The Pornification of a Generation

[Kekvit Irae]

(wow, my first backroom thread all to myself)

In my university's Humanities & Human Rights class, the topic of tonight was on sexuality and sexual education. The problem arose of why sexual education is not effective and/or why teens choose to be sexually active. The problem is not the lack of sexual education, but rather the capitalist need to market to any consumer base anything that will generate profit. Being part Marxist and part Fascist (a contradiction, I know), I tend to see the bad side of capitalism and the effects on society. Because of this, I have long since read several articles relating to this one subject.

Three articles which are required reading for any concerned parent or soon-to-be parent are So Sexy, So Soon: The Sexualization of Childhood in Commercial Culture, The Pornification of a Generation, and the report of the American Psychiatric Association's Sexualization of Girls. These articles argue that girls, as young as four to five, are exposed to sexual themes in every day living, from the slogans on the clothes they wear ("So Many Boys, So Little Time"), to the toys they play with (Bratz), to the cultural influences on TV (Madonna, Britney Spears, Hannah Montana), to the websites they visit (MySpace and Facebook).

Remember this when you go into the local Wal-Mart next time. Stop and look around, and try to find all the little things that work toward the sexualization of children. Now ask yourself, "Should my child even own this?" Or an even better question is, "Have I become desensitized to this to the point where I haven't even noticed it until now?"


The Pornification of a Generation: http://www.newsweek.com/id/162792/output/print
So Sexy, So Soon: The Sexualization of Childhood in Commercial Culture: http://www.tellinitlikeitis.net/2008...l-culture.html
Report of the APA Task Force of the Sexualization of Girls: http://www.apa.org/pi/wpo/sexualization.html
The Porning of America (book): http://www.amazon.com/Porning-Americ...6631319&sr=1-1
So Sexy, So Soon (book): http://www.randomhouse.com/catalog/d...345505064.html

[seireikhaan]

I fail to see how capitalism is the only factor here. Capitalism has existed for hundreds of years, in some function or another. Its more that, with information so readily available and easily transferable, parents have less and less of an impact as more sources of information are available to young(er) children. Not to mention, people used to marry off kids at ages most people would consider to be far to tender nowadays. Frankly, I think people tend to like to dramatize events and situations in their own lifetimes because they either don't fully comprehend fully the historical context of it, or because they like to feel like they are a part of an important movement. Color me nonplussed.

[Reverend Joe]

This is not just Captialism; true, it is caused by Capitalism, but in reaction to an opportunity. Capitalism has a disgusting habit of commercializing and destroying the meaning behind revolutionary social trends, and one of the two worst examples is listed here; the Sexual Revolution. The original ideals of individuality and strength in this movement have been subverted by Capitalism to market crass pornography, itself a part and reinforcer of conservative society. In a word, it's "Sexploitation."

Society can be real twisted.

[Strike For The South]

I fail to see how capitalism is the only factor here. Capitalism has existed for hundreds of years, in some function or another. Its more that, with information so readily available and easily transferable, parents have less and less of an impact as more sources of information are available to young(er) children. Not to mention, people used to marry off kids at ages most people would consider to be far to tender nowadays. Frankly, I think people tend to like to dramatize events and situations in their own lifetimes because they either don't fully comprehend fully the historical context of it, or because they like to feel like they are a part of an important movement. Color me nonplussed.

This. There really is a faux outrage over sex in this country. The age at which people marry are up. The number of teens having sex is down as are teen pregnancies. I fully back my corn fed friend here.

[CrossLOPER]

Capitalism is bad because companies make what people want.

[Lemur]

I'm not going to get into what's capitalism's fault, 'cause I think it's much more important to ask where the hell the parents are?

I'm the father of a two year old girl, and as you can see, I dress her like a slut:

But seriously, I see the Bratz dolls, and I see the inappropriately sexy clothes on sale at Old Navy, but I always wonder: What idiot buys that stuff? Remember, kids have no credit cards or cash. They can't vote or hold a job. Anything they want has to come through you. So what kind of brain-dead nerf-catching drool monkey do you have to be to think it's a good idea to buy all of this sexualized **** for your little girl?

