The Instigator
Pro (for)
3 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
1 Points

Nudity on television/any form of media

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/29/2014 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 791 times Debate No: 53641
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (3)
Votes (1)




I am a huge fan of Game of thrones and while I do think that sex on television should be tuned down for children, I don't think the same should be done for nudity. Children get nude themselves and see their own body-parts and at some point learn about them at school, yet are constantly told that nudity on television is inappropriate...Why? what is the difference between Media nudity and actual nudity...please provide a valid argument and don't bring in any prefixed ideologies.

Thank you


Why? Here,

That is what is being taught that is okay to kids...

It is a wrecking ball to the youth of America and everyone's sanity..

Enjoy the video!
Debate Round No. 1


That only serves my point further...Disgusting videos like that. But you fail to notice that it was meant more of an INSULT to nudity than a support. I'm not saying I support sexually oriented nudity videos, I'm saying I support showing children what reality looks like, not showing them pornography...


I also believe you said "What is the difference between media nudity and reality nudity? Well, there is your answer. That is why it isnt for children. Kids are getting more and more into sex at younger ages. Thus, what is telling them to do that? there is no way that an ex-Disney star could have any effect on children... (Miley Cyrus..)
Debate Round No. 2


When I said media nudity I didn't mean sexual oriented nudity, I meant education oriented nudity. When an ex-disney star decides to go looney, that's not good, but if we just show nudity, not explot it, just show it, no strange videos accompanying it, what's wrong there?


I would have no idea what could be wrong... well, mayyybee...:

The fact that human psychology would get them wondering how a vagina works.

The fact that human psychology would get them wondering how a penis works.

They don't need to be seeing each other naked. It is inapporpriate.

The point in which the sex organs actually start to develop is the beginning of pueberty, which makes exposing to them pointless.

I have nooooo idea though..
Debate Round No. 3


If you state that human psychology would get them wondering ,,how a penis works' what is the immediate danger? Education? so what you're actually suggesting is that we should completely wipe education from all forms of media? nudity itself is not indecent, it is the abuse of portrayal of nudity...The FCC is seeking comments from the public as they consider relaxing their obscenity standards for broadcast television and radio. If adopted the new, lower standards would allow brief "non-sexual" nudity and isolated expletives even during prime time, when most families are typically watching with their children. I mostly assume that certain religous parties will oppose my argument strictly out of ideology, I therefore urge you to think about my following proposition. The human body is not essentially nasty. I mean, God (if you believe in him) made us without clothes. And you look at that famous statue of David that's considered one of the masterpieces of the Renaissance, and here's David, and he doesn't have any clothes on at all. You've got the Venus de Milo and some of those others...the Sistine Chapel, Adam has got no clothes on, and that's the famous artwork of God touching Adam....
The body is not essentially pornographic, and I think to make it so is a mistake. It's what's in your mind. Imagine the pope watching a television show. Maybe it's got some redeeming qualities, but I'm sure wouldn't turn him off just because he's watching a few clips of nudity on TV. That said, overreaching nudity on television (like the wrecking ball video) is inappropriate, son in that respect, I see your point. Yet you mistake my meaning. I'm simply implying that simple nudity/brief nudity shouldn't be crucial to parents and neither should it be censored...


Pro made a remarkable claim at the beginning of his argument. His claim was that he saw no harm in having children curious on how they're parts work.

This is troubling to me. What is a child like when it is curious about something? It is a pure, honest look for an answer. Two children at the ages of which my opponent describes could get curious, and thus become curious about each other. Before you know it, there are babies from these children. That is why we do not expose them to it. Eventually, over time, they become mature enough to be able to understand and look at the opposing sex's organs for reproduction.

However, at the age of which my opponent describes, they are not able to handle this knowledge.

Debate Round No. 4
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by demonlord343 2 years ago
Lol welcome to
Posted by benko12345678 2 years ago
I would just like to point out that your grammar is terrible...Secondly, I really doubt you even read my arguments :P you probably simply said: eh, it's all just talking about how nudity isn't bad...
You still don't seem to understand what I was saying...I was trying to explain that nudity should be allowed for the sake of education, it should be brief and mild...
Posted by benko12345678 2 years ago
Oops! Looks like I made a typo! Please forgive me where it says: son I see your point. I meant So I see your point*
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by whiteflame 2 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:31 
Reasons for voting decision: I didn't find either side's arguments particularly convincing. You both made a lot of claims, but I could find no warrants or actual impacts to seeing nudity on a T.V. screen or in any form of media. Con never presented me with a harm, and Pro never presents me with a reason why it should be OK. Unfortunately for Con, the burden of the debate is on the one stating that there's something wrong with nudity, since it has to be established in order for him to win the debate. I'm sorry, but Miley Cyrus being naked in a music video tells me nothing by itself. You have to explain how that's harmful, and I don't see that in any round. You get close in R4 (a little too late anyway), but you then assume that we're all going to understand the harm of kids having kids, and I'm not going to give you an argument you don't make. I do, however, award conduct to Con, since Pro tried to modify the debate partway through by saying he was only talking about educational media.