Why are sex and vulgar language considered so much worse than violence?

I started pondering this when I was on the 360 board and saw some guy getting game recommendations for his 6 year old son. He seemed to have no problem letting him play a game like Halo 3 as long as there was no sex or swearing in it. To me it seems as though a game can have all kinds of gratuitous violence and parents have no problem with it, but show some boobs or hear an f-bomb and parents seem to lose their damn minds! Why does this double standard exist?

Welcome to America. It really is pretty goddamn stupid if you ask me.

Because people are blibbering morons, that's why that double standard exists.Treflis

This

Halo 3 isn't that violent.

Also your most likely to see the kid curse than blow up arms and shoot guns :|

Halo 3 isn't that violent.

Also your most likely to see the kid curse than blow up arms and shoot guns :|

Omni-Wrath

The standards wich regulate "decency" are inconsistent at best, irrational at worst. As a result, no one seems to be quite sure just how far to push things. In some cases, it can ruin a production in some manner. An example that immediately comes to mind are some of the cut scenes in Xenosaga III. In what should have been emotionally charged moments instead turned out to be unintentional comedy because Namco felt the need to cut the blood out of the North American versions to avert any risk of a "M" rating.:|

Watch those unedted scenes on You Tube and you'll see what I mean.

As an aside, I remember catching a scene The Punisher on FX where an attacker was hit in the face with scalding water, injuries and all shown with nothing edited. But when a henchman in Last Action Hero takes an ice cream cone to the back of the head and dies, a non-graphic scene clearly in the context of comedic value is edited out for TV broadcast, something is really muddled to say the least.

I neverunderstood why, but it exist.

Because America is bass ackwards. Ignorance is everywhere, but it thrives here especially well.

Because America is bass ackwards. Ignorance is everywhere, but it thrives here especially well.

Brendissimo35

Sad but for the most part true. Graphic violence is cool, but something as fundamental to our existence as human sexuality is just obscene and terrible. Protect the children, but don't let on how children are created!!!!

The double standard exists here to some extent. Overt sexuality in a game would certainly make a few tabloid headlines, though no one would kick up a fuss over language. The UK isn't as bad as America though. No-one batted an eyelid over Mass Effect for instance.

because old, male fuddy-duddies in positions of power (broadcasters etc.) don't want women to be in control of their sexuality. if a nipple is shown on television or in a film, then it's a 'bad' thing, to be feared or hidden away; women should be ashamed of their bodies, and given less freedom and power. television is used to control ideas about what is right and wrong. pubic hair for example, is supposed to make women appear stronger.

also, lots of mothers and parents in general would write in and complain to whatever media outlet is showing these images.. which means very small ratings and audiences for those shows, games, and films.

it's pretty much nonsense.. think how it might affect boys growing up, to fear girls. i don't know, it's extreme conservatism and fear, but it's also about power and control.

I follow the old school philosophy, my kid can't play a game until he's got the money and means to go out and buy a system and games by himself, until then sorry Charlie your out of luck, and games!!

Because according to the ESRB, it is better that we run around killing eachother in brutal ways than loving each other? that really is the signal they are sending

Because this culture is messed up.

Because according to the ESRB, it is better that we run around killing eachother in brutal ways than loving each other? that really is the signal they are sending

DoomZaW

... BRILLIANT.

my first answer: because thats what movies and music are there to tell kids about!

but really: lets think about it. Your average highschool kid. He wants sex and drugs. Yes, its probably in there reach. It's alot easier to have sex, or do drugs without their parents knowing, then killing someone. Killing someone is ending somebodys life. nobody knows what its like to be dead. therefore its there, yet we dont really know about it. Drugs, and Sex however, have survivors. Drug addicts dont need to die, and are often very lost in life when they come clean. Sex is looked down upon in many religions. Most infact, and in most cultures. Look at the american and uk societies tho. SEx and drugs are literally everywhere, and whats that thanks too? Music and Movies. literally, nobody really thot it was a big deal 10 years ago when most youth werent smoking pot. look now.

death is around us. but does it really make a person a worse person? wouldnt u rather die and be remembered then live through a live of lust and drugs, which most religions see as keys to hell? its complicated really, but it takes extra thinking. most americans will say "because america is so backwards" which is true, but not in the way there putting it. we are backwards BECAUSE a large part of our youth has sex and does drugs. not because we dont allowdrugs and sex out there in a 3rd or 4th form of media.