I guess you can't blame some people for being complete idiots ... oh, wait, you can.

[Alexanderofmacedon]

I'm not going to get into what's capitalism's fault, 'cause I think it's much more important to ask where the hell the parents are?

I'm the father of a two year old girl, and as you can see, I dress her like a slut:

But seriously, I see the Bratz dolls, and I see the inappropriately sexy clothes on sale at Old Navy, but I always wonder: What idiot buys that stuff? Remember, kids have no credit cards or cash. They can't vote or hold a job. Anything they want has to come through you. So what kind of brain-dead nerf-catching drool monkey do you have to be to think it's a good idea to buy all of this sexualized **** for your little girl?

I guess you can't blame some people for being complete idiots ... oh, wait, you can.

Keep your name calling to yourself Lemur. My little sister is 8, and my parents have plenty of control of the "sexuality" aspect of her life (if there is such a thing). They've bought her a Bratz doll, which has little impact on her overall mentality. They're not idiots and have longer parenting experience then you. Remember to think before you insult people...especially as a mod.

[Strike For The South]

Keep your name calling to yourself Lemur. My little sister is 8, and my parents have plenty of control of the "sexuality" aspect of her life (if there is such a thing). They've bought her a Bratz doll, which has little impact on her overall mentality. They're not idiots and have longer parenting experience then you. Remember to think before you insult people...especially as a mod.

I dont think he meant your parents in particular man. If your parents are instilling good values (which Im sure they are) Im sure Lemur would be proud.

[Alexanderofmacedon]

I dont think he meant your parents in particular man. If your parents are instilling good values (which Im sure they are) Im sure Lemur would be proud.

Was more appalled about the fact that a seemingly mature mod was throwing insults this way and that. Directed at my parents or not they fall under his "idiot" category for buying a doll.

[Yoyoma1910]

Keep your name calling to yourself Lemur. My little sister is 8, and my parents have plenty of control of the "sexuality" aspect of her life (if there is such a thing). They've bought her a Bratz doll, which has little impact on her overall mentality. They're not idiots and have longer parenting experience then you. Remember to think before you insult people...especially as a mod.

No need to get so irate about a Bratz doll. It's just an obvious example of an oversexed marketing campaign aimed at youth.

[Xiahou]

But seriously, I see the Bratz dolls, and I see the inappropriately sexy clothes on sale at Old Navy, but I always wonder: What idiot buys that stuff? Remember, kids have no credit cards or cash. They can't vote or hold a job. Anything they want has to come through you. So what kind of brain-dead nerf-catching drool monkey do you have to be to think it's a good idea to buy all of this sexualized **** for your little girl?

I guess you can't blame some people for being complete idiots ... oh, wait, you can.

I agree. If people buy small children 'sexually charged' clothes and toys, they have no right to complain about children being over-sexualized. Parents have to take responsibility for their children- it's their job. No one is forcing them to buy that crap and if no one bought it, they wouldn't sell it.

[Banquo's Ghost]

Whilst I agree in principle with Lemur and Xiahou, I think we are in danger of ignoring the impact of modern marketing techniques.

People do have choices, but they are subject to immense marketing pressures from corporations and governments. Remember, our entire economic concept in the West is based on naked consumerism. Modern marketing uses very powerful techniques to manipulate desire, and when the ordinary person is surrounded by peer pressure to achieve status not contentment, and government pressure to consume not save, they will be a strong personality not to be influenced by the psychology.

I also find myself in agreement with Crazed Rabbit's morality argument. (I do not however, place the blame entirely on the liberals. ) We are a society which angers itself to apoplexy at the mere mention of paedophiles, yet daily our children are exposed to imagery and role models - particularly in popular music - which glorifies meaningless, abusive sexual relationships. At base, it is the parent's responsibility to moderate what the child sees and experiences, but how does one do this in the modern world? Deprive them of television, friends, the toy of the moment, the music of their generation etc? What happens when one's iron control is not present and they are out in the world?

Instilling moral values is a powerful defence, but the constant bombardment they experience is a deep concern.

