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

[Xkiller9000]

lmao are you actually serious, its made up creatures, that are completely fake, literally just pixels, and youre complaining...

[May90]

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.

Actually, as an immigrant from Russia to the US, I would say the US is much more open-minded about such things than most other countries. Yes, there might be more strict laws regarding such things here, but, at least, these topics are generally open for discussion. By contrast, look, for example, at most Middle Eastern countries than anti-sexual paranoia went as far as to prohibit women from showing their face in public in some especially harsh countries.

But, yeah, some countries are even better at that. There is a reason Witcher was released in its original form in most European countries while in the US it was censored and released with all the nudity removed.

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.

But was it really bad? It is not like there are many genetic failures today due to people 100 years ago having more flexible rules about sex, right? I personally do not see any problem with people sleeping together at 14 y/o (and let's face the reality: this actually happens all over the world, laws cannot stop people from following their nature), as long as they understand the consequences and take the necessary precautions, such as condoms - and hiding all the sexual information from them doesn't help, in fact, it increases the risk that they will do something wrong.

I personally had a first orgasm at 13 or so, and I was actually really scared, I didn't know anything about it due to close-mindness of Russian society and my family to such subjects, and I thought I broke something in my body. Are such things really better than well informed society when children know everything about sexuality and do not shy away from it?

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?

This is the funny thing.
Murder is considered one of the worst things to do.
Sex is considered one of the best things to do.
Sex in games is considered worse than murder in games.

Logic? Haven't heard of such.

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

In educational purposes, I would (if I had a child, that is). Besides, I will be much more confident knowing that my child watches porn every week, than that he/she doesn't know a thing about sex and may get hurt due to it some day.

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.

Well, then what is the problem with, say, 10 y/o seeing a sex scene if he/she doesn't understand it anyway?

- - - Updated - - -

lmao are you actually serious, its made up creatures, that are completely fake, literally just pixels, and youre complaining...

I think you misread my post friend.

[Notshauna]

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.

Except that's wildly untrue, as the opposite usually happens, most teen pregnancies are caused by the lack of education not sex on TV (or anywhere else), an adolescent being aware of sex doesn't turn them into a hornbag, they just naturally are as they've not yet built a resistance to sexual desires.

[BeauFox]

I would assume it's because sexual things in games, depending on how graphic it is, is borderline porn. I understand your point, but there's a reason why porn is also for adults, if a game shows too much, especially if they're trying to build a relationship leading up to sex, it would invoke a much more 'mature' or... 'Adult' feeling than playing CoD with your friend if you know what I mean xD ! Sure kids are always going to get into porn, with the internet around it's pretty much inevitable. But when it's in a game rated Teen and wildly available to most kids. I dunno I just don't think that'd be right. So yeah I can see why it starts bringing it up to 18+ pretty quickly.

That's my opinion on the matter, I think it's fine the way it is for the most part. With that said I still have no idea how WoW holds onto it's teen rating xDD

[Deleted]

In educational purposes, I would (if I had a child, that is). Besides, I will be much more confident knowing that my child watches porn every week, than that he/she doesn't know a thing about sex and may get hurt due to it some day.

Of course when you have the chance to explain what is actually going on, porn could be a sufficient tool (granted there is educational material to explain sex). And I am not quite sure what would be worse in case of being hurt, not knowing about sex or learning sex from porn

[Immitis]

violence is sometimes needed to tell a story. sex is very rarely needed for use in a storyline and when it is used it doesnt need to be explicitly shown.

the majority of the time when sex is shown explicitly its used for one reason and one reason only, to get dudebros to buy the game.

violence is used to make a point or is required to tell certain stories. sex is very rarely not.

you can justify violence much easier than sex.

[zealo]

In educational purposes, I would (if I had a child, that is). Besides, I will be much more confident knowing that my child watches porn every week, than that he/she doesn't know a thing about sex and may get hurt due to it some day.

If you do, please also teach them that porn often involves much acting and is far from realistic.

[May90]

violence is sometimes needed to tell a story. sex is very rarely needed for use in a storyline and when it is used it doesnt need to be explicitly shown.

the majority of the time when sex is shown explicitly its used for one reason and one reason only, to get dudebros to buy the game.

violence is used to make a point or is required to tell certain stories. sex is very rarely not.

you can justify violence much easier than sex.

And that, I think, is one of the indications that something in our society is wrong. That most of the games we play contain a lot of killing and it is considered normal, while you can see sex in maybe one game in 100, and it will be pointed out by everyone.

If you do, please also teach them that porn often involves much acting and is far from realistic.

Well, of course. But it certainly is more realistic than sex in video games.

[IRunSoFarAway]

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

I don't know, the rules say "Hateful language about race, religion, country (Example: US vs. EU threads), political beliefs, etc."

How is saying "religion is the reason for this, that, and the other" considered hateful?

Sure, bringing it up might incur hateful posts about it, but I don't see any of that going on, yet, and it's not like it's totally irrelevant in this discussion.

[May90]

I don't know, the rules say "Hateful language about race, religion, country (Example: US vs. EU threads), political beliefs, etc."

How is saying "religion is the reason for this, that, and the other" considered hateful?

Sure, bringing it up might incur hateful posts about it, but I don't see any of that going on, yet, and it's not like it's totally irrelevant in this discussion.

And those rules were certainly not developed to inflict censorship on these forums, but rather to prevent usual bashing. Criticizing religion and bashing it are two different things.