our societies are messed up. im a teen. yes i may have done bad things i speak against, but in no way is that cool. i am also in a point of studying more religion recently, so this may effect my post here :D

because old, male fuddy-duddies in positions of power (broadcasters etc.) don't want women to be in control of their sexuality. if a nipple is shown on television or in a film, then it's a 'bad' thing, to be feared or hidden away; women should be ashamed of their bodies, and given less freedom and power. television is used to control ideas about what is right and wrong. pubic hair for example, is supposed to make women appear stronger.

also, lots of mothers and parents in general would write in and complain to whatever media outlet is showing these images.. which means very small ratings and audiences for those shows, games, and films.

it's pretty much nonsense.. think how it might affect boys growing up, to fear girls. i don't know, it's extreme conservatism and fear, but it's also about power and control.

just_nonplussed

You have a pretty weird and rather extreme take on this unless you're joking. Anyway...how does pubic hair even denote power? I've always seen being less hairy from a hygenic/attractive viewpoint. Someone has an inferiority issue... :P

Concerning sex I can understand. Children do not yet know, understand or can relate to their sexuality or the perceptions of sex. They have a chance of screwing up their view on how a man or woman should be, ie. think women are just objects, you have to be all muscled up/hariless to be attractive, sadism, etc.

Vulgarity the concern comes with what the word means, such as the F-word which is again connected to sex in the bad light.

Both are arguably linked to violence in one form or another.

[QUOTE="just_nonplussed"]

because old, male fuddy-duddies in positions of power (broadcasters etc.) don't want women to be in control of their sexuality. if a nipple is shown on television or in a film, then it's a 'bad' thing, to be feared or hidden away; women should be ashamed of their bodies, and given less freedom and power. television is used to control ideas about what is right and wrong. pubic hair for example, is supposed to make women appear stronger.

also, lots of mothers and parents in general would write in and complain to whatever media outlet is showing these images.. which means very small ratings and audiences for those shows, games, and films.

it's pretty much nonsense.. think how it might affect boys growing up, to fear girls. i don't know, it's extreme conservatism and fear, but it's also about power and control.

Senge

You have a pretty weird and rather extreme take on this unless you're joking. Anyway...how does pubic hair even denote power? I've always seen being less hairy from a hygenic/attractive viewpoint. Someone has an inferiority issue... :P

Concerning sex I can understand. Children do not yet know, understand or can relate to their sexuality or the perceptions of sex. They have a chance of screwing up their view on how a man or woman should be, ie. think women are just objects, you have to be all muscled up/hariless to be attractive, sadism, etc.

Vulgarity the concern comes with what the word means, such as the F-word which is again connected to sex in the bad light.

Both are arguably linked to violence in one form or another.

well, i do think media, especially t.v, controls ideas of reality and crops the full picture, streamlining it for majority audiences.

I started pondering this when I was on the 360 board and saw some guy getting game recommendations for his 6 year old son. He seemed to have no problem letting him play a game like Halo 3 as long as there was no sex or swearing in it. To me it seems as though a game can have all kinds of gratuitous violence and parents have no problem with it, but show some boobs or hear an f-bomb and parents seem to lose their damn minds! Why does this double standard exist?

UT_Wrestler

:lol: The fact a parent won't let their kid watching a furiously swearing couple have graphic intercourse but they will let their kids watch tame violence strikes you as morally objectionable? Ohhhkaaayyyy....

Halo 3 isn't that violent.

Also your most likely to see the kid curse than blow up arms and shoot guns :|

Omni-Wrath

Common sense! I applaud you, good sir.

I started pondering this when I was on the 360 board and saw some guy getting game recommendations for his 6 year old son. He seemed to have no problem letting him play a game like Halo 3 as long as there was no sex or swearing in it. To me it seems as though a game can have all kinds of gratuitous violence and parents have no problem with it, but show some boobs or hear an f-bomb and parents seem to lose their damn minds! Why does this double standard exist?

UT_Wrestler

if you think about it, games are somewhat more similar to sex than violence. physical violence is painful right? but in the game, we don't feel the pain. physical contact is a pleasure - we feel the rumble of the controller, and see bright sparks on the screen. an enemy dying or exploding is like it's orgasm.

