Nudity and sex are bad, but extreme violence is OK?

[Sledfang]

Youth are less likely to act out fantasy RPGs. There is a large gap between playing an orc and seeing yourself as one. That's why games like GTA also fall into the same category as Playboy. Additionally, (most) adolescents know violence is bad and why, and they know there are repercussions for acting it out; sex (for some) on the other hand has not been taught as readily and teenagers are in the beginning stages of learning it. Same reason that games and television for the very young have minimal to no violence.

Just my 2c.

Basically if you can realistically imagine yourself as the character in the game, then the actions in the game have a higher potential social consequence.

Even kids automatically know that if they are playing as a furry cow humanoid with hooves, the rules are a bit different.

[Remilia]

It's the correct answer.

Even if you wanted to dance around the issue and say "society" instead it still leads back to religion eventually.

Except for the part where discussing religion like that on the forum isn't allowed and generally for good reason.

[May90]

If you mean inside the context of the game, sure you can murder or see sex. It has nothing to do with real life except that you typically need to be an adult in order to legally buy those games.

But that is the question. If both murder and sex in video games have nothing to do with the real life, then why is tolerance towards violence in them is much higher than that towards nudity and sex?

Remember when Mass Effect 1 was only released, and in a few TV programs it got criticized for the nude scene there (where you can't actually see any details, only "non-sexual" parts of bodies)? Somehow it didn't get criticized for the fact that during the game you have to shoot off brains of hundreds of humanoids, including humans - but one very-very censored nude scene, and people already want to prohibit kids from playing it. Why?

Nudity != Sex

PG-13 allows for brief nudity but not sex, while R allows for some sex and NC-17 allows for explicit sex. Reasons are based upon legal consent/adult ages/standards.

Game ratings follow the same basic standards as movies.

Well, I suppose. But how are these even comparable? I mean, if you get to kill thousands in a video game, how can there even be a talk about prohibiting people from playing it due to nudity/sex? Isn't mass murder much more of a potential harm to people playing it than some virtual sex between cartoonish characters?

That has literally nothing to do with any of this.

Both are bad for us when we're kids. You're comparing "cartoon" violence versus actually seeing a real man dying. There are some youtube clips of people getting shot (ISIS killing random people comes to mind) and I assure you, no matter what age you are at, you will find that disturbing versus WoW.

Same can be said about sex: watching a sex scene in a video game is by no means comparable to having sex in real life. Yet people say, "Violence in games is not a real violence, so that's okay", while they don't use the same logic about sex. Double standards?

I think they mean more that sex & nudity is viewed in a worse light/higher age requirement in games than killing things because of the prudish standards set by many religions. Sex in games is just as detached from real life as murder.

Yes, this. I remember playing some game for kids when I was 7: it was specially for kids, 6+ in Russian rating system, and one of the things I needed to do is to trick an evil sorcerer into a trap which instantly killed him. My parents were totally fine with it.

And yet in most families even watching some nude pics in the Internet at 20 y/o will be harshly criticized.

[Zantos]

Welcome to western society. Please leave your logic at the door.

This. The US is so closed minded about sex and many other things it's laughable. While the rest of the world progresses in logic and sees the stupidity in being so scared about these kinds of things, the US just pushes it away and goes Nope. That is why parents rely on the school to teach their kids sex ed instead of teaching their kids themselves. Then they get mad if the school does it without their consent.

I honestly hate living here sometimes because it makes me seem dumber just for being in a place that's so narrow minded when it comes to logic.

[Zantos]

Except for the part where discussing religion like that on the forum isn't allowed and generally for good reason.

I know that its not allowed, but really, if its the correct answer its the correct answer. Even if discussing it isn't allowed. Religion plays a huge role in how a society acts and thinks. It used to play an even bigger role in ancient times when the pope had the same power as the king at the time. The king could often times not even declare war without the popes approval.

[Spiffums]

Laws are based on morality of the group. The morality of the group is based most of the time on religion.




As to why sex gets a higher rating is because kids exposed to sex at an earlier age would lead to more sexual activity at an earlier age. Never mind that less than 100 years ago people were getting married and having family's at 15 and 16 years old.

[tehpwner]

Welcome to western society. Please leave your logic at the door.

Welcome to North American society. Last I checked Europe is still considered part of the west and doesn't nearly as often have this backwards view on Sexuality v Violence.

[Nirawen]

So what if it was a sex game about furry cow humanoids with hooves?

