• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Primetime TV Violence vs Nudity vs Sodomy ;)

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
tynopik said:
it's not what disgusts you, it's what might influence your kids into behavior you don't want
Click to expand...

Then how about you try a real attempt at parenting for once, dagnabbit! Sit the little rapscallions down, and talk to them about things such as sex and nudity. I should hope that if your parenting is good enough and you've raised responsible children that they should typically make good choices.

(I threw in "typically" because no one's perfect. 😛)
 
tynopik said:
again not the point

it's not what disgusts you, it's what might influence your kids into behavior you don't want
Click to expand...
Ok so with that logic, having my child see a naked butt, or boob will somehow lend itself to behavior I don't want (unsure of what this is), but seeing biggier and larger man boobs or someone eating something probably banned in third world countries won't?

I don't follow.
 
RPD said:
Ok so with that logic, having my child see a naked butt, or boob will somehow lend itself to behavior I don't want (unsure of what this is)
Click to expand...

teen sex/pregnancy

RPD said:
but seeing biggier and larger man boobs or someone eating something probably banned in third world countries won't?
Click to expand...


kids eating something banned in third world countries isn't a concern for most parents
 
People still watch TV?... I havent watched TV in years, since about that thing happened... What was it called... Ah, the internet!

Parents worried about kids watching boobs on TV make me lol, I wonder what they would think if they knew what their kids are seeing online
 
If nakedness on tv = teen pregnancy, then I guess all that violence on tv explains teens going on shooting sprees. It wasn't Marilyn Manson afterall! Couldn't possibly have ANYTHING to do with bad parenting.
 
ShadowOfMyself said:
People still watch TV?... I havent watched TV in years, since about that thing happened... What was it called... Ah, the internet!

Parents worried about kids watching boobs on TV make me lol, I wonder what they would think if they knew what their kids are seeing online
Click to expand...

I havent watched TV since I joined the Navy. When I got out there was Netflix and stuff.
 
ImpulsE69 said:
If nakedness on tv = teen pregnancy, then I guess all that violence on tv explains teens going on shooting sprees. It wasn't Marilyn Manson afterall! Couldn't possibly have ANYTHING to do with bad parenting.
Click to expand...

http://www.reddit.com/r/science/comments/onjp1/quebecs_ban_on_fastfood_ads_reduced_consumption/

clearly what kids see on TV has zero impact on behavior

(this also explains why TV advertisers pay so much)

your mistake is comparing activities that have a very low probability (going on a shooting spree) with activities that have a much higher probability (teen pregnancy).

Let's say violent TV makes you 13% more likely to go on a shooting spree. The initial odds were so low, that 13% (or even 50%) higher isn't going to worry most parents.

Let's say sexy TV makes you 13% more likely to be involved in a teen pregnancy. That is going to be of much greater concern to most parents because it is far more likely to actually impact their kids.
 
Last edited:
alien42 said:
that is a minority and you know that the church as a whole shuns sexuality.
Click to expand...

They do not shun sexuality, they profit from hiding it. Actually, they tend to covertly engage in it, I see the scandals time and again in the news and tabloids.
 
tynopik said:
http://www.reddit.com/r/science/comments/onjp1/quebecs_ban_on_fastfood_ads_reduced_consumption/

clearly what kids see on TV has zero impact on behavior

(this also explains why TV advertisers pay so much)

your mistake is comparing activities that have a very low probability (going on a shooting spree) with activities that have a much higher probability (teen pregnancy).

Let's say violent TV makes you 13% more likely to go on a shooting spree. The initial odds were so low, that 13% (or even 50%) higher isn't going to worry most parents.

Let's say sexy TV makes you 13% more likely to be involved in a teen pregnancy. That is going to be of much greater concern to most parents because it is far more likely to actually impact their kids.
Click to expand...

No, your mistake is trying to equate a behaviour that is going to happen anyway to a behaviour learned from watching TV. Teenagers are going through puberty, nature is telling them that, not TV.
 
xj0hnx said:
No, your mistake is trying to equate a behaviour that is going to happen anyway to a behaviour learned from watching TV. Teenagers are going through puberty, nature is telling them that, not TV.
Click to expand...

never mind the fact that if tv had influence, people wouldn't be fat as hell.
 
NFS4 said:
Yeah, NYPD Blue was famous in the early years for ass and sideboob. I remember people making a big stink about Dennis Franz showing his ass on the show.

The clip that Jon Stewart showed with Charlotte Ross was from an episode late in its run.
Click to expand...

I remembered one usual teaser NYPD blue ad for (which season I dunno) which kept playing showed Franz bursting in on his son's gf cheating or working as a prostitute. He then tells her to put on her panties.
 
xj0hnx said:
No, your mistake is trying to equate a behaviour that is going to happen anyway to a behaviour learned from watching TV. Teenagers are going through puberty, nature is telling them that, not TV.
Click to expand...
I'm starting to think this might not be true in all cases since so many people disagree with it.

Example: I never really see men as attractive, I think most women are attractive, and I think about sex all the time. I assumed everyone else was like that. That's how humans think about things - we think everyone else is like us. I think about women and sex, so I expect everyone else to think about sex. Then out of nowhere come people who project the exact opposite of that. They say things like "just don't have sex" or they word things like "he chose to be gay." Statements like that always seemed retarded to me. What do you mean don't have sex? My brain is telling me I should have sex. Is your brain telling you that you should not have sex unless the goal is to get someone pregnant? That's the only reason someone would make a statement like that. That must be how they see the situation (sex is not fun), so they expect others to see it like that as well. The same weird projection applies when talking about sexual preference. Some people say things like "he chose to be gay" and they say it with a completely straight face. This statement doesn't make sense to me. I didn't choose to be straight; I just am. I never really thought it was a choice to bat for the other team, but these people say that it is a choice. Does that mean the people making statements about choice are actually closet homosexuals and they choose to ignore homosexual desires? :hmm:

tldr version:
The people saying teens learn sex from TV have absolutely no sex drive - they actually did learn it from TV and they think everyone else had this same experience.
The people saying homosexuality is a choice are closet homosexuals - they see it as a choice because they experienced it as a choice; they have homosexual urges that they choose not to act on.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top