[QUOTE="UT_Wrestler"]

I started pondering this when I was on the 360 board and saw some guy getting game recommendations for his 6 year old son. He seemed to have no problem letting him play a game like Halo 3 as long as there was no sex or swearing in it. To me it seems as though a game can have all kinds of gratuitous violence and parents have no problem with it, but show some boobs or hear an f-bomb and parents seem to lose their damn minds! Why does this double standard exist?

just_nonplussed

if you think about it, games are somewhat more similar to sex than violence. physical violence is painful right? but in the game, we don't feel the pain. physical contact is a pleasure - we feel the rumble of the controller, and see bright sparks on the screen. an enemy dying or exploding is like it's orgasm.

What games have you been playing?

[QUOTE="UT_Wrestler"]

I started pondering this when I was on the 360 board and saw some guy getting game recommendations for his 6 year old son. He seemed to have no problem letting him play a game like Halo 3 as long as there was no sex or swearing in it. To me it seems as though a game can have all kinds of gratuitous violence and parents have no problem with it, but show some boobs or hear an f-bomb and parents seem to lose their damn minds! Why does this double standard exist?

CarnageHeart

:lol: The fact a parent won't let their kid watching a furiously swearing couple have graphic intercourse but they will let their kids watch tame violence strikes you as morally objectionable? Ohhhkaaayyyy....

That might not be quite the way that was meant to sound.;)

[QUOTE="UT_Wrestler"]

I started pondering this when I was on the 360 board and saw some guy getting game recommendations for his 6 year old son. He seemed to have no problem letting him play a game like Halo 3 as long as there was no sex or swearing in it. To me it seems as though a game can have all kinds of gratuitous violence and parents have no problem with it, but show some boobs or hear an f-bomb and parents seem to lose their damn minds! Why does this double standard exist?

CarnageHeart

:lol: The fact a parent won't let their kid watching a furiously swearing couple have graphic intercourse but they will let their kids watch tame violence strikes you as morally objectionable? Ohhhkaaayyyy....

Errr, that's not what he was talking about. Way to blow things out of proportion. I doubt that there are any "furiously swearing couples having graphic intercourse" in video games. And he's right: a game can have a lot of blood and parents don't seem to care, but they go insane if there's any implied sex or a single unclothed boob. Yeah, because apparently making babies is bad for our society.

Sex and language really isn't as bad as violence. Mass Effect would probably have been rated Teen if we weren't a bunch of prudes and if this weren't such a young form of entertainment (and as such, people still are scared of games and don't accept them as mainstream). Ironically, the film Top Gun was rated PG (yes, I know this was the 80s, but it would be PG-13 today) and the love scene was more graphic than anything in Mass Effect.

Welcome to America. It really is pretty goddamn stupid if you ask me.

PEELEDbanana

[QUOTE="CarnageHeart"]

[QUOTE="UT_Wrestler"]

I started pondering this when I was on the 360 board and saw some guy getting game recommendations for his 6 year old son. He seemed to have no problem letting him play a game like Halo 3 as long as there was no sex or swearing in it. To me it seems as though a game can have all kinds of gratuitous violence and parents have no problem with it, but show some boobs or hear an f-bomb and parents seem to lose their damn minds! Why does this double standard exist?

The_AI

:lol: The fact a parent won't let their kid watching a furiously swearing couple have graphic intercourse but they will let their kids watch tame violence strikes you as morally objectionable? Ohhhkaaayyyy....

Errr, that's not what he was talking about. Way to blow things out of proportion. I doubt that there are any "furiously swearing couples having graphic intercourse" in video games. And he's right: a game can have a lot of blood and parents don't seem to care, but they go insane if there's any implied sex or a single unclothed boob. Yeah, because apparently making babies is bad for our society.

Sex and language really isn't as bad as violence. Mass Effect would probably have been rated Teen if we weren't a bunch of prudes and if this weren't such a young form of entertainment (and as such, people still are scared of games and don't accept them as mainstream). Ironically, the film Top Gun was rated PG (yes, I know this was the 80s, but it would be PG-13 today) and the love scene was more graphic than anything in Mass Effect.

In regards to your first point, the only game he named was Halo, which is pretty tame. If he had named Dead Space or Gears of War or something I could see where you were coming from.

