Is there a differnce between excessive gore and excessive sexual imagery

[IdiotWithPencil]

depends on the culture, in american culture gore is fine but sex is a no-no, while in Germany or France sex is fine but violence is a no-no,

their's this book called the culture code, in it it explains a bit of why some culture see things the way they do, for example in France love and flirting is seen as pleasure for the other person, the pleasure of the other, which is nice, while in USA it is seen as danger and manipulation of the pure, which is not nice

it's a good read if you are interested

edit:

Would having characters who have offspring count as sexual content?

nope, if you show the baby making yes, if not you're safe

[lunaartemisasama]

In my country both things are seen as creepy. At least on the surface, lol but everybody knows most of the people watch porn on the Internet and that some people like gore or horror films lol.

So I just live in your typical hypocrit two faced society :P.

[Chronitis]

two-faced society! Uh-oh better call Batman

[lunaartemisasama]

[joe_galindez]

I don't understand the question. Do you mean depictions of live birth?

[Mr_B]

I was pondering this question earlier and was wondering what you think. I don't plan to add theses subject matters in any of my current work. But I'd like to know? Why is seeing gruesome deaths okay but seeing a nip slip or man's bulge seen as... inhumane?

I wanted to quote your initial post when replying to this topic because I feel that it kind of contradicts the title of this thread. I don't think "gruesome deaths" and "nip slips or a man's bulge" weigh up equally when you put them on a scale, because there's really nothing "excessive" about a nip slip or a bulge. You're using the same term to describe something that is very extreme and offputting, and something that is actually quite tame and subtle.

Excessive sexual imagery is much more than a bit of nudity or a panty shot. Like excessive gore, where everything is stopped just to revel in the hideousness of the situation, it completely derails the current developments of the plot to show something that, unless the story itself is porn or about sex, has no place in the current narrative. Showing a panel of a couple having sex in a slice-of-life story is not excessive. Showing it over twenty pages in excrutiating detail, with close ups of every orifice and fluids spraying around everywhere is.

In my mind, there is no difference between excessive gore and excessive sexual imagery, because they're both just that: excessive. When something is excessive, it means it goes past the standards and tone defined by the story and, in my book, that's bad by definition. I don't watch enough movies to really know what censoring practices are used, but I don't think blockbuster movies ever really show a "gruesome" death. It's always a bit reigned in and detached so you don't really think about the implications, and are able to just stay connected to the story. Same with sex - you're never going to see anyone really getting it on in a Hollywood movie because there's no point.

[UbePie]

This comment will make me petition for Facebook type 'like' options on the forum. I wanted to laughing face like this post so hard, lol.

[UbePie]

This might be a deeper analysis then anyone wants, but here is my opinion. I think the reason why American culture is ok with violence of any sort, but not ok with sexuality of any sort, is because sadly violence is very real. It is common place to see someone with a gun, it is not horrifying to know someone has a conceal carry permit. People get shot on the street over traffic disputes. Shot by cops who are using excessive force, people shoot into crowds for no good reason. Violence is real in America and so because it is real and we are familiar with it, it shows up on our big screen. Sometime the violence is to make a point about how violent our society is, sometimes it is to glorify our Heros, but it's something we see everyday. Even back in the 'Wild West' violence was an everyday occurrence, and a means to provide justices, or seek revenge.

Sadly what America lacks is love. Love understanding and intimacy. Therefore when those things show up on screen they either make people uncomfortable, or they are some twisted into overly sexualized scene that have no real emotion behind it, and do nothing for the plot or development of the characters. I look around everyday watching my friends fail at being in relationships, over and over again. Cheating is everywhere, and those who have more 'traditional' approaches to relationships are shamed. Sleeping around is glorified. If you fall in love with your high school sweet heart and have only ever had sex with them, than you are seen as having missed out. You should 'live a little' before settling down. But that makes you selfish, and guess what one trait is are to overcome in a healthy relationship? Selfishness.

We have woodstocks and more people having open or polyamorous relationships. If that is right for them, then go right ahead, the issue is that that is also being pushed onto our society through media, and usually in a negative way. The drama of a pair of people in an open relationship but one of them falls in love with someone else. The drama of a happy Lesbian couple but all of a sudden one of the 'lesbians' fall for a man, or the drama of the 'successful business lady' cheating on her stay at home husband. All with the excuse that we are 'sexual' beings and seek out pleasure. However if a murderer pleasure is to kill, that doesn't making it right. So all these plot line of cheating and going around 'seeking' your selfish pleasures are horribly negative. The sex becomes about pleasure and temporary passion rather than love and commitment.

That's why I hate it, and don't want to see it, and am really getting sick of it becoming more lewd. Maybe I'm just a hopeless romantic, but I really hate how almost every ABC or NBC show has a bunch of people cheating or jumping into bed with someone else.

Plus the sexualization is hypocriticall in that, it's find to see a lady jumping up and down on a man and moaning, but everyone burst a blood vessel if two men kiss on screen. Not to mention that if two girls kiss on screen it's usually for the pleasure of men. Example Veronica and Betty from that live action adaptation of Archie. They kissed to get a shock value, that was most likely just fan-service for the male audiences.

Rant over, lol.

[Chronitis]

No just we see character first and then fast forwards now they have a son or daughter. We all know how it happened so does that count as, not excessive, but sexual content?

[Chronitis]

polyamorous relationships

Who knew you could learn so much in the Tapas forums. Seriously though thank you for that in depth analysis. You could be a blogger my friend.

[joe_galindez]

I wouldn't say so. Have you met anyone who thought it was?

[Chronitis]

Yeah in a sense, yeah

[Mr_B]

Yeah in a sense, yeah

That just... makes me scratch my head.

When people write a story or draw a comic, there's going to be a lot of things that are implicit because they are simply irrelevant to the plot and would drag it interminably. It goes without saying that the heroes in a fantasy setting need to eat ever so often and pee when their bladder's full. You don't show them eating or urinating every time they do so because your audience knows that they do these things and doesn't need to be reminded of it. In much the same way, if a woman gives birth to a baby, it is completely natural (in a realistic world setting) that she had sex in order to conceive it. How does this read as sexual content? Especially excessive sexual content? Unless you could see her genitals in close up during birth, there's nothing sexual about this.

If an action is implied and happens behind the curtains, how can it be considered sexual even in the slightest? If you show a romantic couple in a story, every reader will absolutely know that they do the nasties from time to time. But the story doesn't show it, because that's not its focus. It's not excessive content because it's not content - it's literally not in the story.

[IdiotWithPencil]

Yeah in a sense, yeah

how? why? when? what? I am flabbergasted that a person would say that a child in a story was sexual content of any shape or form (how you described it at least), that's a zero on sexual content for me, hell most people see children as a by product of love or a mistake more so then sex

[Chronitis]

Yeah me and my friend don't agree on things too often...