Are people finally getting the message - a sign of hope?

Submitted by katten on
Printer-friendly version

Thought you guys might be interested in this. It's about plans in the UK to reduce sexual imagery in advertising in public spaces (billboards etc.) to help cut the amount of sexual imagery children are exposed to. If the regulations come through it will be great for porn addicts too...

The focus on children seems

The focus on children seems short sighted. We do this here in the US too. It is easier to pass legislation to protect children, but perhaps better to work on the adults that the children are getting their cues from. Making ever bigger bubbles for children will make it harder for children to become adults. That is perhaps part of the emerging adulthood phenomenon.

I was just thinking that not

I was just thinking that not having pornographic images plastered across the countryside would be pretty much good for everyone. I know it is hardly a drop in the ocean given what is going on, but it would sure be a start.

I sure don't think kids need wrapped up in cotton wool, all the things most kids aren't allowed to do these days incase they get hurt is rediculous and they will find it hard to adjust to being adults, but porn is like drugs. In this country you aren't allowed to advertise smoking, you aren't allowed to portray smoking as cool in adverts either. This is like a similar idea for porn. It isn't banning it (banned substances are always cool), it's just making sure that it isn't in everyone's face all the time. That seems like a good idea.

I'm all for kids being allowed to fall off bikes, and out of trees and into rivers. Didn't do me any harm. Tell kids about sex from an early age - that's cool. But erotic images all around them from the day they are born? That's never going to be good for them.

It is good for all, but

It is good for all, but sometimes it seems politicians would rather ban things than talk about them. People are shockingly uncomfortable talking about sexuality. Maybe it would be better to allow the ads with a large print textual message that suggests a dialogue.

What they actually said was

What they actually said was that if the advertising folks didn't clean up their act that they would then ban the adverts. The advertising companies have 6 months or something to sort everything out before they are banned. An these are not ads about sex. Sex is not the issue. It's porn. They advertise anything from mobiles to pizza's with half naked women these days.

Very encouraging, katten

It also makes it easier for parents to take a hard line when talking about such subjects. Right now, if I were a parent, I'd feel like a nitwit trying to explain the problem with porn, given the adverts and TV shows (that is, I would if I didn't know how to explain the reward circuitry).

Katten, good article. It is

Katten, good article. It is really sad to see people now in their 20s that grew up on Internet porn. I can't imagine how a 12 year old would know what to do with unlimited free online porn. With the Internet being worldwide, I know it is hard to police it, but there has to be a better answer for stopping porn access to minors.

I also hope someday the knowledge that Maria and Gary are spreading catches on. 70s and 80s porn was much different than the fast food stuff of today. At least back then you had to rent a tape or buy one. You couldn't just sit down and watch a zillion nude women at a click.

A question for you on the advertising. I don't disagree at all that it goes over the edge, the old saying is "sex sells". But how would you draw the line on what is allowed and what isn't? I think the UK is similar to the US in allowing sexual content on TV and ads. But how would you handle the slippery slope of what may be perceived as censorship and/or control on free speech?

I'm also curious about Europe and nudity. I always thought that nudity wasn't as big a deal in Europe (and I always saw that as more healthy). In the US most parents don't discuss sex with their children and from day 1, girls turn into sex objects for boys. Every young boy wants to see their first breast. As I've grown, I've always wondered if more liberal policies on sex and nudity may lead to a healthier environment (especially for women).

Tasteful nudity

is beautiful, but it's not an antidote. Kids in Europe are getting hooked on Internet porn, too. Italian doctors are already noticing the link between heavy porn use and "sexual anorexia." In any case, 'nearly nude' is everywhere now, and certainly not leading to a healthier environment.

Guess the genii is out of the bottle.

Maybe still life nudity

Maybe still life nudity doesn't matter. We've talked here about the vast differences between magazine and internet porn. TV ads might be a bigger problem for the brain. The still life ads probably do negatively impact self-esteem of both sexes.

Actually we were talking

Actually we were talking about still life bill-boards. We have nationalised television chanels here which don't have adverts on them. Media is more regulated here. It wouldn't be too hard to make sure that kids didn't see inapropriate stuff on the TV I should think. And I think still life does matter. I agree with Marnia that nudity can be beautiful - but the problem with so many adverts is not nudity, it's sexualising.

Sexualizing is much more

Sexualizing is much more difficult to regulate as it is subjective. You could argue that something as basic as a shampoo or clothing commercial is sexualizing one sex or the other. Even drug commercials (which you don't have in the UK) are sexualizing or sell happiness, human connection, etc. in a commoditized fashion. Marketers are not going to just stop marketing. Even with regulation, they will find other ways to get the message across. Sometimes brands targeting women buyers are the worst offenders. Perhaps women should think more about what brands they patronize. That is the most adaptive form of regulation.


Last night we watched the movie "Love and Other Drugs"~~there is a part where the main character's brother has been kicked out of the house and he arrives at his brother's house saying, "She kicked me out because she said I was addicted to internet porn!" and the brother says, "Well, are you?" and the ousted brother replies, "Isn't everyone??"


(and most of the movie's plot is about the main character's climbing career with Pfizer when the drug Viagra first comes out)