As for your second point, if you're trying to argue that Top Gun's rating wasn't high enough, maybe you're right (I haven't see it in forever, I didn't think much of it). If you're trying to argue that videogames are unfairly held to a different standard than movies, you're certainly right.

I started pondering this when I was on the 360 board and saw some guy getting game recommendations for his 6 year old son. He seemed to have no problem letting him play a game like Halo 3 as long as there was no sex or swearing in it. To me it seems as though a game can have all kinds of gratuitous violence and parents have no problem with it, but show some boobs or hear an f-bomb and parents seem to lose their damn minds! Why does this double standard exist?

UT_Wrestler

[QUOTE="PEELEDbanana"]

Welcome to America. It really is pretty goddamn stupid if you ask me.

MarioGirl64

nope. lots of stupid british people as well...

I found it weird too actually.

Sex is something that is completely natural - we humans were designed to have sex, and reproduce, (But as we all know, most of the time it's done for pleasure, but that's besides to point) but for whatever reason, parents don't want their kids to know about it, or have any sort of clue as to how they were created.

But, it's perfectly fine to have a kid play Gears Of War, or other extremely violent and graphic games. Blood and gore is also something natural. We all bleed red, we all have internal organs, we're all just as vunerable as the next guy.

And yet, anything that is slightly sexual sets off the alarm, yet the guy with a double-barreled shotgun blowing people's heads off is just given a warning. It makes absolutely zero sense - both of such things exist in the every day world, but sex - something that is a natural human desire - is seen to be worse than graphic violence? (something that is usually portrayed in overly-dramatic sequences anyway)

[QUOTE="Senge"]

[QUOTE="just_nonplussed"]

because old, male fuddy-duddies in positions of power (broadcasters etc.) don't want women to be in control of their sexuality. if a nipple is shown on television or in a film, then it's a 'bad' thing, to be feared or hidden away; women should be ashamed of their bodies, and given less freedom and power. television is used to control ideas about what is right and wrong. pubic hair for example, is supposed to make women appear stronger.

also, lots of mothers and parents in general would write in and complain to whatever media outlet is showing these images.. which means very small ratings and audiences for those shows, games, and films.

it's pretty much nonsense.. think how it might affect boys growing up, to fear girls. i don't know, it's extreme conservatism and fear, but it's also about power and control.

just_nonplussed

You have a pretty weird and rather extreme take on this unless you're joking. Anyway...how does pubic hair even denote power? I've always seen being less hairy from a hygenic/attractive viewpoint. Someone has an inferiority issue... :P

Concerning sex I can understand. Children do not yet know, understand or can relate to their sexuality or the perceptions of sex. They have a chance of screwing up their view on how a man or woman should be, ie. think women are just objects, you have to be all muscled up/hariless to be attractive, sadism, etc.

Vulgarity the concern comes with what the word means, such as the F-word which is again connected to sex in the bad light.

Both are arguably linked to violence in one form or another.

well, i do think media, especially t.v, controls ideas of reality and crops the full picture, streamlining it for majority audiences.

That's rather obvious...though note it's not always intentional; no one or any body of persons can portray a complete take or view on events. How does that relate to what I asked/even posted though? You seem to miss that I'm referring to you weird interpretation of the reasons for filtering.

I think it's because violence will persuade most people not to act out with such things where as sex and vulgar language either feel good or don't really hurt anyone.

I found it weird too actually.

Sex is something that is completely natural - we humans were designed to have sex, and reproduce, (But as we all know, most of the time it's done for pleasure, but that's besides to point) but for whatever reason, parents don't want their kids to know about it, or have any sort of clue as to how they were created.

But, it's perfectly fine to have a kid play Gears Of War, or other extremely violent and graphic games. Blood and gore is also something natural. We all bleed red, we all have internal organs, we're all just as vunerable as the next guy.

And yet, anything that is slightly sexual sets off the alarm, yet the guy with a double-barreled shotgun blowing people's heads off is just given a warning. It makes absolutely zero sense - both of such things exist in the every day world, but sex - something that is a natural human desire - is seen to be worse than graphic violence? (something that is usually portrayed in overly-dramatic sequences anyway)

MadVybz

The game mentioned was Halo, not Gears. Nice try though.

Also, the divide you are trying to set up is a false one. Though they are more accepting of violence than sex, parent's aren't big on their kids watching anything explicit, be it a guy's braining splattering all over the lawn (think GI Joe, where despite years of pitched warfare, death was almost absent and serious injury rare).

