Whats up with the Strict TV rules?

[j250x]

im from the uk. and with the anniversary of janet jacksons "warderobe malfunction" at the superbowl, im thinking, why is tv in the us so regulated that a brief glimpse of naked breast could land the company a fine? whats with the no nudity on tv? in the uk, theyre allowed to show nudity (tho genrally only after 9'oclock, which is when most of the more adult programs are on). it also doesnt make sense when theyre allowed to show semi-pornographic music videos on mtv, but not a few swear words which loads of people hear daily anyway?

[SkyCube]

At 2/6/05 03:28 PM, Jeeves250x wrote: <stuff/>

IT probably has something to do with people in the US being generally more conservative than in th UK. People over there are a lot more religious and like to whine about petty incidents such as this. I agree that it's a little rediculous that MTV can show that sort of stuff, but then the kind of people who complain about things like that aren't the same kind of people who usually watch MTV are they?

[JerkClock]

There's no real answer other than, "Because of whiney, lobbying dipshits". Would be nice if th FCC were abolished, and if also anyone who ever worked for them could not be legally employed or housed.

[Maus]

It's the difference between public television, and cable/premium programming.

After 9 pm here, the language gets a bit coarser, but they try to keep it at a level where a 3 year old won't be traumatised by whateer happens to be on television.

The FCC did get a bit big for its britches, and went overboard in a few cases. But the chairman just resigned, so we'll see.

[drDAK]

At 2/6/05 03:28 PM, Jeeves250x wrote: im from the uk. and with the anniversary of janet jacksons "warderobe malfunction" at the superbowl, im thinking, why is tv in the us so regulated that a brief glimpse of naked breast could land the company a fine?

Comeon. Do you believe children should be exposed to her boob? Hello. Kids not even teens were watching that!

whats with the no nudity on tv?

The fact that horny guys like you only want it because for that sole reason. Morals

in the uk, theyre allowed to show nudity (tho genrally only after 9'oclock, which is when most of the more adult programs are on).

Well, we don't like copying small little islands from Europe.

it also doesnt make sense when theyre allowed to show semi-pornographic music videos on mtv, but not a few swear words which loads of people hear daily anyway?

Children do not hear it daily anyway. Your brain is full of rationalization but no reason.

[Maus]

Boobs never hurt anyone, dak. A titslap stings but for a second.

LOL @ paradox:

'Boobs are bad, don't look at them, young man.'
'Don't be gay.'

[AntiangelicAngel]

I'll say it... I'm not afraid to. Americans like to pretend they have values.

[JerkClock]

At 2/6/05 03:38 PM, Maus wrote:
The FCC did get a bit big for its britches, and went overboard in a few cases. But the chairman just resigned, so we'll see.

But the problem I have with that is that the constitution ripping bastard is still alive, no one has him on a rack or any torture instrument either.

[LazyDrunk]

At 2/6/05 03:43 PM, Maus wrote: LOL @ paradox:

'Boobs are bad, don't look at them, young man.'
'Don't be gay.'

I'm just wondering, about what percentage of that paradox was serious?

[j250x]

At 2/6/05 03:39 PM, drDAK wrote:

At 2/6/05 03:28 PM, Jeeves250x wrote:

Id like to point out a few things to drDAK

im from the uk. and with the anniversary of janet jacksons "warderobe malfunction" at the superbowl, im thinking, why is tv in the us so regulated that a brief glimpse of naked breast could land the company a fine?

Comeon. Do you believe children should be exposed to her boob? Hello. Kids not even teens were watching that!

Yeah, like its gonna traumatise them for the rest of their life. There was no explicit sexual context, so kids will just see a breast, thats it. far less damagign than the stuff they might see in adverts with no age restriction.

whats with the no nudity on tv?

The fact that horny guys like you only want it because for that sole reason. Morals.

Im merely challenging the extreme censorship in the US. The UK seems to think that people can cope. And your saying thats it immoral to be horny? Its not exactly something you can control. And im not a sex freak just cos im against censorship.

in the uk, theyre allowed to show nudity (tho genrally only after 9'oclock, which is when most of the more adult programs are on).