Excellent thread, Kekvit.

[HoreTore]

More sex, eh?

How is this a bad thing?

As Jesus himself (almost) said; "Let all the sluts come to me."

[Hosakawa Tito]

Whilst I agree in principle with Lemur and Xiahou, I think we are in danger of ignoring the impact of modern marketing techniques.

People do have choices, but they are subject to immense marketing pressures from corporations and governments. Remember, our entire economic concept in the West is based on naked consumerism. Modern marketing uses very powerful techniques to manipulate desire, and when the ordinary person is surrounded by peer pressure to achieve status not contentment, and government pressure to consume not save, they will be a strong personality not to be influenced by the psychology.

I also find myself in agreement with Crazed Rabbit's morality argument. (I do not however, place the blame entirely on the liberals. ) We are a society which angers itself to apoplexy at the mere mention of paedophiles, yet daily our children are exposed to imagery and role models - particularly in popular music - which glorifies meaningless, abusive sexual relationships. At base, it is the parent's responsibility to moderate what the child sees and experiences, but how does one do this in the modern world? Deprive them of television, friends, the toy of the moment, the music of their generation etc? What happens when one's iron control is not present and they are out in the world?

Instilling moral values is a powerful defence, but the constant bombardment they experience is a deep concern.

Excellent thread, Kekvit.

First off, great thread topic Kekvit. My family has been discussing this same subject in the aftermath of my step-daughter's recent 16th birthday. I find that the older I get the less I'm sure of anything as absolute. However, in answer to BQ's questions I'd have to say that communication with and listening to your children is crucial on topics such as these, especially the listening part. Lead by example, be the role model. Nothing closes a thinking child or teen's mind faster than a "Do as I say, not as I do" parental attitude. If they know they can come to you when they do screw up, and when asked "who their hero is" and they reply "my Mom & Dad".....you know your doing it right.
Gray hairs & some sleepless nights are part of the job.

[naut]

Thank you Banquo, you put it much more eloquently than I ever could.



I don't see capitalism as the only reason behind the current growing trend of sexualisation. Though marketing, and cultural noise/pollution, can play a major, major role in decision making. After all that is what it is designed for, to get consumers to make purchases, to choose one product, or benefit, over another. A key question has to be whether pornification, or porn culture, is a fashion or a style? Is it something like bell-bottom jeans, something that lasts for a couple of years and fades away. Or does it linger, like tuxedos or cigars. My inclination is that it'll linger, because it is so profitable. Hormones and emotions are effective marketing. How does Michelin sell tyres? Not by advertising the quality of their product, but by instilling the fear that if you don't you risk the lives of your loved ones. How does Clearasil market itself? By telling you that without it you'll never get a date. The industry(ies) know they have a powerful tool at their disposal, so why wouldn't they use it? If I was to run a advertising campaign for my product, and I had to choose between emotional or cognitive marketing, I'd choose emotional marketing every, single, time. Simple.

But to blame it on the system is far, far to easy. Hell, I'd call that cultural suicide. Yet, isn't that what our society, this society, does anyway? They always find someone else to blame. Parent's should hold themselves more accountable. At the end of the day who spends the money, and makes the purchases, the parents. So why don't they ever stop and think, "Hmm, this is not exactly appropriate for my little Princess, I think I'll get something else." Yes, cultural pressure is being exerted on them, yes, they feel the need to satisfy a want. But, what want is it? It's not true want, it's a want for status, for acceptance. And again we come back to emotions. And yet, besides the fact that the parents control the money and the purchases their children make, (or at least they should), why is it that they aren't acting as influencers in their children's lives. Shouldn't they be working to be role models for their children? Perhaps they lack the time, or the effort, or they plain don't know how to. Yet, look at other issues, there are political movements for pretty much anything. But, before this thread I hadn't noticed much cuffufle at all. That's not to say that I advocate such an idea as parent's forcing their ideas on their children, or to quote Samuel Goldwyn, "If I want your opinion, I'll give it to you." Because in the end that's just as dangerous. But, parents should teach their children to question, to question and seek no matter who or what they hear something from. Sad though, it seems, that parents fail to do so, and misunderstand that it is their job to do so.

