It must be noticed that any instances of sex and violence in movies is not really for any educational value. So when, in a move, a couple is portrayed as not using safer sex techniques, it's not really the purpose or the responsibility of the movie to do so. That's what parents are for. It is up to parents to first teach their kids the difference between movies and reality (if they haven't already figured out. Let's be honest, most kids can grasp such basic concepts), the responsibilities and the morals of sex, and then trust them to be able to figure out for themselves if what a movie portrays is or isn't okay.

I've always been annoyed at the argument of "Oh my gawd we can't show that! think of the impressionable young children with no minds of their own who will thoughtlessly copy everything they see!!" I think it's bullshit. Kids are shaped and effected by the REAL people around them, first and foremost. If some kid is microwaving a cat because he saw it on youtube, i consider that the failing of a parent, rather then proof we need to censer the internet.

And as for sex in movies or TV... well, as Brian Kinney from Queer as Folk loves to say, "Sex Sells." It's the truth, and as long as human beings are facinated and interested in sex, it will continue to be the truth.

Either in a movie or a show is fine by me. TV and movies are for entertainment. While there are some that delve deeper than that, on the surface, movies are for a fun and good time.

I feel that our society is being far too puritanical in how they see major media but, I blame those in charge of this nation. They show the masses happy dancing fluffies to keep them from freaking out so then the minute they see a woman's bare midriff, everyone has their panties in a bunch.

very liberal views on sex which often causes clashes with other people (i've been called a slut before, tho i've only slept with 2 guys i care very much about)

I think that sex would be a lot less potentially traumatizing if our society relaxed about it a bit. I mean, yes, STDs and unwanted pregnancy are big issues, but that is, in my opinion, more of a failing in education than the effects of the evils of sex.

If people would just stress about it less, it would be SO much less potentialy damaging.

Originally Posted by YumikoYoshihana

It must be noticed that any instances of sex and violence in movies is not really for any educational value. So when, in a movie, a couple is portrayed as not using safer sex techniques, it's not really the purpose or the responsibility of the movie to do so.

Now that is a killer point I missed! :O I agree so much with this, it's like what Oscar Wilde said in his preface to Dorian Gray;

There is no such thing as a moral or an immoral book. Books are well written, or badly written. That is all.
The nineteenth century dislike of romanticism is the rage of Caliban not seeing his own face in a glass.
The moral life of man forms part of the subject-matter of the artist, but the morality of art consists in the perfect use of an imperfect medium.
No artist desires to prove anything. Even things that are true can be proved.
No artist has ethical sympathies. An ethical sympathy in an artist is an unpardonable mannerism of style.

I don't think sex or violence in films are really bad. My favorite movies often have violence or sex, and it's not a "I am going to kill you all, blood guts gore, your brain on the wall" it's a kind that without it, the movie would not be complete. For instance, in Children of Men, how was the director supposed to get across a torn, chaotic world without using violence? And in Push, how were the director and writers supposed to get across the hopelessness of the character without showing some of that sexual abuse? And Pan's Labyrinth, another example, a wonderful movie where several people are killed or injured brutally, had violence as well, and yet it's not a bad movie. It's a fairy tale for adults, and told after the Spanish civil war; of course violence is necessary, without it, the movie would not have been truthful. Violence in most movies is essential and sex, is not such a big deal when done with a decent director. Because most movies are made to reflect the world we live in, where violence and sex are key components to our world, shouldn't they be represented? Of course, I'm not talking about trashy action films, or mindless gory horror films or sexual comedies. I'm talking about those movies we all love, that, don't deny it, have sex or violence in them at one time.

I'd like to give some kudo's to Modern Muse, for expressing ideas i had yet found difficult to articulate.

Although i would like to add that i do so love mindless action films. Jason Statham anyone?

XD thank you?

I don't know who he is. (Don't be angry with me!) What movies has he been in?

Originally Posted by YumikoYoshihana

It must be noticed that any instances of sex and violence in movies is not really for any educational value. So when, in a move, a couple is portrayed as not using safer sex techniques, it's not really the purpose or the responsibility of the movie to do so. That's what parents are for. It is up to parents to first teach their kids the difference between movies and reality (if they haven't already figured out. Let's be honest, most kids can grasp such basic concepts), the responsibilities and the morals of sex, and then trust them to be able to figure out for themselves if what a movie portrays is or isn't okay.

