sozobe wrote: Thomas, I would be pissed off if I went Christmas shopping with the sozlet and (most types of) porn was playing on the TV's.
Fair enough. All I'm saying is that I wouldn't be pissed off, and in general I don't want the rules of society to be made by those who are most easily pissed off -- which is increasingly the case.
I think you make a very good observation about porn vs. violence. It is considered perfectly normal to have murder mysteries any time on TV where people kill each other, yet when a station runs pornos showing people getting conceived,
that is a danger to our children. I'd prefer this inconsistency to be evened out, which implies much greater tolerance for sex in the media.
Yes I edited, but the point that my problem with violent porn is with the violence, not with the sex, was in the first version too.
CAN'T GET ENOUGH OF YOUR LOVE, BABE
Barry White
I've heard people say that
Too much of anything is not good for you, baby
But I don't know about that
As many times as we've loved
We've shared love and made love
It doesn't seem to me like it's enough
There's just not enough, baby
There's just not enough
Oh, oh, baby
Uh-uh
My darling, I
Can't get enough of your love, babe
Girl, I don't know, I don't know why
I can't get enough of your love, babe
Oh, some things I can't get used to
No matter how I try
It's like the more you give, the more I want
And baby, that's no lie, oh, no, babe
Tell me, what can I say, what am I gonna do
How should I feel when everything is you
What kind of love is this that you're givin' me
Is it in your kiss or just because you're sweet
Girl, all I know
Is every time you're here
I feel the change
Somethin' moves
I scream your name
Look what you got me doin'
Darling, I
Can't get enough of your love, babe
Girl, I don't know, I don't know, I don't know why
I can't get enough of your love, babe, oh, no, babe
Girl, if I can only make you see
And make you understand
Girl, your love for me is all I need
And more than I can stand, oh, well, babe
How can I explain all the things I feel
You've given me so much, girl, you're so unreal
Still I keep loving you more and more each time
Girl, what am I gonna do because you're blowin' my mind
I get the same old feelin'
Every time you're here
I feel the change
Somethin' moves
I scream your name
Look what you got me doin'
Darling, I
Can't get enough of your love, babe
Girl, I don't know, I don't know, I don't know why
I can't get enough of your love, babe
Oh, my darling, I
Can't get enough of your love, babe, oh, babe
Girl, I don't know, I don't know why
I can't get enough of your love, babe
Darling, I
Can't get enough of your love, babe
I agree with that, Thomas. (Evening out.)
I don't think that everything can be left up to the parents, though, that there are things out of their control. That is how society enters into the equation, whether it should or not. I.e., that "do what you feel is right for your children, I do what I feel is right for my children" is not always practical. If, for example, society is teaching my child that homosexuality is bad, I will try to change what and how society teaches. I may well fail, but it's my perogative. Parents have a disproportionate influence on their children, but they are far from the only influence.
My editing comment was just that you added something nice which wasn't there when I replied, and so I didn't acknowledge.
sozobe wrote: If, for example, society is teaching my child that homosexuality is bad, I will try to change what and how society teaches
Fair enough. My approach would be to use it as a case in point that just because lots of people believe something, that doesn't make it right. I think it's the more valuable lesson I can teach, and it's a much better investment of my time than engaging in an arms race with the people who disagree with me.
sozobe wrote:My editing comment was just that you added something nice which wasn't there when I replied, and so I didn't acknowledge.
That's how I had taken it. But I can see how my post could have come across otherwise. Sorry
I'd also want to teach that if you see something happening that you think is wrong, you take action in an attempt to rectify it.
It'll be SO interesting when you have a kid...
Thomas,
I want to push back a little about what you said (although I agree with it mostly).
Society does have an interest in what you do with your kids. There are some things that are so contrary the morals of society that they are without question both offensive and damaging. Incest is an extreme example.
If what you are doing with your kids is clearly harmful, society does have the right and responsibility to intervene. I don't know where the line would be for the type of pornography you might show your kids. In my mind, the intent is important. These are difficult social and moral issues and this is why occasionally very painful and contentious cases come up.
That being said, I believe that parents should open about talking about sex with their kids. Kids should have books about sex and I certainly have no problem with nudity. With my kids I do set limits with what I consider pornography -- i.e. the use of sex without a relationship for object gratification.
sozobe wrote:It'll be SO interesting when you have a kid...
I agree. And I suspect I'll be seriously blackmailable one day when you threaten to show it my old A2K postings ...
Hmm, I grew up seeing sex since I could remember. At 3 and 4 I remember reading manuals on sex and knew enough of the subject to think that one book depicting sex standing up was odd. At around 4, I knew all the parts of the genitalia (down the the nitty gritty) and I was even encouraged to actually have sex at an age in which this was simply impossible.