From personal experience you don't need to go to a shop to see the extent. Simply walk into a school. Walk in and look around. Here, at least we have uniforms. But, non-uniform days, you'd be lucky to see 20% of the girls wearing what my parents would label "respectable clothing". I'm not saying that every girl was wearing high heels and a miniskirt. But, short skirts and midriff "tube tops" are pretty much the norm. I remember hearing stories of the girls several years below myself being sexually active at the ages of thirteen and fourteen, and it was fairly obvious in the manner in which they acted and portrayed themselves that they were. I remember friends complaining that they were still virgins at the age of fifteen and sixteen. Complaining that it was some sort of disadvantage to them. Which, is complete rubbish, since at that age, for all the porn you may have seen, you are hardly able to have sex, let alone good sex. I lost my virginity young, and looking back it is fairly obvious that I was desensitised to it all. And, a lot of it has to do with the pressure from peers, and the lack of understanding by my role models, my mentors, that for us kids it was a big and confusing issue. I don't think they really grasped what it was we were facing. They didn't listen, or perhaps, rather they didn't want to listen. It wasn't until later, when I got some more adept mentors, who had lived a little, that I started to understand.

But, it's not just that. I've noticed how hard it is to get a lasting relationship. Yes I'm young, and yes I should be living a little. I get it. But, of the relationships I've had there's only three that I'd bother to label the girl involved as being my girlfriend. Three. People always say it's guys that don't want commitment, but is that really true? From personal experience girls, since the time I started being interested in them, seem to not want a real relationship. One example, my friends were trying to set me up with this girl they knew from Uni, an attractive girl sure. But, it's not that they thought we were a good match, or that we'd like each other. Their reasoning, and I quote one of my friends, "You'll have awesome sex." But, guess who said that, it wasn't a male friend it was one of my female friends. And who was doing the majority of the forcing, my female friends. Odd that we always assume that it's just the males who objectify women.



Oh, and I'm considering doing a Marketing Major, so in essence it's all my fault.

[Mouzafphaerre]

I'm not going to get into what's capitalism's fault, 'cause I think it's much more important to ask where the hell the parents are?

I see the Bratz dolls, and I see the inappropriately sexy clothes on sale at Old Navy, but I always wonder: What idiot buys that stuff? Remember, kids have no credit cards or cash. They can't vote or hold a job. Anything they want has to come through you. So what kind of brain-dead nerf-catching drool monkey do you have to be to think it's a good idea to buy all of this sexualized **** for your little girl?

I guess you can't blame some people for being complete idiots ... oh, wait, you can.

.

.

[Shaka_Khan]

I'm the father of a two year old girl, and as you can see, I dress her like a slut:

How dare you dress her in attention-attracting colors! Dress her up in black and cover her face.

[Lemur]

How dare you dress her in attention-attracting colors! Dress her up in black and cover her face.

I know, I know, I dress her like a slut. I'm a bad dad, that's all there is to it.

[Evil_Maniac From Mars]

Capitalism is bad because companies make what people want.

Instead of the best path, which is, of course, making what the people should want, and don't?

This is obviously a problem. But the fault of capitalism? I disagree. Maybe to a certain extent, but the obvious problem is, as Lemur essentially stated, the idiots who buy the things for their children. Remember, no market, no merchandise.

[CrossLOPER]

Instead of the best path, which is, of course, making what the people should want, and don't?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origin_Systems

[Strike For The South]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origin_Systems

Explanations are fun

[CrossLOPER]

You didn't read at all, did you?

[Divinus Arma]

(wow, my first backroom thread all to myself)

In my university's Humanities & Human Rights class, the topic of tonight was on sexuality and sexual education. The problem arose of why sexual education is not effective and/or why teens choose to be sexually active. The problem is not the lack of sexual education, but rather the capitalist need to market to any consumer base anything that will generate profit. Being part Marxist and part Fascist (a contradiction, I know), I tend to see the bad side of capitalism and the effects on society. Because of this, I have long since read several articles relating to this one subject.

