Which is Worse: Violence, Nudity, or Toilet Humor?

Post Reply New Topic

I don't think that there is anything inherently wrong with any of them.
I don't like sexual content, but I think that nonsexualized nudity is overcensored/overprotested. Overcensored mainly by a chilling effect. I find it hypocritical that many sex scenes are acceptable as long as you don't see the peoples parts, but if you see the parts outside of a sexual context it suddenly becomes unnacceptable?
I don't care for violence either, but I'm not against it.
Toiler humor, I don't understand and don't care for. I watch a lot of shows that use it, but I tend to watch those shows for different reasons.

For all three categories, they can be done right and wrong. The first two are very real things, and art would suffer greatly without them. Art can do without toilet humor though. If any of them are done properly, then I think it's great. If not, oh, well, it get's forgotten pretty fast.
All things have a season.
I'm glad South Park is back in for another season. (two jokes in one day, I'm on a roll)

VIOLENCE ALL THE WAY

Kinda sad when violence is mixed in with the other two.

Alfred Hitchcock recognized though, that violence does have its place in the media, at least as something akin to therapy, in that many people get their bile out of their system by being vicarious participants in on-screen violence.

People as a whole probably need to see it, yes.

Making it fiction and sport is better than the gladiatorial games of the past and whatnot of other cultured people, for example.

I suppose that represents improvement of a sort.

i never found toilet humor funny in any way.

yeah, a flooding toilet is about as much fun as a flooding toilet.

The reason I don't like nudity, because I was never able to celebrate the differences between men and women and I never will be able to do so.