Well, we don't like copying small little islands from Europe.

Woah! Small little islands from europe? The population of the US is 295,410,905 according to http://www.census.gov/main/www/popclock.html

The population of the Uk is around 60,000,000 according to the same website. Not exactly small in comparison. And besides, you do copy us, U use our language, our music (the beatles), and a lot of you originated from here (ireland is part of the uk as well) in the first place.

it also doesnt make sense when theyre allowed to show semi-pornographic music videos on mtv, but not a few swear words which loads of people hear daily anyway?

Children do not hear it daily anyway. Your brain is full of rationalization but no reason.

I beg to differ. Im a teenager in a normal high school. EVERYONE, uses bad langauage. And teens i know in the US say its the same. Wake Up.

[Demosthenez]

At 2/6/05 03:58 PM, Jeeves250x wrote: I beg to differ. Im a teenager in a normal high school. EVERYONE, uses bad langauage. And teens i know in the US say its the same. Wake Up.

Fuckin A

And just a question. Do you UK guys like Dizzee Rascal or like American rap more? Or not much at all? Just wondering cause Dizzee seems to have gotten kinda famous.

[drDAK]

At 2/6/05 03:58 PM, Jeeves250x wrote: Yeah, like its gonna traumatise them for the rest of their life. There was no explicit sexual context, so kids will just see a breast, thats it. far less damagign than the stuff they might see in adverts with no age restriction.

YOU ARE BIG ON RATIONALIZATION.

Im merely challenging the extreme censorship in the US. The UK seems to think that people can cope. And your saying thats it immoral to be horny?

No. It's not good, but sure, it's their right as long as they leave everyone else who does not want to see "an innocent piece of female flesh" out of it.

Woah! Small little islands from europe? The population of the US is 295,410,905 according to... blah blah blah.

Okay, I said that the US does not like copying small little islands from Europe, meaning Britain, which is another name for the UK, where you live..............

I beg to differ. Im a teenager in a normal high school. EVERYONE, uses bad langauage. And teens i know in the US say its the same. Wake Up.

"Normal" meaning a public school. I will never send my kid to the public school system, God forbid I ever do.

Public School Education System=Terrible
Terrible=Something to Copy???

[Maus]

Oh right, like kids in private school don't swear, or talk about sex. Private schools are a British institution, btw. You'd be copying the brits by sending them to one.

You're deluding yourself if you think you can shield your kids from everything. Short of keeping them under lock and key. Which no parent can do, and remain sane.

[Hand-of-God]

At 2/6/05 04:27 PM, drDAK wrote:
"Normal" meaning a public school. I will never send my kid to the public school system, God forbid I ever do.

Public School Education System=Terrible
Terrible=Something to Copy???

I go to a private school. And in 7th grade we were swearing like fuckin hell.

Might want to uh...check on your kid there man.

By the way...the reason why TV is so strict is becasue of American society. I mean, little kids crying when they see a boob kinda thing. but of course, people shooting other people are okay. Its different for every society. For example, France is permissive of sexual content but restricts violence.

[j250x]

Whats wrong with being rational? PEOPLE CAN COPE WITH SEEING SOMETHING THAT IS COMPLETLY NATURAL

If janet was accidentally decapitated then I would say that would be bad for children to see, but all they saw was a little bit of flesh, something which anyone who breastfeeds their kids will see.

How can it be physcologically damaging for kids to see a very brief glimpse of breast?

[drDAK]

At 2/6/05 04:44 PM, Maus wrote: Oh right, like kids in private school don't swear, or talk about sex. Private schools are a British institution, btw. You'd be copying the brits by sending them to one.

I don't care. I just think our lives should not be copying Britain, who are so far back they even still have their monarchy in place. However, Private Schools are a community with higher levels of teachers and a lower level of students than the Public Schools. Resulting in a better overall person. Ofcourse you cannot stop kids from lusting, but you can stop them from many drugies and gangs.