I've always been annoyed at the argument of "Oh my gawd we can't show that! think of the impressionable young children with no minds of their own who will thoughtlessly copy everything they see!!" I think it's bullshit. Kids are shaped and effected by the REAL people around them, first and foremost. If some kid is microwaving a cat because he saw it on youtube, i consider that the failing of a parent, rather then proof we need to censer the internet.

And as for sex in movies or TV... well, as Brian Kinney from Queer as Folk loves to say, "Sex Sells." It's the truth, and as long as human beings are facinated and interested in sex, it will continue to be the truth.

Very true when saying it's not for educational value. My responses are only geared towards the question: What is worse.......? and my own opinion on it and why.

That said, I don't agree with your opinion as to the child microwaving a cat and it being the parents' fault. As I already stated, I think some kids are just bad, evil, pick your word. (I believe) that a child that is going to kill poor Fluffy or Spot has something wrong with them to begin with, OR POSSIBLY has seen mommy or daddy do the same and has been taught it's alright by them because THEY (mommy or daddy) are a sicko. Except in the case of mom or dad being a sicko, I don't think much a parent does in trying to teach little "demon spawn" (being the "evil" type child I speak of) wrong from right is going to make much difference. That's just my personal opinion though. There are far too many children out there that have most assuredly been taught right from wrong, and still go terribly wrong themselves when they grow up, as well as those who have seen nothing but the horrors in life but turn out just fine. Parents get blamed far too often for the choices their kids make as teens and adults. This does NOT go for the ones that I have referred to as "bad", this is for "normal" children. Again, the ones who are going to do some sick, violent acts are ones I think have something mentally wrong with them to begin with.

I feel a need to state that while I don't think the parents are to blame all the time, that it is also NOT a call to censor anything.

And for some reason, I feel like I've not made myself understood. Oh well :), I tried!

Originally Posted by Infinitys Echo

Very true when saying it's not for educational value. My responses are only geared towards the question: What is worse.......? and my own opinion on it and why.

That said, I don't agree with your opinion as to the child microwaving a cat and it being the parents' fault. As I already stated, I think some kids are just bad, evil, pick your word. (I believe) that a child that is going to kill poor Fluffy or Spot has something wrong with them to begin with, OR POSSIBLY has seen mommy or daddy do the same and has been taught it's alright by them because THEY (mommy or daddy) are a sicko. Except in the case of mom or dad being a sicko, I don't think much a parent does in trying to teach little "demon spawn" (being the "evil" type child I speak of) wrong from right is going to make much difference. That's just my personal opinion though. There are far too many children out there that have most assuredly been taught right from wrong, and still go terribly wrong themselves when they grow up, as well as those who have seen nothing but the horrors in life but turn out just fine. Parents get blamed far too often for the choices their kids make as teens and adults. This does NOT go for the ones that I have referred to as "bad", this is for "normal" children. Again, the ones who are going to do some sick, violent acts are ones I think have something mentally wrong with them to begin with.

I feel a need to state that while I don't think the parents are to blame all the time, that it is also NOT a call to censor anything.

And for some reason, I feel like I've not made myself understood. Oh well :), I tried!

*Laughs* Indeed. There are those demon-spawn children.

I think, however, that it is freakishly rare that one would come across a child that was a "born" demon-spawn child. A.K.A. had no influences whatsoever that turned it into said "demon-spawn" child. A child's mind is the most malleable thing in existence. It's a blank slate waiting to be written upon, so to speak, and children are usually -turned- into what you mention.

I understand what you are saying about how some children are just naturally "evil" or "cruel," however I must ask: what would cause a child to be born this way, in your opinion? Some chemical imbalance in the brain...what?

*Laughs* Indeed. There are those demon-spawn children.

I think, however, that it is freakishly rare that one would come across a child that was a "born" demon-spawn child. A.K.A. had no influences whatsoever that turned it into said "demon-spawn" child. A child's mind is the most malleable thing in existence. It's a blank slate waiting to be written upon, so to speak, and children are usually -turned- into what you mention.

I understand what you are saying about how some children are just naturally "evil" or "cruel," however I must ask: what would cause a child to be born this way, in your opinion? Some chemical imbalance in the brain...what?