Bovine Strippers 2 is one of my all time favourite games.

[Zantos]

Laws are based on morality of the group. The morality of the group is based most of the time on religion.




As to why sex gets a higher rating is because kids exposed to sex at an earlier age would lead to more sexual activity at an earlier age. Never mind that less than 100 years ago people were getting married and having family's at 15 and 16 years old.

Honestly, its worse now then when people got married at 15 and 16. Back then they took credit for what they did. Now, it ruins their lifes and no one wants to assume responsibility at that age. Yet they know just as much, if not more at that age now then back then.

[Sledfang]

So what if it was a sex game about furry cow humanoids with hooves?

Yeah. That's really not the reason why at all.

So what if it was lol? It would have a mature rating and kids cant buy it.

There are already erotic 3D animations and simple erotic games like this on the internet.

If your into that, then go right ahead.

[Fus Ro Yay]

this reminds me of a video i saw from jimquisition / the escapist magazine.


while i understand the reasoning behind banning rape games and such, i still find it wierd that murder in games is taken so lightly, when other things, like this thread says, sex & nudity is taken much more seriously
isn't murder supposed to be the worst thing one can do?

also, this is somewhat related.

just a side note edit: Do you guys think we should make games to live out certain desires? or do you think that just encourages people to follow down that road irl? (games make people more agressive etc etc)

[RoKPaNda]

It's the correct answer.

Even if you wanted to dance around the issue and say "society" instead it still leads back to religion eventually.

So does literally everything else in the world, odd how some people only point out the bad things and others only point out the good though?

[barackopala]

It's the correct answer.

Even if you wanted to dance around the issue and say "society" instead it still leads back to religion eventually.

i'd go with "age of the audience".

[Revi]

I remember writing and reading long posts on this the last time this popped up here, but does it really matter? Are kids these days being exposed to too little sex?

Anyways, sex and violence really shouldn't be compared as often as it is, it's two completely different things and the views on one does not necessitate a certain view on the other.

[Sledfang]

(In before the infraction)

Lol why are you worried about being infracted?

[Deleted]

I'd have a guess that it is because defeating an enemy or something like that (be it death or not), is a tad more understandable for children beneath the age of 13, than an actual relationship or why you'd stick your dick into somebody or let somebody stick a dick in you.

Can't say for all people but usually, sex and nudity, isn't an interest for < 13 year olds, and we likely ban it, because we don't really want them to play such things. Corruption of the youth and such.

Example: would any parent here show their < 13 year old child, porn?

Edit: also, extreme violence (blood, suffering, show of pain etc.) usually is rated 18+.

[unholytestament]

i'd go with "age of the audience".

The only problem I would have with a 14-year-old playing the Playboy Mansion game is that it's a terrible game.

[Celarent]

Was actually thinking about this today, and I'm surprised people are still confused.

About 20 years ago, I was at a friend's house, and at my request we were watching the Aeon Flux shorts (then on MTV's Liquid Television). The short happened to be where Aeon sneaks onto an elevator and catches Trevor Goodchild giving his consort a little tongue in the ear. My friend's younger brother, 10 or so, repulsed, could not understand why the man would do that. Yet a couple more years and he'd have understood perfectly.

Nobody's saying that kids should be taught to hurt others, but while humans understand violence from birth we really can't process sexual activity until we reach puberty and it's not healthy for us to try. Simple as that.

[Itisamuh]

It really shouldn't be that difficult to understand (though people on this site can't seem to think beyond blaming religion for anything.) Seeing murder in a game or movie doesn't usually make a 13 year old want to go out and murder. Seeing sex, well, that's a different story. If religion is the reason we don't have half of 13 year olds getting pregnant and having herpes, then more power to it. If you want your child being sexualized at an early age, that's your decision. Not everyone's going to agree with that.

[unholytestament]

Seeing murder in a game or movie doesn't usually make a 13 year old want to go out and murder. Seeing sex, well, that's a different story.

Why?

If religion is the reason we don't have half of 13 year olds getting pregnant and having herpes, then more power to it. If you want your child being sexualized at an early age, that's your decision. Not everyone's going to agree with that.

That's a beautiful strawman you made there.

So if a kid knows about sex before 13 they are going to run out and have sex, but they won't recreate violence? Funny, I seem to recall there being an anti-Power Rangers thing when I was kid because kids were supposedly doing backyard karate.

You know what's the solution to both problems? Proper education and good parenting. Keeping kids in the dark is not proper education.