Views and opinions expressed on this website are solely those of the individuals expressing them. They are not necessarily the views and opinions of all of the contributors, A Little Nonsense, its editor, or its sponsors. So, if you disagree, don't get all flibbidy-jibbit. Rather, join the conversation and share your thoughts.

Sunday, September 18, 2011

Sex & Violence in comics

Dan Slott started a twitter conversation last night where he asked comic readers who are parents what level of sex and violence they want to see in comics.  As you can imagine, the responses ran the gamut from full on NC-17 content to no sex/violence at all.


But, one theme that did pop out repeatedly was how much implied sexual content existed in shows "we" watched in the late 70's and early 80's.  One example that Slott brought up was Three's Company.  That show had the running gag that Jack was homosexual (which was why it was "okay" for him to live with single women) and tons of sexual innuendo.  

I tend to fall pretty strongly into the "unlimited violence but no sex" in my Marvel/DC comics.  Now, non-Big 2 are another matter as I love anything with pretty girls in it (although I am more a cheesecake fan than a sex scene fan).  Why is that?

Here's what it comes down to for me: I have a daughter.  I worry not one iota about her slicing off a friend's head with a sword or shooting up her school while imagining a scene from Punisher.  But, my biggest worry as a parent is pregnancy.  Pretty much all the other juvenile problems can be healed.  There is rehab for drugs and even if you go through a phase of stealing cars as a juvenile, you can eventually still go to college and lead a productive life.  Heck...you can even stop being a stripper.

Pregnancy is different.  My hat is off to those who have thrived as teen parents, but I'm talking about this from a parent's (specifically a father's) point of view.  But, no father in 2011 hopes that his daughter will have a child before she is (a) finished with her education, (b) established in her career and (c) married.  That's the optimal that we're all shooting for.
So, why do I care about this more than many fathers a generation ago?  Well, I have a few theories which may or may not be based in fact:
  1. The whole AIDS thing.  I was born in 1973, so I went to high school and college in the late 80's and early 90's.  Everyone was freaked out by AIDS because it was a death sentence back then and we had just realized that it wasn't just a disease that gay men and IV drug users got.  The orgy-like behavior from the 60's and 70's may have sounded like the good old days, but we could hardly imagine anything less wise.
  2. Little girls have more career goals and possibilites than a few generations ago.  Increasingly, more girls than men go to college and graduate school in the United States.  Go back to the 70's and 80's and women we only starting to emerge from a society that expected them to be teachers, nurses or secretaries.  Heck....in some of those jobs, pregnancy could even be a tool to make a physician or businessman marry you.  How times have changed!
  3. Father's are generally more involved in their daughter's lives than generations ago.  The goal used to be: get them married so they're off the payroll.  Now fathers are involved in their daughter's lives and share in their daughter's hopes and dreams which are more extensive that being a homemaker for a surgeon.  
So, you take all of that, and I DO cringe a little bit every time there is a hint in any Marvel or DC comic that people having sex is somehow cool, hip and desirable.  That's what I have my non-Big 2 comics for (Tarot, Cavewoman, etc.), but I kinda want Spider-Man and the Avengers to be clean.

If you have a different opinion, I'd love to hear it.  For what it's worth, I've heard parents of boys say exactly the opposite: They worry about their boys crippling a friend trying out a move seen in a Deadpool comic, but they really don't care how much sex their sons have.

- Dean Stell

4 comments:

  1. I tend to think it's a more effective deterrent to show the consequences of actions than to pretend those actions don't exist. Immaculate conception in a comic isn't going to fool anyone of reading age. Besides, mainstream comics have plenty of sex, even if they don't formally acknowledge sex acts. If anything, I would think that would give children the wrong idea; The Vamp, with her pheromone powers and her skimpy outfits might not have sex, but she will sure imply plenty to a young teen mind.

    But if you depict sex honestly and openly as the complex human act it is...that might actually be beneficial. Having a character called "Jailbait" with all that implies is one thing, but having a 20 year old single mother dealing with her dual life as a superhero and a caregiver might be almost educational.

    I've stated in the past that I think comics could benefit from some kind of internally administered ratings system to give parents an idea of what a comic might contain, without expecting them to read it first (which I've always thought to be a unrealistic expectation.) With such a system, it would make sense to me to have different levels of sex and violence in comics intended for different age groups, assuming the companies would stick to them. I would prefer that personally to a carte blanche approach.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Yeah, I see your point..... But I think until they're going to really show what being a 20 year old single mother is really like, they should skip it. Because she wouldn't have a dual role where she just has trouble dating, they'd have to show 3 years worth of comics where she doesn't superhero or date or do anything for herself because she's changing diapers and dealing with sickness that her kid picks up at child care and how she can't superhero because she needs to make money for child care.....

    I completely agree on the ratings system though. Why can't it be like TV where they say, "The following program contains scenes of ______, _______ and __________." The only wrinkle I'd add is that I want them to make the rating the standard for a title. Like Uncanny X-Men is the PG rated title, and Uncanny X-Force is the R rated title and there is no bleeding over. I give a lot of my old comics to our housekeepers kids and it is really tedious for them having to break up runs because the Disir are suggesting that they want to have an orgy with Thor in a single issue (when that scene adds nothing to the story).

    ReplyDelete
  3. There would definitely be a need for some poetic license and compressed time there, yeah. One incident where SuperMommy can't go out on the town because the babysitter canceled and the kid gets colicky could stand for a whole lot of similar nights.

    Agreed on your other point. Some would probably hate that because they'd think it would preclude crossovers. Aside from the fact that comics could probably stand to have fewer crossovers in the first place, they could still have them, just maybe not the line wide ones they have now.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Yeah....crossovers would be a problem. Not sure what to do about those other than have fewer of them. My semi-bold prediction is that once digital really gets cranking, they won't have to have 10 X-titles anymore to get sales. They'll be able to have 1-2 X-titles that sell a TON and that should lessen the need for crossovers. (I hope).

    ReplyDelete