I know it may make me sound more childish, but I often times use very common, everyday words, like "demon spawn" to avoid sounding too "technical" or....can't think of the right word....Just felt the need to say that :).

Now, as to your question, I'm thinking of someone like a sociopath. Mental disorders. I think most times, disorders along the lines I'm thinking, you are born with. Now maybe in a certain environment, they may not develop into a hideous person, but I think, more often than not, they do. So chemical imbalance? Maybe. If that's what's found to cause these disorders. In the make-up of the brain, for sure. I will concede that often times the type I'm speaking of have been abused themselves as children. However, there are others who aren't. That's where you get into the debate of nurture versus nature, environment versus genetics. This would be for the violence part of this discussion. While rape IS violent, I put it in a different category. And it can be noted that it's always said to be about power and not sex, which would not put it in a "sexual" category ( I don't completely agree with that in all cases though).

Freakishly rare? I'm not so sure about that, when you take a look at all the serial killers popping up. While there seems to be more of them now than in past history, how are we to truly know how many there have been in the past? How are we to know that some of those "leaders", kings, emperors, etc. of the past who killed mercilessly weren't also serial killers, jut that they were in a position to easily carry out their sick deeds with the added excuse of merely conquering new lands and peoples?

I do not believe in labeling children "evil." That is the same thought process that created juvenile detentions, which does nothing to impressionable children but scar them and mold them into criminals. It is the same thought process that charges 14 year olds as adults. Children are to impressionable, their personalities to elastic, to ever justify giving them such a label

A child must prove he is evil, and by the time he does that, he is an adult.

And sociopath is not equated with "evil" or "menace of society"

What does all of that have to do with movies? If a kid sees a movie and says, "Hey it wouldn't be a big deal if I did that," and tries it out, then it is not the fault of the movie. The kid should have a good sense of good and bad. I mean, I watched violent films at a young age and I didn't torture cats or anything. It's the kid and the parent(s) who affect this. The parents can monitor what the kid watches, the kid could choose not to see it, the kid could realize, "Hey, that's bad," and not do it. This is not the fault of the movie.

Originally Posted by Infinitys Echo

I know it may make me sound more childish, but I often times use very common, everyday words, like "demon spawn" to avoid sounding too "technical" or....can't think of the right word....Just felt the need to say that :).

Now, as to your question, I'm thinking of someone like a sociopath. Mental disorders. I think most times, disorders along the lines I'm thinking, you are born with. Now maybe in a certain environment, they may not develop into a hideous person, but I think, more often than not, they do. So chemical imbalance? Maybe. If that's what's found to cause these disorders. In the make-up of the brain, for sure. I will concede that often times the type I'm speaking of have been abused themselves as children. However, there are others who aren't. That's where you get into the debate of nurture versus nature, environment versus genetics. This would be for the violence part of this discussion. While rape IS violent, I put it in a different category. And it can be noted that it's always said to be about power and not sex, which would not put it in a "sexual" category ( I don't completely agree with that in all cases though).

Freakishly rare? I'm not so sure about that, when you take a look at all the serial killers popping up. While there seems to be more of them now than in past history, how are we to truly know how many there have been in the past? How are we to know that some of those "leaders", kings, emperors, etc. of the past who killed mercilessly weren't also serial killers, jut that they were in a position to easily carry out their sick deeds with the added excuse of merely conquering new lands and peoples?

I wasn't making fun of you for using "demon-spawn," lol. I use it myself, at times. :)

I'm still going to have to argue that 99.9% of the time the child is made into the "evil" person because of what he/she has been exposed to as a child. Be them born with a chemical imbalance in the brain or no, there still must normally be some instigator that causes the child to develop into an "evil" person.

The serial killers popping up are evil, yes. However, are they born with the fate of being a serial killer because of their genetics/ nature? Probably not.

This brings us back to the movie argument.

As I stated a long time ago in one of my posts in this thread; violence is worse in movies. It teaches children that violence is okay--that killing, and that being able to beat the living tar out of anyone, and that being a bad-ass... are all things that are cool and things that are to be aspired to. These teachings are what have created the serial killers of today.

I think that it is mostly nurture, not nature, that creates such people. Of course there are those cases where some strange defect in the child caused them to be heartless killers. And those cases are probably more prevalent in serial killers, but I still think that nurture is more likely the cause.