[Immitis]

And that, I think, is one of the indications that something in our society is wrong. That most of the games we play contain a lot of killing and it is considered normal, while you can see sex in maybe one game in 100, and it will be pointed out by everyone.


Well, of course. But it certainly is more realistic than sex in video games.

and why is that?

war and violence is a part of history that is engraved and drenched into every history and culture of the world.

kings, queens, pharaohs, emperors, khans. soldiers, everyday criminals, even the gods of pretty much ever religion have violence or needed violence in order to make their legacy and get to where they were.

entire civilizations were built upon violence as a necessity.

the world is a cruel place where every once in awhile skulls have to be smashed with rocks. its always been that way.

almost every story requires violence in one way shape or form. what it does not always require is GRAPHIC violence.

you can show violence in a variety of different levels and still tell the same story.

there are very very very few stories that require sex and the vast majority that do can get the sex parts over with very quickly and dont have to show anything explicit.

[Edge-]

violence is sometimes needed to tell a story. sex is very rarely needed for use in a storyline and when it is used it doesnt need to be explicitly shown.

Curious as to some examples of this. Because I can't think of a single instance in which you could get away with not explicitly showing sex but couldn't do the same without explicitly showing violence.

Both can be heavily implied and occur without being explicitly shown.

[IRunSoFarAway]

And those rules were certainly not developed to inflict censorship on these forums, but rather to prevent usual bashing. Criticizing religion and bashing it are two different things.

Hmm, I now see "Religious opionions/debates", so I suppose they were. I guess even expressing pinion about it is a no no, hateful or not. Someone might want to fix that typo in the rules, btw, not sure how long that one has existed.

[Beat5beat]

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..

The rest of the world? What part of the rest of the world are you talking about exactly? China? Russia? India? The middle east? Africa? Australia? Because all of those places that I just listed are at least as restrictive as the USA and sometimes moreso. Or were you actually talking about the small minority of European nations which are actually only barely more liberal minded in regard to sex vs violence?

[Immitis]

Curious as to some examples of this. Because I can't think of a single instance in which you could get away with not explicitly showing sex but couldn't do the same without explicitly showing violence.

Both can be heavily implied and occur without being explicitly shown.

certain characters just wouldnt be the same or as imposing without the violence.

hannibal is one of the first that come to mind. they get away with using alot of graphic violence by mixing it with alot of imagery but its still kind of out in the open and wouldnt be the same or have the same effect without it.

[Beat5beat]

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.

What? People want sex because it's a biological imperative, it has NOTHING to do with what you see on tv or in games. As soon as puberty hits you seek out sex, has nothing to do with the media. Before puberty, you don't give a shit, it's gross to you.

[Sky High]

violence and sex are part of human nature. however to treat the one aspect that we derive pleasure and further existence on this world as a bad thing is grossly disingenuous to say the least. it might be a no no to mention on these forums but that sentiment is purely the fault of religion.

[Edge-]

certain characters just wouldnt be the same or as imposing without the violence.

hannibal is one of the first that come to mind. they get away with using alot of graphic violence by mixing it with alot of imagery but its still kind of out in the open and wouldnt be the same or have the same effect without it.

How about the movies? Take away the scenes where Anthony Hopkins actually commits acts of violence, and he's still an absolutely terrifying, imposing character. You don't need to show a character committing violent acts for them to be terrifying characters.

I mean, you could make your same argument about sex. You have a character that's supposed to use his/her sexuality to manipulate and control people through sex. By your argument, not showing that sex would detract from the characters sexuality.

[smartazjb0y]

Honestly, I didn't understand your objection. What do you mean by "killing in WoW is not realistic"? How can killing in a video game be realistic in the first place? Killing in Payday or Hitman is not much closer to reality, you don't kill people with mouse clicks.

Killing people is much more realistic in other games than it is in WoW. In WoW you have pretty low-poly characters that cast spells or use attack animations with weapons, but they don't actually really hit the target and they don't harm them. I play zoomed out so I can't tell but generally there's not even blood.

In other games, like Hitman, the violence is a lot more realistic. There's actually blood, the targets actually get hurt, etc. If you shoot someone in those games, there'll be a gunshot wound with blood.

Or compare Mortal Kombat with those M-rated sexual games. Mortal Kombat, while maybe not realistic (because those fatalities get ridiculous) shows a lot more gore and violence than WoW does.

[Immitis]

How about the movies? Take away the scenes where Anthony Hopkins actually commits acts of violence, and he's still an absolutely terrifying, imposing character. You don't need to show a character committing violent acts for them to be terrifying characters.

I mean, you could make your same argument about sex. You have a character that's supposed to use his/her sexuality to manipulate and control people through sex. By your argument, not showing that sex would detract from the characters sexuality.

i disagree. the movies really just dont do hannibal justice as a character, i think alot of people who read the books would agree with that.

if someone using sex to manipulate people was an important part of their character then it probably would detract from their character not to show that.

lost girl comes to mind as a show where sex is an important part of the main character since shes a succubus. but sex scenes dont really need to be long or graphic to get their points across. you can show a short non graphic sex scene and get the same point across a longer more in depth one can. you cant really do that with violence all the time, sometimes you need to see a longer more graphic violent scene to fully get across the brutality of a character.

the only times you really need a graphic brutal scene which involves sex is when it involves rape.