You aren't anti-capitalism. You're anti-marketing. Big difference. You should distinguish the two and seperate the benefits of free trade between free people from manipulative tactics in target market exploitation.

[Reverend Joe]

You aren't anti-capitalism. You're anti-marketing. Big difference. You should distinguish the two and seperate the benefits of free trade between free people from manipulative tactics in target market exploitation.

DA: that's actually a good point, and one that I failed on.

[Samurai Waki]

I've thought on some of this, and as my daughters near their 2nd birthday in a couple of months, it seems to be that this proliferation of sexuality might be purely a societal "bump" in the road from decades of sexual repression. When I go to the store and see mothers toting around their ten year old daughters like they were some kind of brothel house madam trying to make a quick buck, I nod my head, take note and remind myself that this situation is beyond my control. At least they aren't getting stoned to death after the rape, because the site of them made a man feel like he needed to commit heinous adultery. And hey, maybe the mother of this child had a lot of fun in her early years, and now that shes a dried out burlap sack, believes her daughter should have fun being the village bicycle when she comes of age.
It doesn't mean that I will parent my daughters in the same way, I understand that children absorb everything they see, which is why my wife as well as myself believe that they need to get out as much as possible, away from the TV. And when they're actually old enough to understand whats on TV I'd rather have them watch Law and Order and have them watch Geico Commercials with funny neanderthals rather than Dora the Explorer, which runs Crack Whore Barbie Ads and so forth during commercial breaks.
I also believe in discipline, maybe as a natural extension of my own childhood. Yeah, I probably won't use the belt like I got, but ten minutes in the corner seems to be working well enough, other than that its kind of wait and see at this point and I hope to god that this really disturbing cultural trend passes sooner rather than later.

[The Celtic Viking]

(wow, my first backroom thread all to myself)

In my university's Humanities & Human Rights class, the topic of tonight was on sexuality and sexual education. The problem arose of why sexual education is not effective and/or why teens choose to be sexually active.

One thing here interests me: what exactly do you mean when you say "sexual education"? It sounds to me like you're talking about abstinence education in particular, and that fails quite miserably no matter what society you live in for one simple reason: it goes against human nature. Our strongest instinct is the one that tells us to pass on our genes, which is done through sex, and it's so strong that it can even override our own survival instincts. What chance do you then think some religious nutjobs screaming "SEX IS EVIL!!!!" have to stop them?

What kids should be taught is to always use protection, and condoms should be given out for free, no questions asked. Why? Because teens will always have sex, and it's cheaper and better for the society at large to make sure they use the proper protection so they don't get pregnant or catch STDs. That works.

Three articles which are required reading for any concerned parent or soon-to-be parent are So Sexy, So Soon: The Sexualization of Childhood in Commercial Culture, The Pornification of a Generation, and the report of the American Psychiatric Association's Sexualization of Girls. These articles argue that girls, as young as four to five, are exposed to sexual themes in every day living, from the slogans on the clothes they wear ("So Many Boys, So Little Time"), to the toys they play with (Bratz), to the cultural influences on TV (Madonna, Britney Spears, Hannah Montana), to the websites they visit (MySpace and Facebook).

I had action figures and played war with sticks as rifles all the time when I was a kid. I also watched a lot of action movies, played FPS games and killed tons of imaginary people. However, I can guarantee you that unless some country actually invades Sweden (hah!), you won't be seeing me doing anything like that for real any time soon.

What I'm saying is that sure, they can be influenced by people on the TV and people around them, but if the parents actually spend some time with their own damn kids and actually do some parenting, that could be eradicated, or at least limited to a negligible degree. The responsibility here lies with the parent, not to "shield" them from anything, but to explain things like sex properly to them.

What it all boils down to in the end is that children, just like puppies, need training. If you spend proper time with them and train their mental facilities, guess what? They won't fall for marketing that easily, because they will be smarter and they will be able to critically examine them for themselves. This will also make them, amongst other things, better able to withstand peer pressure, which would be another factor in this.