-----------------

If we're talking about the old kings and emperors who had the ability to kill whomever they wished without repercussions... I don't even know that many of those were cases of nature over nurture.

The worst king I can think about is Ivan the Terrible. He disemboweled birds and generally tortured animals as a child, BUT he was also molested as a child and tortured by the boyars of Russia that were always attempting to steal the throne from him. His parents both died by the time he was eight. One from assassination and the other from blood poisoning. He was left to starve in a dungeon at the age of three because his uncle wanted the throne... Obviously this was a case of nurture, not nature.

I'd give a few more examples of crazy rulers, but I fear that I'm becoming long winded.

Overall, I think it's nurture, not nature.

--------------------------

@ModernMuse: Children are clueless. If a child isn't taught something, they simply won't know what to do. There are no instincts left in a human child beyond eating, sleeping, and the want of love.

If a child sees a movie where a cat is being tortured (to use your example) and his parents never taught him that torturing a cat is bad, he's got a good chance of doing it. That child has absolutely no inborn sense of the fact that torturing cats is wrong, just that somebody did it and that he wants to repeat it.

The fact that you didn't torture things as a child (even though you watched violent movies) is probably because your parents taught you that it was wrong, or someone/something did.

I'm NOT saying that the kid doesn't have the choice to turn off the movie, though. I am saying that if the child doesn't, the movie could cause the child to become a violent person if the child is NEVER taught that what he sees therein is wrong.

Yeah, I agree. But still, what child isn't taught that? By the age of four or five most kids have a good sense of right and wrong. And probably would have known that's not right. I mean, yeah, there are those kids that slip through the cracks... but that's the parents' fault. The parents, if the kid is watching this movie, should have said, "Hey that's not okay." So I really think it's the nurturing part that has the most effect on kids.

Because a kid raised well, even at a young age, even with an impressionable mind wouldn't have repeated what they saw.

Originally Posted by Modern Muse

Yeah, I agree. But still, what child isn't taught that? By the age of four or five most kids have a good sense of right and wrong. And probably would have known that's not right. I mean, yeah, there are those kids that slip through the cracks... but that's the parents' fault. The parents, if the kid is watching this movie, should have said, "Hey that's not okay." So I really think it's the nurturing part that has the most effect on kids.

Because a kid raised well, even at a young age, even with an impressionable mind wouldn't have repeated what they saw.

Most definitely, it's the nurturing. Even if the kid does the violent act without knowing that it's violent, it's still probably due to nurturing. A.K.A. the child has received none. Thus, it's (in part) the parent's fault.

Still...If those people who create movies simply refused to portray violence, there wouldn't be any reason to blame them. BUT, when is that going to happen? Lol.

As long as there is a market for violent movies there will be violent movies. I am not ashamed to say I'm a part of that violence.

And I don't even mean blood gore death movies. I don't like them, they squick me to pieces. I mean action movies like the transporter and taken, and the bourne series and silly mindless things with hot guys going all alpha male and punching people's lights out in a creative and exciting fashion.

All humans have some violent tendencies, and i think it is when we do not allow ourselves to enjoy a good videogame or movie with fantasy violence and suppress those tendencies is when we have a problem

Personally i think first person shooters have prevented more crazy gunmen than caused.

Originally Posted by YumikoYoshihana

As long as there is a market for violent movies there will be violent movies. I am not ashamed to say I'm a part of that violence.

And I don't even mean blood gore death movies. I don't like them, they squick me to pieces. I mean action movies like the transporter and taken, and the bourne series and silly mindless things with hot guys going all alpha male and punching people's lights out in a creative and exciting fashion.

Those are stupid. And, yes, most people like a good violent movie every now and then. I love the Pirates of the Caribbean movies (violence present) and I'm a fan of the Prince of Persia video games (all you do is kill).

I also hate mindless killing movies. I do like, however, MMORPGs that do nothing but kill. I don't know what it is about them...

I do think, as well, that movies that bring attention to violence being a bad thing, whilst portraying violence, are okay. To some extent...

Originally Posted by YumikoYoshihana

All humans have some violent tendencies, and i think it is when we do not allow ourselves to enjoy a good videogame or movie with fantasy violence and suppress those tendencies is when we have a problem

Agreed, but I'm not so sure that violence is an inborn trait.

