Since the OP discussed this as an "in a game" manner, I'd like to direct my post to the case of violence in Video games and nudity in Video Games. In both cases, neither is actually a problem nor do they turn people in murdering rapists wondering our towns and cities destroying lives.

The problem is that people can't accept video games as an entertainment medium on the same level as movies, music and books. In my observations in both the media and political circles video games are portrayed as something that is for children only. Adults don't play video games, only children do, and as such no adult content should ever be included in a video game. This is merely a case of an outdated understanding of the medium, and will solve itself with the slow attrition of it's critics.

Ignoring the fact that Video games have almost surpassed movies are the primary entertainment medium on the planet in terms of revenue (where do kids get so much money from?) generation, the only issue - as pointed out by CobraA1 - is that parents don't control what their children get to play, or stores aren't enforcing the ratings and selling these games to young children. As a gamer, even I have to admit that here are several games that I own that should never be played by children, and have earnt their high level ratings.

It gets worse. People can't accept that game *developers* can make something for adults. If it's a game, it's for kids *because* it's a game, in their minds a game simply can't deal properly with issues such as war simply because it's a game instead of a more "adult" form of entertainment, such as a movie or a book.

Just read some of the public reactions against Konami's Six Days in Fallujah game, the prejudice against gaming as a form of expression is simply incredible.

*uses necromancer powers*

Thanks for all the posts!

Moosetek, is that ambivalence or sarcasm that's lost on me? I can't really tell whether you're endorsing nearly unlimited public speech a-la the US, something in-the-middle like the EU laws that forbid advocating genocide or national socialism, or mabye even something more authoritarian like the Iranian or PRC censorship practices.

What do you mean don't realize? Anyone with a brain has already noticed the crap, hell game stop just to trade in games invades ones on privacy and checks to see if you have a criminal record... Fear campaigns my friend one thing that has never been let go of and they are still the wave of the future.

I simply can't understand it myself. I'd have thought that between love/nudity and hate/violence I'd much rather my children were exposed to the first instead of the second. I'm much more concerned about a computer game that would let my children go around shooting people, hacking at them and spraying blood everywhere than a game that would expose them to nudity. When I hear of the fuss made by some people over sexual content in a highly violent game, I shake my head in disbelief - do such people really think that violence is more desirable than sex?!

Either way the one thing I think is vital is having a ratings system that not only gives a suggested age, but the reasons for it. I want to know if a game is deemed suitable only for adults or for older children etc., and the reasons for this, i.e. due to violence, or nudity, or language, etc.

I don't see how violence is made comic, especially given the increasing realism in graphics (even going back say 10 years though you could have some pretty horrific violence via the graphics), and they are both detached in the same way. Obviously if you shoot someone in game it is detached from reality, just the same as if you had sex in game it would be detached with reality.

Let me put it this way: how many times have you heard about somebody watching a violent action movie, then going into a killing rampage? and conversely, how many times have you heard about a couple watching a porn movie, then having sex?

Say what you will about the merits of violence and sexuality, but I believe its logical that something that doesn't readily influence people would be more acceptable than something which does, so it's clearly not as clear-cut as you imply.

I dunno.

I sit here with my 13 year old daughter, watching a 'good' show (could be one of many), and suddenly there is partial nudity (or full nudity with a sheet or towel in the way) and a sex scene which really has nothing to do with the story line of the show. It is just thrown in to add some skin-n-slurp.

SGU is a very good example, because there have been so many scenes in so few episodes that are simply thrown in for the sake of showing someone having sex. I mean, really, what is the point in showing a man humping a woman who is then interrupted by a call? He could have been doing any number of things more pertinent to the storyline.

She has not watched SGU because she usually goes to bed earlier than it airs. But, I don't want her watching it, simply because I never know when a random sex event will take place. We are both enjoying V. But if it turns into a sex-fest (like several SGU episodes) I will have to start recording every episode so that I can skip her watching of those episodes. I have already done it with one episode of Flash Forward, because of the heavy lesbian activity.

Movies are one thing - there is always warning of sexual content. TV, however, should be held to a somewhat higher standard - simply because the audience is younger in general. Shows that are meant for a general audience should not have gratuitous sex scenes. And shows like SGU, Babylon 5, any Star Trek, things like Flash Forward and V, or the upcoming Prisoner are meant for all ages (I would think).

I am all for freedom of speech - for the individual. But freedom of expression must be balanced and, to a certain extent, limited in the general media. At least in my opinion.

"Let me put it this way: how many times have you heard about somebody watching a violent action movie, then going into a killing rampage? and conversely, how many times have you heard about a couple watching a porn movie, then having sex?

Say what you will about the merits of violence and sexuality, but I believe its logical that something that doesn't readily influence people would be more acceptable than something which does, so it's clearly not as clear-cut as you imply."

So you are saying that nudity and sex scenes do not influence behavior, but depicted violence does?

Personally, I have never heard of someone going on a killing rampage because they watched a violent action movie. There is always something more involved.

But your other point of people watching (hard or soft) porn and then wanting to have sex? Happens all the time. And that might be why there are so many STD's, abortions, failed marriages, single mothers and fathers...

Let see :

- SGU is PG ( parental guidance ) in Canada, M ( mature ) in Australia

- V 2009 is TV 14 in USA

- Babylon 5 is PG, with some episode M and the season 5 is TV 16

- Star Trek 2009 is PG13 for sci-fi action and violence, and brief sexual content.

- For the original "Prisoner" from 1967, it is PG... sure that the modern version will have minimum PG

- Flash Forward : until now, have no rating

So, a lot of these show are not for your daughter, some of them need YOUR parental guidance... by the way, if you can post here, you can consult the IMDB for see the "Certification" because it seem that for a lot of series, you think wrong... the more funny is that your daughter seem enough adult for film like Star Trek 2009 who show sci-fi action and violence, and brief sexual content...

Media is not responsible if a lot of people don't use their PG because they are too lazy... i understand your point of view on the media but they are not responsible if you allow your daughter to see V2009 since it is TV14...

Where the media are really responsible, it is the publicity who cut film or serie on TV... a lot of these publicity show more women/men skin or in some case, similation of sex act that the film or serie itself... What about National geographic channel who show African people running naked or half naked in their village... what about reportage related to biologie and who explain reproduction... and school, early, people are teach how reproduction work...

In fact, nudity is something normal in life... sex too...

For SGU, you wrote :

what is the point in showing a man humping a woman who is then interrupted by a call? He could have been doing any number of things more pertinent to the storyline.

In fact, it is very pertinent to the storyline... people there are on the edge of death, creating a adrenaling rush... it is a fact that in case of danger, people seek confort with a partner... if you know that tomorrow, you can be dead... what will be your action for these night... a torrid night with the woman you love or a game of chess with somebody else...

In fact, film and serie are not so hot that the real life...

And that might be why there are so many STD's, abortions, failed marriages, single mothers and fathers...

The reason is education... young people like try everything who is prohibith... censure them will lead them to try it after your back... to much parent are afraid to speak about sexuality, STD, condom, etc with their own children...

I’m sorry but no, if both parties did not think about both the good and consequences of their actions and ready to stand up and take responsibility than they shouldn’t be doing it in the first place and you reap what you so. A better comparison I would say is rape hentai, I have never heard of anyone actually raping someone after watching a rape hentai or play a rape game, same can be said about lolicon which is another issue with in itself. And if one party isn’t ready than that person needs to learn to say NO, two letters with 1 meaning.

You need both, nudity and violence.