Maggie and Jigs were popular characters as I recall.
Posted on 08/17/2012 10:25:19 AM PDT by Kaslin
Culture Challenge of the Week: Movies "Selling" Sex to Children
Can you name the last five movies your teenage son or daughter has watched with friends? How strong was the sexual content in those movies?
And does it really matter?
New research suggests that it does. The study, conducted by Dr. Ross O'Hara and soon to be published in the journal Psychological Science, found that promiscuity on-screen promotes promiscuity in real life. "Adolescents who are exposed to more sexual content in movies start having sex at younger ages, have more sexual partners," and engage in riskier sexual activities says Dr. O'Hara.
While at Dartmouth University, Dr. O'Hara (now a researcher at the University of Missouri) and his team analyzed the movie-watching patterns of about 1,200 young teens, ages 12-14. Researchers next analyzed the teens' sexual behavior six years later, considering the age at which they became sexually active, their number of partners, and the riskiness of their sexual activity, including whether or not they used contraceptives.
The result: bad news. Young teens who viewed movies with sexual content were profoundly influenced by what they watched. They initiated sexual behavior earlier than their peers who viewed less sexual content, and tended to imitate the on-screen sexual behaviors they saw-which included casual sex, multiple partners, and high-risk behaviors.
It's not surprising, really. Teens crave information about sex--and too often turn to the media for information. Moreover, adolescent hormones operate in overdrive and teens are naturally more sensitive to sexual stimulation. Less likely to delay gratification, teens are more likely to be impulsive and think themselves impervious to harm. The combination, researchers say, means that "sensation seeking, or the tendency to seek more novel and intense sexual stimulation" increases in teens who "watched more movies with sexually explicit content."
So what should parents do?
How to save your Family: Select Movies with Your Children
Dr. O'Hara sums it up well, saying, "This study, and its confluence with other work, strongly suggests that parents need to restrict their children from seeing sexual content in movies at young ages."
Agreed. But unfortunately, the solution is not as simple as checking a movie's rating. In fact, G-rated movies are part of the problem. The O'Hara study also analyzed the sexual content in 700 films, all top-grossing films from 1998-2004. Defining "sexual content" as anything from heavy kissing to actual sex scenes, researchers found sexual content in more than a third of the G-rated movies, more than half of PG-rated films, and four out of every five R-rated movies.
Short of prohibiting movies all together-an unwise and unworkable solution--there are some things a parent can do. First, use websites that provide specific information about movie content, rather than a reviewer's judgment about an appropriate viewing age.
Websites like Pluggedin.com and Movieguide provide not only specifics about movie content but also analysis from a Christian perspective. (PluggedIn offers reviews of music and gaming products as well.) Two straightforward secular sources are Screenit and Kids-in-mind-both provide valuable descriptions of specific movie content, including sexuality, violence, and language. One caution-a few websites, such as CommonSense Media, offer age-ratings to help guide parents. But organizations which lean left, as CommonSense Media does, or are tied in tightly with entertainment industry folks, can't be relied on by parents who want to raise children with traditional values. The Parent's Television Council at www.ParentsTV.org is an excellent resource for information on the content of popular TV shows and offers great movie reviews.
Second, talk with your children about sex. While sex won't be a casual dinnertime conversation topic, you need to create private time with your teens to explore their feelings and questions about sex. If we're silent, our teens will learn about sex from friends and the movies-a route that's sure to normalize sexual risk-taking.
Third, stay in the loop. Talk with other parents and get to know your teen's friends. Realize that at some point your child probably will see something too sexually explicit, whether at a friend's house or on a computer. Keep the conversations going and remind your teens that Hollywood is a world without consequences.
Your post #50...I don’t even know who Murphy Brown is...guess it’s not important. I only know this, that God doesn’t care what man’s norm is, only His standard, and it will never change.
Some? It had buck naked sex scenes. It did however have some great dialog and was well acted. If you had recorded them and edited out the sexual stuff it would have left a little over half the show intact.
Maggie and Jigs were popular characters as I recall.
Hawaii 5-0 likes to show plenty of surfer scenes, Person of Interest has been batting 1000 with me even as the story line gets a little whacky. Blue Bloods has been very good even though it has the outspoken bleeding heart daughter. I was very surprised when the Grand daughter seemed to make a hard right turn.
I was pleasantly surprised when a couple shows I felt were to edgy to make it, but they have made hard right turns as well. Suits, and Franklin & Bash, which is now no more offensive than NCIS which is still the most popular show on TV.
Sexual cr@p began big time with "Love Boat" been going down hill big time since then.
Same here.
I can watch “NCIS” all night long. Bridget Moynihan is HOT for her age on “ Blue Bloods,” but her daughter does need some reining in.
I remember when I was still a kid and they came out with the TV ratings (Y7, G, PG, etc). My mom kept saying how great it was because blah blah it will keep kids from seeing bad stuff. I was like, “Mom, are you kidding? Right now everything on tv is limited to somewhere around PGish at the worst. Once they get these ratings in they’ll be able to put much worse stuff on tv and justify it by saying that it’s got a rating on it, so if you don’t want to watch then don’t.” My mom totally didn’t think that it would happen like that.