Originally Posted by YumikoYoshihana

Personally i think first person shooters have prevented more crazy gunmen than caused.

It's quite possible, but there is that percent that has been caused by them.

Wow-some good discussion going on. I'll only quote and reply to these two as my post would turn into a book instead of just a wall of text:)

Originally Posted by YumikoYoshihana

I do not believe in labeling children "evil." That is the same thought process that created juvenile detentions, which does nothing to impressionable children but scar them and mold them into criminals. It is the same thought process that charges 14 year olds as adults. Children are to impressionable, their personalities to elastic, to ever justify giving them such a label

A child must prove he is evil, and by the time he does that, he is an adult.

And sociopath is not equated with "evil" or "menace of society"

Not trying to be mean or a smart ass, but all I can say is you must not have seen some of the kids I've seen. I've seen more than a few who are what they are through their own devices. You can only blame your parents for so much, but at some point you MUST begin to take responsibility for your own actions. I, personally, have overcome many bad things in my youth. Because of this, I'm a pretty no-nonsense type of person towards those who like to blame everything on someone else. I've seen my OWN children do things that they most certainly never learned from me, have even been taught the exact opposite. No excuse. Period. Oh, and yes, little darlings can and DO lie.

YES, I can certainly see a 14 y/o being tried as an adult in some cases. One case in particular comes to mind, though I can't remember his exact age at the time, he may have been 12. The "wrestling defense" case? Do you remember that one? Bullsheez he didn't know those moves could do serious damage to that little girl. Bullsheez he was just trying out some cool moves he saw on wrestling. He KNEW what he was doing and what it could cause. I doubt he meant to KILL her, but he knew he was going to really hurt her.

I know the way I just posted sounded as if I was being very personal with you, but that is NOT my intention. I just felt more comfortable and was able to find the words to express myself easier with the wording I used in this case.

Originally Posted by ElysiumFate

I wasn't making fun of you for using "demon-spawn," lol. I use it myself, at times. :)

I'm still going to have to argue that 99.9% of the time the child is made into the "evil" person because of what he/she has been exposed to as a child. Be them born with a chemical imbalance in the brain or no, there still must normally be some instigator that causes the child to develop into an "evil" person.

The serial killers popping up are evil, yes. However, are they born with the fate of being a serial killer because of their genetics/ nature? Probably not.

This brings us back to the movie argument.

As I stated a long time ago in one of my posts in this thread; violence is worse in movies. It teaches children that violence is okay--that killing, and that being able to beat the living tar out of anyone, and that being a bad-ass... are all things that are cool and things that are to be aspired to. These teachings are what have created the serial killers of today.

I think that it is mostly nurture, not nature, that creates such people. Of course there are those cases where some strange defect in the child caused them to be heartless killers. And those cases are probably more prevalent in serial killers, but I still think that nurture is more likely the cause.

-----------------

If we're talking about the old kings and emperors who had the ability to kill whomever they wished without repercussions... I don't even know that many of those were cases of nature over nurture.

The worst king I can think about is Ivan the Terrible. He disemboweled birds and generally tortured animals as a child, BUT he was also molested as a child and tortured by the boyars of Russia that were always attempting to steal the throne from him. His parents both died by the time he was eight. One from assassination and the other from blood poisoning. He was left to starve in a dungeon at the age of three because his uncle wanted the throne... Obviously this was a case of nurture, not nature.

I'd give a few more examples of crazy rulers, but I fear that I'm becoming long winded.

Overall, I think it's nurture, not nature.

--------------------------

@ModernMuse: Children are clueless. If a child isn't taught something, they simply won't know what to do. There are no instincts left in a human child beyond eating, sleeping, and the want of love.

If a child sees a movie where a cat is being tortured (to use your example) and his parents never taught him that torturing a cat is bad, he's got a good chance of doing it. That child has absolutely no inborn sense of the fact that torturing cats is wrong, just that somebody did it and that he wants to repeat it.

The fact that you didn't torture things as a child (even though you watched violent movies) is probably because your parents taught you that it was wrong, or someone/something did.

I'm NOT saying that the kid doesn't have the choice to turn off the movie, though. I am saying that if the child doesn't, the movie could cause the child to become a violent person if the child is NEVER taught that what he sees therein is wrong.

