometimes both, sometimes only one at a time...

AND babies. Sex is also for having children. I disagree with contraception because I believe in sex being for love AND children.

 

[tomsnowman123]

AND babies. Sex is also for having children. I disagree with contraception because I believe in sex being for love AND children.

Again, I say people should have a choice. People shouldn't be forced to have sex just to have children. Wouldn't that take some of the fun out of it? It's their bodies they are using, to say what they should or shouldn't do with them seems like a serious interference in one's personal life. The government already does too much of that. Their bodies, their choice, their purpose.

 

[Tycoon101]

Again, I say people should have a choice. People shouldn't be forced to have sex just to have children. Wouldn't that take some of the fun out of it? It's their bodies they are using, to say what they should or shouldn't do with them seems like a serious interference in one's personal life. The government already does too much of that. Their bodies, their choice, their purpose.

I'm just going by what The Law says. I do not believe in many of the things that you believe in, but I will still respect your opinion.

 

[tomsnowman123]

I'm just going by what The Law says. I do not believe in many of the things that you believe in, but I will still respect your opinion.

And that's all I ask. As much as I disagree with your opinion, I will respect it since you believe in it.

 

[Ethics]

Nevertheless, to say teenagers are incapable of making rational long-range decisions is still inaccurate, regardless of what MTV and the industries that sell crap to kids want you to think.


...among all age groups.

Its not about what MTV wants me to think. I work in the education system. I've taught junior and high school students. There is a % of the students who are mature and developed in their behavioral maturity... and then theres the larger group...

Also, most of those stuggles (like Romeo & Juliet) were not caused by love itself but the struggle of love against a repressive society.

Although Shakespeare is complicated, I would argue that there is a larger issue during the time period of love and partner selection becoming more removed from the family and to the individuals. Romeo & Juliet is one example of contention of the extreme of two "teenagers" (I find that term appropriate even though it didnt exist in the time period) being left to make the decisions of passion and love, and the other extreme of society choosing it.

Guess where the highest per capita rates of strip clubs are? The cities in the bible belt. Atlanta had the most per capita till the shut 'em down in the run-up to the Olympics. I've lived in LA, the SF Bay Area and the Dallas-Ft. Worth metro area and I can tell you that Dallas-Ft. Worth had ads EVERYWHERE for "Gentlemens clubs", etc...

I would be cautious in attempting to paint the picture that the urban areas of the "South" are anything similar to the rural. The bible belt is a diverse and complicated region as it was in the sixties. I've lived in Houston, and I've live in the boondocks of Mississippi (and elsewhere), very little similarities exist. Atlanta is no more representitive of the "old south" as is Dallas or Houston. Don't get me started on Memphis... urban centers are beacons of liberalism!

I think, in general, people are worried too much about the ends and not enough about the means. What determines peoples behaviors is not if schools teach abstince or pass out bags of condoms in kindergarten. It starts at home w/ parents who reflect and loving, healthy relationship and attitude and who are unafraid to discuss all aspects of the body and sex w/ their kids. Every thing else is just window dressing for politicians to appeal to the masses or for people to rip on each other in internet forums.

I agree with you, I think such morality should come from home in an ideal situation. Unfortunately, we do not have a cookie cutter society of "Leave it the Beaver." I see kids who come from a home life where the only thing they see is their mom going "out on the prowl" and leaving them to do as they wish. I've seen junior high black boys trying to "get them some" (because thats the thug live they've see and aspire too) from the girl that has HIV from her drugged out sexed up mother (and we can't tell them the dangerous path they're walking due to privacy laws).

Ironically, this is where I see the difference in the children who do well and behave in school and the "wild heathens." Its home live. Its about two parents who are in the business of their children. Unfortunately, we have a lot of children who have substituted tv, advertisements, and music for competent parents. If I'm going to have to be one of the beacons of success they have in their life (and trust me, the expectation is increasing for teachers to be the family figure as family morality crumbles) I can't promote what I think is dangerous to their future.

Its a messy issue, thats for sure.