You're deluding yourself if you think you can shield your kids from everything. Short of keeping them under lock and key. Which no parent can do, and remain sane.

So all of the sudden putting kids in a Private School is "hiding them"? SO when do they NEED to know about about sex? The age of seven? Are you kidding me? I don't want my future kids to know everything I knew at the age of seven.

Disciple =/= Hiding

[Maus]

Let me explain again:

You said we should not 'copy a small island.'

I said that putting them in private school was very British. I also said that kids in private school are just as bad (if not worse, in some respects) than public schoolers.

I said 'you can't shield your kids, short of keeping them under lock and key.' I meant YOUR lock and key. Foisting them off on a private school for the day isn't under lock and key.

[Luxury-Yacht]

I think us Americans make too big of a deal of what's on TV. In many parts of Europe, nudity is much less taboo in the media. Their children don't seem to be screwed up in the head because of it. We make such a big deal of nudity. If we were more used to that type of thing, the media wouldn't obsess over every freakin' nipple slip. We'd be used to it.

[drDAK]

At 2/6/05 04:57 PM, Maus wrote: I said 'you can't shield your kids, short of keeping them under lock and key.' I meant YOUR lock and key. Foisting them off on a private school for the day isn't under lock and key.

I never said I was going to lock my future kids under lock and key.
btw: I have no children yet... thankyou.

[j250x]

Far back. Yeah right. And the monarchy dont do anything by the way. they have no power. we are a democracy, and more of a democracy than america. At least our leaders friends cant stop people from voting cos they might not support them.

[Maus]

At 2/6/05 05:02 PM, drDAK wrote: I never said I was going to lock my future kids under lock and key.
btw: I have no children yet... thankyou.

Did I say that you would? No, I didn't.

[Hand-of-God]

At 2/6/05 05:00 PM, Rancorman wrote: I think us Americans make too big of a deal of what's on TV. In many parts of Europe, nudity is much less taboo in the media. Their children don't seem to be screwed up in the head because of it. We make such a big deal of nudity. If we were more used to that type of thing, the media wouldn't obsess over every freakin' nipple slip. We'd be used to it.

Exactly. Kinda like how kids have gotten used to seeing people getting shot on TV so if Janet Jackson faked getting shot, no one would care.

Mostly because of the Church and its percieved morality, sexuality is under wraps because its thought of as something wrong. Its been like that in the States for like...centuries.

[BigBlueBalls]

At 2/6/05 03:39 PM, drDAK wrote: Comeon. Do you believe children should be exposed to her boob? Hello. Kids not even teens were watching that!

Depends on whether that child is an infant, then I guess they'll be exposed to their mother's tits on a daily basis. XD

The fact that horny guys like you only want it because for that sole reason. Morals

No it's called being prudish and Americans are known for it. Here in Canada, they allow swearing and tits on our national news channel. It's not like all the time, but when someone does swear it's not bleeped or when they're showing a picture, like of Janet Jackson's boobie, they don't blur it out. Nobody really complains and the few dipshits that do, would probably get laughed out of court.

I'm glad I live in a country that allows us to watch the Sopranos during primetime on CTV, which is a basic cable channel. Also, we don't bleep the swear words on Trailer Park Boys as I've seen BBC America's version does. Another thing I hate is watching movies on channels like TBS or Fox because they always censor them so bad. When they play them on Canadian channels, we get the full meal deal, just as they should be.

[drDAK]

At 2/6/05 05:06 PM, Jeeves250x wrote: Far back. Yeah right. And the monarchy dont do anything by the way. they have no power. we are a democracy, and more of a democracy than america. At least our leaders friends cant stop people from voting cos they might not support them.

I know! You think I watch the news all day and never had any idea that you still kept a monarchy for no reason with a democracy anyway? Your monarchy is useless and get it out of the way, it's humiliating Britain.