Hmm...where to start? I knew you weren't making fun of me, I just felt a need to say why I type in a certain manner most times. As mentioned to the poster above, sometimes it's easier to express myself using more down to earth words. It's just too tiring to try to be intellectual at times :lol:!

In an attempt to try to keep it short(er), I just agree to disagree with you on "nature versus nurture". We all have our own ideas, and I'm fine with people not agreeing with each other as long as I feel we've all been listened to and understood. If it helps, I did say a few things in a previous post that might help explain some of my views.

As to the previous rulers, things were much harsher in the old world. On both sides, the "rulers" and the "peasants". Just as today, I'm sure there were far more children who were abused who turned out "normal" than turned into horrid people. Somehow, somewhere, there had to be something wrong in their minds that they weren't able to stand up to the atrocities done to them and turn out to be good people.

Back to the "Fluffy" analogy ( :) ) , again, in another post I kind of addressed that. It doesn't necessarily have to be that mom or dad teaches the child it's bad, but that I feel within us all (again, except for the sickos) there is something that tells us that Fluffy squealing in such a manner is NOT good, and that we are hurting her, and that we wouldn't want to be hurt that way. Therefore, we "know" it is wrong.

All said, I don't think little Johnny is going to be influenced enough by seeing Fluffy tortured on screen to go do it himself unless he already has something "wrong" with him.

Originally Posted by Infinitys Echo

YES, I can certainly see a 14 y/o being tried as an adult in some cases. One case in particular comes to mind, though I can't remember his exact age at the time, he may have been 12. The "wrestling defense" case? Do you remember that one? Bullsheez he didn't know those moves could do serious damage to that little girl. Bullsheez he was just trying out some cool moves he saw on wrestling. He KNEW what he was doing and what it could cause. I doubt he meant to KILL her, but he knew he was going to really hurt her.

Well then! *Cracks knuckles* If we're talking about older children. Sure, they most definitely have the choice to be stupid, lie, and do violent things. No doubt on that. But I still think the ten year old learned the violence somewhere, in most cases.

Originally Posted by Infinitys Echo

Hmm...where to start? I knew you weren't making fun of me, I just felt a need to say why I type in a certain manner most times. As mentioned to the poster above, sometimes it's easier to express myself using more down to earth words. It's just too tiring to try to be intellectual at times :lol:!

Just making sure you didn't think that I was, and no kidding. Academic language gets on my nerves sometimes, as well, and (after all) this is just an online forum.

Originally Posted by Infinitys Echo

In an attempt to try to keep it short(er), I just agree to disagree with you on "nature versus nurture". We all have our own ideas, and I'm fine with people not agreeing with each other as long as I feel we've all been listened to and understood. If it helps, I did say a few things in a previous post that might help explain some of my views.

*Shakes Infinitys' hand* I agree to disagree. ^_^

Originally Posted by Infinitys Echo

As to the previous rulers, things were much harsher in the old world. On both sides, the "rulers" and the "peasants". Just as today, I'm sure there were far more children who were abused who turned out "normal" than turned into horrid people. Somehow, somewhere, there had to be something wrong in their minds that they weren't able to stand up to the atrocities done to them and turn out to be good people.

I agree, but there were probably times when there was just no one there to help them get through the suffering and they just couldn't deal with that.

Originally Posted by Infinitys Echo

Back to the "Fluffy" analogy ( :) ) , again, in another post I kind of addressed that. It doesn't necessarily have to be that mom or dad teaches the child it's bad, but that I feel within us all (again, except for the sickos) there is something that tells us that Fluffy squealing in such a manner is NOT good, and that we are hurting her, and that we wouldn't want to be hurt that way. Therefore, we "know" it is wrong.

There is most definitely some form of common sense there.

Originally Posted by Infinitys Echo

All said, I don't think little Johnny is going to be influenced enough by seeing Fluffy tortured on screen to go do it himself unless he already has something "wrong" with him.

If he sees it enough times with no one telling him that it is wrong, then he might come to accept it as appropriate...but then, we've agreed to disagree, lol.

---------------------------

Also, it does sound like I haven't/we haven't met the kids you've met. I don't know what I'd believe if I had your experiences. ^_^

Originally Posted by ElysiumFate

Well then! *Cracks knuckles* If we're talking about older children. Sure, they most definitely have the choice to be stupid, lie, and do violent things. No doubt on that. But I still think the ten year old learned the violence somewhere, in most cases.