Fast forward and now I’ve got my own very young kids. We don’t watch anything except limited cartoons and limited movies with the kids around. There’s just nothing that I can let them watch. We have a couple of cable shows each year that we watch after the kids go to sleep, and those don’t run at the same time. Often we just don’t watch anything. My parents watched only very tame stuff when I was young, but I still remember a lot of inappropriate content that I don’t want my kids seeing.
There ARE a lot of great educational cartoons out there now, that didn’t exist before. It’s just too bad there’s nothing that all of us could watch together.
Don't be silly. The show was not 1/2 (play acting) sexual stuff. Not even close. Maybe 5% or so.
Actually I thought the occasional graphic violent scenes and the occasional make believe sex scenes made it more realistic for a historical drama. But it wouldn't have helped if the rest of the show was crappy.
I tried to want a Richard Burton movie playing the King and it bored me to death. But the Tudor kept moving,
I don't want to shock you but that REAL King in real life had 6 wives and way many lovers in between and he had two wives and multiple foes executed.
Ever hear of the Tower of London ? That wasn't Sunday school or confession,
I enjoyed that show that portrayed his life as more realistically the way it was rather than some watered down version made to look like Little House on the Prairie or Highway to Heaven. GAG.
BBC America plays the series without the nudity or occasional violent scenes but the frequent commercials are very annoying. I liked it's run on ShowTime and saved some of them on my computer off the internet.
You're kidding, really?
Please don't tell me your history books were sanitized to leave that stuff out? Did they say “Family Friendly History for all ages “ on the covers? If so you might want to check the references to see if they are real.
Yes, I know this was a historical drama.
OK, you two shouldn’t get me going, now we are in for some fun :)
I can just imagine the Tudors version created by the “Family Friendly World that Never existed” Channel
Michael Landon Plays the King Henry VIII and with such bad luck like Job his wives die of cancer, heart attack, the flu and falling off a horse. Each death the King is weeping (as is the audience) as Landon (the King Tudor) cries “God why didn’t you take me instead??” And God answers his prayers each time with another faithful wife,
But the bright side is how great a dad the King was with his three children and the joy and tears and laughter....Oh Christmas and Church and dad humbleness...
GAG LOL
A biography can be depicted without showing people having sex, even though we know he did so. A biography can be depicted without showing the subject using the toilet, even though we know he or she must have done so several times a day. Showing sex scenes is a choice to titillate the audience, not to be “historically accurate.”
A lot of people like to watch handsome actors simulating sex, so there’s no mystery, from the producers’ point of view, about why that’s chosen over showing them pooping or delousing or having an enema.
How old are you?, Six?
SickofLibs quotes from the liberal playbook on this issue. Wow!
Just because you lived it up like every other liberal in the 60's doesn’t mean that morality was dead everywhere.
Everyone knew what the beds in the bedroom, on I Love Lucy were for, we did not need a visual demonstration of how they made Little Ricky.
I am pretty sure there were no BJ's handed out in any classroom I ever attended, but since Bill Clinton, it happens on a regular basis. Truth is good, unbridled sex orgies not so good.
HA-HA, NOW you think that Lucy was a real person that lived ??? (As King Henry VIII was in the Tutors??) Man, your Family Friendly History book you use must be a doozy to teach you that.
I don't want to shatter your imaginary world, but Newbreak: but both Lucy AND Ricky were fictional SITCOM characters. Even little kids know that. But that must be that porn that infested their minds to know that right???
RE : “Why don't you post some links to some of the porn sites you visit regularly. Maybe we can get an idea of how sick of Libs you really are.
.....
I am pretty sure there were no BJ’s handed out in any classroom I ever attended, “
Now you think you saw BJs on the Tudors? You been skipping those meds? You think that a historical drama that had <5% nudity to get across a point is of any interest to a porn site ?
I found the Tudors here at this *porn* site LOL
Project Free TV the Tutors
Non-graphic and short 'sex/nudity' scenes but yes made to be colorful as with the rest of the show.
As was the brief torture and execution scenes. They happened in real life and were added to make it realistic. I like Band of Brothers for similar reasons.
If that is not to your taste then watch what is.
A few Sundays ago I saw a movie Child Star The Shirley Temple Story in Inspiration Network. I never could sit through 5 minutes of a corny Temple movie but I really enjoyed seeing the dramatic biography : a story of a famous child star who wasn't screwed up. Nice to see a happy ending.
But I can tell you that I share your opinion of yourself.
Porn is Porn and if you are trying to tell me that people need to be shown in bed humping like dogs in heat to make a point, then you are sick. John Wayne managed, so can they.
Those brief sex clips are not porn. I prefer movies and shows to be realistic..showing people with their defects and flaws..what is happening out in real life.
Hollywood is not cramming this down our throats..this is what people want.
You mentioned the glorious old days (I Love Lucy days). What about all those old 1950's westerns? The ones where the cowboy wore perfectly pressed pants, plaid shirt and perfectly placed bandana around his neck and the women wore bright yellow frilly dresses, full makeup and salon quality hair. What a joke. The real old west was 180 degrees opposite. Women wore what amounted to not much more than sack clothes for dresses and the men wore old rags themselves. makeup and salon hair? LMAO.
I would much rather watch a true to life western like "Unforgiven" or the remake of "True Grit" versus the singing cowboy of Roy Rogers that was not even close to being realistic.
I believe that was my original point - that I preferred watching nothing at all, at the particular time - along with pointing out that the family were "Tudors" rather than "Tutors."
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.