The Church of England is also stupid, if it were America, a bunch of Liberal protestors would be outside declaring it segregating. I mean, our country complains about a slab of Ten Commandments in a court room!

[j250x]

At 2/6/05 05:19 PM, drDAK wrote:

At 2/6/05 05:06 PM, Jeeves250x wrote: Far back. Yeah right. And the monarchy dont do anything by the way. they have no power. we are a democracy, and more of a democracy than america. At least our leaders friends cant stop people from voting cos they might not support them.

I know! You think I watch the news all day and never had any idea that you still kept a monarchy for no reason with a democracy anyway? Your monarchy is useless and get it out of the way, it's humiliating Britain.

The Church of England is also stupid, if it were America, a bunch of Liberal protestors would be outside declaring it segregating. I mean, our country complains about a slab of Ten Commandments in a court room!

Hey, id love to get rid of the monarchy. But bein just an average joe in this country i dont get a lot of say in the matter.

I also agree that the church of england is stupid. But quite honestly neither of these things have anything to do with the original argument i brought up. There are morons in britain. Of course there are. But theyre not in charge of the censorship.
and thats a very good thing for people who arent so conservative that they cant take anything that even hints at values away from theirs.

[Demosthenez]

I dont think most people in America have a problem with it, I think its just the fact that our lobbyists rule our country. And there are some rich ass conservative lobbyists. So we get screwed with censored ass shit.

Not that I really care much. If I wanted to see naked people, I would go on the computer and get stuff for free. I mean, its not like I am missing much that I cant see Janet Jacksons nipple "oh my goodness" on National TV.

[Proteas]

At 2/6/05 03:51 PM, JerkClock wrote:

At 2/6/05 03:38 PM, Maus wrote: The FCC did get a bit big for its britches, and went overboard in a few cases. But the chairman just resigned, so we'll see.

But the problem I have with that is that the constitution ripping bastard is still alive, no one has him on a rack or any torture instrument either.

There's this wondefull little thing called the 8th amendment stopping you buddy. Look it up.

At 2/6/05 04:51 PM, Jeeves250x wrote: Whats wrong with being rational? PEOPLE CAN COPE WITH SEEING SOMETHING THAT IS COMPLETLY NATURAL

Yeah, there's nothing unnatural with seeing a black woman's breast during the middle of a football game's half time show, why else would I have tuned in but for that sole reason?

How can it be physcologically damaging for kids to see a very brief glimpse of breast?

Would you like to explain the concept of a nipple peircing to a 6 year old?

Didn't think so.

[j250x]

At 2/6/05 04:51 PM, Jeeves250x wrote: Whats wrong with being rational? PEOPLE CAN COPE WITH SEEING SOMETHING THAT IS COMPLETLY NATURAL

Yeah, there's nothing unnatural with seeing a black woman's breast during the middle of a football game's half time show, why else would I have tuned in but for that sole reason?

It was an accident. The point im making is that even if you didnt expect to see it, are u still having nightmares about it? Has it deeply affected you, or anyone? The natural thing im talking about is the breast itself, not the context.

How can it be physcologically damaging for kids to see a very brief glimpse of breast?

Would you like to explain the concept of a nipple peircing to a 6 year old?

Didn't think so.

"A nipple piercing is when someone chooses to have a piece of metal put through their nipple. Just like the ear, but on the nipple"

Simple. I would have no problem explaining that.

[Thagomizer]

I find it odd that the American public would go in an uproar over an exposed breast, and not even gasp at graphic murder scenes/dead bodies/grusome violence on TV shows.
I'd prefer some T&A over violence anyday.

[Reverend-Kyle]

I claim it's rooted in religion: the female body is wrong.

And what's this about high school students not swearing? My friends in high school said 'fuck' every couple of seconds. What's the big fucking deal, anyway?

What's this morality bullshit? What is morality? Who dictates what is moral? What makes a female breast so dirty and wrong? Aside from arousing me and being used to feed infants, what's the difference between a female and a male breast?

Can you step outside your current world view for a few minutes? :O