I saw porn videos, even ones featuring the adults who took care of me.
Anywho, my point is look how I turned out. Thomas has to be dead wrong here. :-P
Thomas
Quote:There is a line, but it has a lot more to do with exposure to violence than with exposure to sex. Unless animals like bestiality, this line is crossed when it comes to bestiality and s&m. This is way beyond the level of hard-core-ness that is easily accessible to children on even with permissive internet usage.
That's what I meant Thomas, you cannot simply say as you have,
"I see nothing wrong with porn, nor with exposing children to it."
.without qualifying it, unless that is what you mean, i.e. all porn including hardcore, some of which includes violence and s/m, and other hardcore porn that is non violent yet abuse and degrading.
I am probably Craven's opposite as far as exposure at an early age, and look at how I turned out. Well, I went through a lot of wildness that wasn't all that useful and occurred quite late. I'm not actually sorry, but it wasn't an emotionally sanguine progression.
I agree with Thomas to some extent, probably not all, though I back off since I am answering enthusiastically before I have really read the thread. I also have some experience, re my ex husband's family, with the power of fear of sex. Another story, not today..
twyvel wrote:Thomas
Quote:There is a line, but it has a lot more to do with exposure to violence than with exposure to sex. Unless animals like bestiality, this line is crossed when it comes to bestiality and s&m. This is way beyond the level of hard-core-ness that is easily accessible to children on even with permissive internet usage.
That's what I meant Thomas, you cannot simply say as you have,
"I see nothing wrong with porn, nor with exposing children to it."
.without qualifying it, unless that is what you mean, i.e. all porn including hardcore, some of which includes violence and s/m, and other hardcore porn that is non violent yet abuse and degrading.
Fair enough. I admit that in my "yes, yes, and yes" answer, the first "yes" was an over-generalization. Maybe the thrid one too -- I wouldn't take a child to life shows obviously. But the original question was "Is sex too prevalent in the media?" And I happen to believe that the amount of sex children get exposed to by channel-surfing on TV and surfing the web is not really a problem.
Sorry that I'm a little late, but...
Thomas wrote:And since it was usual practice back then that whole families slept in one bed, it's inevitable that the children of these families witnessed their parents having sex on a regular basis too.
How can you possibly make that assumption? Even though families usually slept in one bed, and sex was considered something as mundane as eating breakfast (wasn't all shut doors), people still had a sense of what their children should and should not see. I seriously doubt the sanity of any person who would have sex with their children present and able to give a play-by-play breakdown and I seriously doubt the sanity of anyone who thinks that that is or was acceptable.
Individual wrote: Even though families usually slept in one bed, and sex was considered something as mundane as eating breakfast (wasn't all shut doors), people still had a sense of what their children should and should not see.
Families too poor to afford multiple rooms or multiple beds -- the majority until not too long ago -- had few options to avoid that kind of exposure. So presumably they exposed their children to it, sane or not. This is what I gather from occasional reading in history magazines. So I admit my evidence isn't perfect, and if yours is better I'd be delighted to see it. "I question the sanity ..." doesn't qualify as evidence in my opinion.
twyvel wrote:That's what I meant Thomas, you cannot simply say as you have, "I see nothing wrong with porn, nor with exposing children to it."
.without qualifying it,
I admitted earlier that I overgenaralized. But in addition to that, let me caution you not to make too much of that admission. As a matter of logic, the conversation could have played out the same way if the topic had been milk.
In a hypothetical parallel universe, twywel and I wrote:Me: I see nothing wrong with milk, nor with children drinking it.
Twywel: All children, any kind of milk -- even milk mixed with whiskey? There are some drinks, such as Bailey's, which basically consist of that.
Me: Yes and yes. I wouldn't serve whiskey-fortified milk to a child, but that reflects a problem I have with serving children wiskey, not a problem I have with serving children milk.
Twywel: See? That's when I meant, Thomas, you cannot simply say as you have: "I see nothing wrong with milk, nor with children drinking it", without qualifying it.
My point is, you can exaggerate any opinion to a level where it becomes absurd. This shouldn't count against the opinion in question.
Thomas, your last post was a gem of logic and humor.
Glad you are here.
There has ALWAYS been sex in the media. What I am observing, is that in the recent past, what I have been seeing is "in your face" blatant sex.
I find that neither attractive, nor exciting.
Phoenix32890 wrote:There has ALWAYS been sex in the media. What I am observing, is that in the recent past, what I have been seeing is "in your face" blatant sex.
I find that neither attractive, nor exciting.
Me neither!
Well...at least, not all the time.
I remember once about three or four years ago ... I found it neither attractive nor exciting. :wink:
Do you think plumbing has anything to do with how people view this "problem?"