Also, there is a big difference between 'slightly sexual' and 'sex' or even 'provacative dress' and 'nudity'. During one summer in college I labelled sexual content in programs for the purposes of a university study and there is a fair bit of mild sexual content permitted on broadcast tv (and such content can be found in quite a few kid's cartoons). Sosome people's claim that Americans are against their kids being exposed to sexual content of any form is clearly false.

I started pondering this when I was on the 360 board and saw some guy getting game recommendations for his 6 year old son. He seemed to have no problem letting him play a game like Halo 3 as long as there was no sex or swearing in it. To me it seems as though a game can have all kinds of gratuitous violence and parents have no problem with it, but show some boobs or hear an f-bomb and parents seem to lose their damn minds! Why does this double standard exist?

UT_Wrestler

Because sex is bad and nobody should ever do it.

Language is even worse. Should you use language while having sex then you get transported straight to hell.

Violence is fine. The more violent the better.

I don't agree with this rating rubbish. First of all, when something is made taboo (sex unfortunately is) it becomes more desirable. Also; students should be taught about sex in preschool to remove this whole taboo-centric society. What could be more beautiful than the act of love?

Also; if I saw someone in half in GOW, does it mean that I am going to grab a chainsaw and do it to someone in real life? I am starting to notice that society places no trust in the young generation; that very lack of trust is what is making them smoke pot and conceive in their teens.

I think it is because violence is something we are exposed to even from birth. As kids were told of stories of heros fighting dragons andcutting off their headswhich too is violence. Things like sex and vulgar language are soemthing usually adults do so we shield kids from becoming adults too early, see what I mean?

I don't agree with this rating rubbish. First of all, when something is made taboo (sex unfortunately is) it becomes more desirable. Also; students should be taught about sex in preschool to remove this whole taboo-centric society. What could be more beautiful than the act of love?

Also; if I saw someone in half in GOW, does it mean that I am going to grab a chainsaw and do it to someone in real life? I am starting to notice that society places no trust in the young generation; that very lack of trust is what is making them smoke pot and conceive in their teens.

Because (at least in America) our Puritan roots are so deep. When you think about it, foul language and Sexuality were very taboo subjects for them, but they commited a huge sum of violent acts (Selem witch trials) on a somewhat regual basis.

Dad can tell the kid that the violence in a video game is not real. The kid is surrounded by sex and vulgar language in public so often, "it's only a game" won't work.

Therefor, sex and vulgarity are considered worse because being more common, they are more likely to be practiced by young ones.

• No Drugs.
• No promiscuity
• Do not use four letter words in polite company

are much more likely to influence a child than are ;

• No headshots
• Do not throw hand grenades
• Thou shalt not use your katana to remove people's heads

I don't know. There's nothing wrong with nudity or sex, but it seems to be demonized for some reason. I think it's just a matter of being ued to seeing something in videogames. We're used to seeing violence, so we think nothing of it. Sex isn't as common, so it's a shock when it's there

The double standard exists here to some extent. Overt sexuality in a game would certainly make a few tabloid headlines, though no one would kick up a fuss over language. The UK isn't as bad as America though. No-one batted an eyelid over Mass Effect for instance.

_glatisant_

lol mass effect was funny,when that women was jabbering rubbish about it being a rape simulator and that yyou could rape anyone.Man some people are morons that will say anything for air time

[QUOTE="_glatisant_"]

The double standard exists here to some extent. Overt sexuality in a game would certainly make a few tabloid headlines, though no one would kick up a fuss over language. The UK isn't as bad as America though. No-one batted an eyelid over Mass Effect for instance.

YoJim8obaJoe

lol mass effect was funny,when that women was jabbering rubbish about it being a rape simulator and that yyou could rape anyone.Man some people are morons that will say anything for air time

How on earth did she think she could comment when she had clearly never even touched the game?

Because according to the ESRB, it is better that we run around killing eachother in brutal ways than loving each other? that really is the signal they are sending

DoomZaW

Because this culture is messed up.

The_AI

Because sex is bad and nobody should ever do it.

Language is even worse. Should you use language while having sex then you get transported straight to hell.

Violence is fine. The more violent the better.

Murj

Christian values.