If people were with there kids, they could just change the channel. Now I know a lot of people are going to say, I have to work and this and that and the other. Well, if you are doing all that, then you're not a very good parent parent anyway. It's called PLANNED PARENTHOOD! I am a die hard conservative, we make our own decisions in life and we deal with the consequences.
But I guess if I have to answer this question, I would rather my child look at someone's boobs and butt, before wanting them to see someone shot to death. Plus I would hope our children have seen their parents naked before, right. Of course at a young age. I look forward to your crazy responses.
Blood and violence in media can be just as bad (say, for young children) in certain contexts, but watching violent TV shows won't turn a child into a future criminal. Nudity, however, is not a behavior that can be turned down by parents. Adults may normalize it somewhat, though it should be kept from children until they are ready, while violence is something we can agree on as being bad.
Violence is harsher than nudity.
Violence and nudity are both likely to scare you but violence is more likely to scare you than how likely and much nudity is to scare you.
Nudity is just people being naked.
Violence is physically hurting and some times, bullying an other person.
Nudity is seperate and it doesnt seem dangerous than violence. Violence is dangerous especially children watching it. I dont think theres nothing wrong with nudity because its not us that put it on tv . Its the people who put it on. Violence will give you psychological thoughts that are negative.
I would love to sit here and spew a lot of statistical data at you guys, however, I know no one will read it. Therefore, I want to start out by saying seeing the naked body should be brought on as a positive thing. It is teaching people to be ashamed of their body when it is covered all the time. Kids are going to eventually learn about sex with or without television influence because that is how our bodies are programmed. Violence,however, is not a natural thing. I know some people will argue the point of survival of the fittest and bring up biological factors. But throughout the years humans have been evolved into helping another instead of killing for the sake of future generations and one's safety. The television is a huge influence on what kids learn. Nudity expresses harmless content. Violence differs in that subject. As humans, we want to fit in with the crowd and be as "cool" as our idols and role models. As children grow they will learn about sex and nudity through puberty, but with violence it is only taught through outside influence. Therefore, exposure to violence has a greater negative effect on people than nudity.
I had older brothers and sisters. They liked Monty Python. There is a fair amount of nudity in that show. I watched it from a early age. It was not disturbing, it did not bother my parents I was watching.
Sexuality is not disturbing. Violence is. We don't want to live in a environment filled with violence, but we watch it as entertainment? Living in a world of sexuality is just fine on the other hand. Learning early on what the difference is between objectifying and enjoying sexuality is wonderful. The more repressed, the more sexuality is treated as taboo, the more the chance sexuality is skewed and becomes objectification and twisted with shame.
The consequences of children seeing blood and violence are much bigger than a children seeing nudity. Blood, depending on how bad it is, can metally scar someone for life, while nudity I guess can be pretty disturbing, won't scar anyone. Also, a child CAN turn into a violent criminal by seeing these horrifying scenes, while nudity they're probably going to see anyway in their future in real life anyway. With nudity, kids are just "learning" a bit earlier than intended. With violence, kids are potentially letting their lives go completely downhill in the future, all because they think it's cool to shoot a man's head off.