What's worse for chidren?

[Sunstone]

What's worse for children: seeing violence or seeing sex in the media? Why?

 

[angellous_evangellous]

That's a great question. I would say that sex isn't harmful unless it's violent.

 

[Faint]

Neither. Both are part of life. Kids need to learn about both eventually, and we should not try to shelter them in some kind of censored fantasy world.

 

[Green Gaia]

What's worse for children: seeing violence or seeing sex in the media? Why?

As a mother, I have more of a problem with my children seeing violence than sex.

 

[Ormiston]

Violence in my opinion. I'm basing this mainly on that movie "Bowling for Columbine". Take Canada for example. They show more sex on public TV than in the US but less violence in the media. They have tons of guns but only a fraction of the shootings. I don't know if they have more sex or not, but I'll take a pregnant daughter over a dead one any day. [note: I'm not even sure if my argument makes any sense. ]

 

[spacemonkey]

I don't think that seeing either is bad as long as someone is their to answer questions the child may have or to put what they see into context. Violence and sex are both part of nature that a person will eventually be exposed too so why wait to start educating a child about them.

 

[Quiddity]

Since you are talking about "seeing". I would say sex because it can have immediate affects on you. Lusting, etc.

~Victor

 

[spacemonkey]

The real danger comes from the people who want to control what is broadcast because they feel they know what is best (morally or any other way) for everyone else.

 

[spacemonkey]

Since you are talking about "seeing". I would say sex because it can have immediate affects on you. Lusting, etc.

~Victor

Typical Catholic response, damn sexuallity but promote violence.

 

[Ormiston]

Neither. Both are part of life. Kids need to learn about both eventually, and we should not try to shelter them in some kind of censored fantasy world.

I don't agree with this. The amount of sex and violence in the world is endless. EVERYONE needs to be sheltered to some degree. Especially children. I've got a friend who downloaded that terrorist video where they cut off the guys head. He was worked up for a week spouting racist crap and losing his head about the state of politics. I told him how unhealthy I thought it was to witness that sort of extreme violence. Fantasy world or not, I know what's good for me...

 

[spacemonkey]

I don't agree with this. The amount of sex and violence in the world is endless. EVERYONE needs to be sheltered to some degree. Especially children. I've got a friend who downloaded that terrorist video where they cut off the guys head. He was worked up for a week spouting racist crap and losing his head about the state of politics. I told him how unhealthy I thought it was to witness that sort of extreme violence. Fantasy world or not, I know what's good for me...

I watched that same video and all I thought was, "Man, it sure looks easier in the movies..."

 

[Fluffy]

I would probably be more concerned about violence but I don't have any real reason for this. I would let my children see anything I would be comfortable with seeing and probably more than that if I felt my reasons for feeling uncomfortable about something were irrational.

 

[Sunstone]

I agree with Ormiston that children need to be sheltered to some extent. I feel, however, that seeing sex does less harm than seeing violence. In fact, I know of no studies that would suggest seeing sex does any harm at all to children, but there are many studies that suggest seeing violence does indeed harm children.

 

[Quiddity]

Typical Catholic response, damn sexuallity but promote violence.

Don't be retarded. He asked me to pick one over the other based on "seeing".

~Victor

 

[Bishka]

Violence.

 

[Faint]

I agree with Ormiston that children need to be sheltered to some extent...there are many studies that suggest seeing violence does indeed harm children.

Can you cite these or provide a link to these studies? Do they specify whether or not people are more violent today than they have been throughout history? Also, do these studies suggest why most of us grew up watching violent TV and haven't killed anyone yet?

 

[Sunstone]

Can you cite these or provide a link to these studies? Do they specify whether or not people are more violent today than they have been throughout history? Also, do these studies suggest why most of us grew up watching violent TV and haven't killed anyone yet?

Google "media/violence" and take your pick.

 

[spacemonkey]

Don't be retarded. He asked me to pick one over the other based on "seeing".

~Victor

Why is my response retarded? Are you denying that the Catholic Church has condemned sexuallity throughout its existance? That has to be what you mean because I know there is NO WAY you can deny they have promoted violence.

 

[spacemonkey]

Violent behavior has been around LONG before the concept of media. Violence for entertainment has been around since the times of the Roman empire (probably before that, hmm...ancient Egyptian cockfights?). The real danger lies in censorship.

 

[Quiddity]

Why is my response retarded? Are you denying that the Catholic Church has condemned sexuallity throughout its existance? That has to be what you mean because I know there is NO WAY you can deny they have promoted violence.

What in the world are you talking about? Are you talking about the Crusades? Specific catholics saying something? Or Catholic teaching [which is what I care about]?

~Victor