Just making sure you didn't think that I was, and no kidding. Academic language gets on my nerves sometimes, as well, and (after all) this is just an online forum.

*Shakes Infinitys' hand* I agree to disagree. ^_^

I agree, but there were probably times when there was just no one there to help them get through the suffering and they just couldn't deal with that.

There is most definitely some form of common sense there.

If he sees it enough times with no one telling him that it is wrong, then he might come to accept it as appropriate...but then, we've agreed to disagree, lol.

---------------------------

Also, it does sound like I haven't/we haven't met the kids you've met. I don't know what I'd believe if I had your experiences. ^_^

The ten year old could well learn or see it from somewhere, but I think just as often, he is capable of it on his own. Everyday stuff, like fighting and lashing out more quickly than "normal" kids could just as easily be the sign of a disorder of some sort, which then leans it towards the way I believe that something is "wrong" to begin with. Now the other kind, the mean, cruel kind, is another thing. I believe it takes a mind that's not right to commit those kinds of acts, especially in the very young. As to lying, I brought that up because it's often heard said that "little children (VERY young ages, like four or five) don't lie. Oh YES THEY DO! Ask Bill Cosby :lol:! Just a joke there, but he uses it in a routine he does.

As to not having someone there to help them through the hard times, I had no one. I managed to overcome. So have, I bet, millions of others. Granted, while I may have seen and experienced some pretty bad things, I didn't see the real horror that some kids are subjected to. There has to be something more to it. My belief is that the "more to it" is something not wired right in their brain. I admit, I'm a little biased on this due, in part, to personal experience. I acknowledge that there are those who need more help than others, and at the same time, it's also hard for me to understand as I don't see myself as stronger or tougher than anyone else.

And the very last, it really does come down to personal experience. Some of the heathens I've seen, GEEZ! However, believe it or not, I'm a bigger advocate than I may seem towards teens and their woes. I almost expect certain behaviors that many adults do not accept or tolerate. It doesn't mean I agree or think it's right, but I try to realize that that many things they do are acceptable in the sense that they ARE immature and irresponsible-it's to be expected. That's why they are considered children and teens and not adults. Did that make any sense?

@Infinity: Your last statement made plenty of sense. Hormones are something that NO ONE can control. I think that everyone goes through a "craphead" stage, so to put it, as a teenager. There is no teenager alive that hasn't made ten thousand mistakes. I understand why you're more accepting.

Little kids can most definitely lie. I remember doing it...and I admit that I don't remember being taught how to do it...

Yup, teens are the mother's curse on her children, you know the one: One day you'll have kids that will do the same thing to you! I'm glad it made sense to you.

Ahh, so you knew how to lie without being taught or seeing it on screen! ~~laughs~~ I'm not poking fun or anything, but it does show there are some things we can do without any outside influence. It's like a two sided sword sometimes though. Little ones may lie at the drop of a hat for some things, and others, like "if mommy asks, we did NOT buy ice cream", well, shoot, it's almost like they couldn't lie if you threatened to steal their cookies away :)!

I'm very pleased how the thread came back to life and the discussion this time around was so interesting.

*Scrolls up* Forgot what we were debating to begin with, lol.

Yes, this is an interesting debate. I got into it a few months back with Tutela de Xaoc (sorry if I spelled it wrong), but it hasn't been interesting since we finished our debate.

Lol, I didn't exactly admit it. I just can't remember where I learned it or why I did it (give me something, I was four...). But, 'tis true. Humans were blessed/cursed with the ability to lie. AND, it is strange how some children couldn't tell a lie if you promised them a year's supply of candy whilst others do nothing but.

I still have a hard time believing that such behavior is inborn, but I'm also still not going to say that there is no such thing as nature.

It really does make you wonder, with the little kids and lying. You'd think they are so innocent in the bad ways of the world, yet something like that, they can figure out. But when it comes to the human brain, I don't think we'll ever have it all figured out. At least, not anytime soon.

Originally Posted by Infinitys Echo

It really does make you wonder, with the little kids and lying. You'd think they are so innocent in the bad ways of the world, yet something like that, they can figure out. But when it comes to the human brain, I don't think we'll ever have it all figured out. At least, not anytime soon.

I highly doubt it. :)