Remember this when you go into the local Wal-Mart next time. Stop and look around, and try to find all the little things that work toward the sexualization of children. Now ask yourself, "Should my child even own this?" Or an even better question is, "Have I become desensitized to this to the point where I haven't even noticed it until now?"

I don't really care, to be honest. People can dress up anyway they want. What's wrong with showing some skin anyhow?

i agree that kids younger than 11 shouldnt be exposed to sexual stuff, but that's only because they are likely to not understand what it is, and if they are exposed to that kind of thing, it may mess with their head because it would seem strange to them and/or disgusting and would not have a good impact.

They are only likely not to understand what it is if you haven't explained it to them. Since they will come in contact with it sooner or later, you should do that, and then there will be no problem. In fact, I don't think it's a problem even if they see it without understanding it. I mean, seriously, what are we talking about here? Naked bodies? Sex? That's not harmful for a child to see. The objection to this really comes down to the grown-up being scared that the kid might lose what the grown-up idealizes as the "innocence of a child", not for any actual danger posed to the child itself.

On the other hand, i do not agree with parents who try to shield their kids from sex as if it's such a horrible thing, like telling them babies come from the "stork" and such nonsense like that. My parents told me the truth about procreation the first time i asked them about it, when i was like 4 or 5. Of course this was done in the least graphic way possible without discarding the main idea of it, but my point is that it didnt cause any problems in my life or anything, and i didnt have to deal with eventually learning that my parents were lying to me the whole time.

Good to hear, and that's what parents really should do. Mine did the same, although they didn't care about sparing any of that graphical stuff. Guess what? I wasn't hurt by that, either.

[AlexanderSextus]

One thing here interests me: what exactly do you mean when you say "sexual education"? It sounds to me like you're talking about abstinence education in particular, and that fails quite miserably no matter what society you live in for one simple reason: it goes against human nature. Our strongest instinct is the one that tells us to pass on our genes, which is done through sex, and it's so strong that it can even override our own survival instincts. What chance do you then think some religious nutjobs screaming "SEX IS EVIL!!!!" have to stop them?

What kids should be taught is to always use protection, and condoms should be given out for free, no questions asked. Why? Because teens will always have sex, and it's cheaper and better for the society at large to make sure they use the proper protection so they don't get pregnant or catch STDs. That works.

I had action figures and played war with sticks as rifles all the time when I was a kid. I also watched a lot of action movies, played FPS games and killed tons of imaginary people. However, I can guarantee you that unless some country actually invades Sweden (hah!), you won't be seeing me doing anything like that for real any time soon.

What I'm saying is that sure, they can be influenced by people on the TV and people around them, but if the parents actually spend some time with their own damn kids and actually do some parenting, that could be eradicated, or at least limited to a negligible degree. The responsibility here lies with the parent, not to "shield" them from anything, but to explain things like sex properly to them.

What it all boils down to in the end is that children, just like puppies, need training. If you spend proper time with them and train their mental facilities, guess what? They won't fall for marketing that easily, because they will be smarter and they will be able to critically examine them for themselves. This will also make them, amongst other things, better able to withstand peer pressure, which would be another factor in this.



I don't really care, to be honest. People can dress up anyway they want. What's wrong with showing some skin anyhow?



They are only likely not to understand what it is if you haven't explained it to them. Since they will come in contact with it sooner or later, you should do that, and then there will be no problem. In fact, I don't think it's a problem even if they see it without understanding it. I mean, seriously, what are we talking about here? Naked bodies? Sex? That's not harmful for a child to see. The objection to this really comes down to the grown-up being scared that the kid might lose what the grown-up idealizes as the "innocence of a child", not for any actual danger posed to the child itself.

Good to hear, and that's what parents really should do. Mine did the same, although they didn't care about sparing any of that graphical stuff. Guess what? I wasn't hurt by that, either.

I'm not saying that young children would be "hurt" by hearing about or seeing the more "graphic" parts of sex, Just that they would probably think it was really gross and they would probably be really disturbed by it for a while. Then when they got older they would probably laugh that it bothered them at all.