Innocence - the idea of it is becoming more and more corrupt...

[Skitty1]

Warning: this topic is somewhat questionable - as long as people are mature I think we can have a good chat.

Ok so on one of my many adventures on YouTube I came across a video (cartoon-ish) that revolves around the innocence of youth. At first glance someone would label the video as something gross but this comment describes it best I think...

A video about shyness and innocence of youth. The girl is innocent. When the boy tries to kiss her, she jumps in the water,and someone appears in her [censored]. She feels [censored], she wants that, yet she thinks of it as a bad thing. When the monsters appear - those two are having sex, while she just sees them as that. Monster girl bites another boy [censored] - a [censored].And in the end, the girl realizes - she will eventually become same as them so her eyes burns up to realization. She's a monster as well.

Now why did I start a topic about this? well I want to know how people feel about how people look at innocence and how society has a very bad habit of corrupting the idea of sex and innocence.

 

[NarutoActor]

Well not in a statement of support/against, but if you go with Thomas Hobbs' view on the state of nature, no one is innocent, everyone is self satisfying, out for themselves, since the beginning of their life.

Then I started thinking about the ideal of Natural Morals, and that everyone is born with an innate moral compass, which in it's fullest extent would be innocents. But if someone already experiences something immoral and corrupts their innocence could they some how return to a state of innocence?
Or is no tie between morals, and innocents, and that innocents is the lack of morals. Taking it in that direction, the most innocent being would be something close to the overman(Ubermaunch) That Nietzsche talked about.

 

[Oryx]

Well not in a statement of support/against, but if you go with Thomas Hobbs' view on the state of nature, no one is innocent, everyone is self satisfying, out for themselves, since the beginning of their life.

Then I started thinking about the ideal of Natural Morals, and that everyone is born with an innate moral compass, which in it's fullest extent would be innocents. But if someone already experiences something immoral and corrupts their innocence could they some how return to a state of innocence?
Or is no tie between morals, and innocents, and that innocents is the lack of morals. Taking it in that direction, the most innocent being would be something close to the overman(Ubermaunch) That Nietzsche talked about.

I'm replying to your post because the OP confused the crap out of me with the summary of that video.

I would agree that children, from the second they're born, are self satisfying and it's a learned trait to be thoughtful towards others. A baby, although it can't understand much, can understand that they're hungry and have no way to feed themselves, so they cry in hopes someone else will feed them. They don't feel the need to thank anyone or feel grateful, because it's expected in their minds that they will be fed when they need it. Gratefulness in generosity is acquired through socialization, and through not having everything given to you so you don't come to expect it when it is handed to you.

However, it depends strongly on your definition of innocence. Many people think of it as the way that makes people feel best in our society, however it varies from one country to the next. For example, Skitty you mentioned "corrupting the idea of sex and innocence". This has the assumption that once a child knows about sex, they're not innocent - and I would disagree with that. In our society often sex is seen from a Puritanical standpoint, that sex is something that "dirty" people do and that it's wrong. However, I strongly believe that there's nothing wrong with it and in fact it's a moral good in and of itself. It makes two consenting people happy physically and sometimes emotionally as well, and it can be a beautiful expression of love. It can be abused, but so can many other things that aren't inherently immoral.

 

[Skitty1]

I'm replying to your post because the OP confused the crap out of me with the summary of that video.

I would agree that children, from the second they're born, are self satisfying and it's a learned trait to be thoughtful towards others. A baby, although it can't understand much, can understand that they're hungry and have no way to feed themselves, so they cry in hopes someone else will feed them. They don't feel the need to thank anyone or feel grateful, because it's expected in their minds that they will be fed when they need it. Gratefulness in generosity is acquired through socialization, and through not having everything given to you so you don't come to expect it when it is handed to you.

However, it depends strongly on your definition of innocence. Many people think of it as the way that makes people feel best in our society, however it varies from one country to the next. For example, Skitty you mentioned "corrupting the idea of sex and innocence". This has the assumption that once a child knows about sex, they're not innocent - and I would disagree with that. In our society often sex is seen from a Puritanical standpoint, that sex is something that "dirty" people do and that it's wrong. However, I strongly believe that there's nothing wrong with it and in fact it's a moral good in and of itself. It makes two consenting people happy physically and sometimes emotionally as well, and it can be a beautiful expression of love. It can be abused, but so can many other things that aren't inherently immoral.

How was I confusing? the whole video was kind of gut wrenching but it does have some sort of moral lesson to be learned from it. Personally after seeing it the ending part has been stuck in my head :(

 

[Oryx]

How was I confusing? the whole video was kind of gut wrenching but it does have some sort of moral lesson to be learned from it. Personally after seeing it the ending part has been stuck in my head :(

I don't have any interest in watching the actual video, it's the summary that's confusing and has a lot of ambiguous phrasing and confusing shifts. So I replied to your overall point and left the video alone, lol. You should reply to my actual points instead of focusing on how I didn't understand your video since my points were fairly strong regardless.

 

[Skitty1]

Damn you text formatting!!! it makes it a pain in the butt (swapped for a better word) to quote properly... :(

I would agree that children, from the second they're born, are self satisfying and it's a learned trait to be thoughtful towards others. A baby, although it can't understand much, can understand that they're hungry and have no way to feed themselves, so they cry in hopes someone else will feed them. They don't feel the need to thank anyone or feel grateful, because it's expected in their minds that they will be fed when they need it. Gratefulness in generosity is acquired through socialization, and through not having everything given to you so you don't come to expect it when it is handed to you.

Well I was not tlaking about self entitlement my point was that it seems like thanks to society and other factors that younger people (like me) are being introduced to themes early on. Here is a quote that can wrap up most of todays media on TV...

If you turn on TV, all you see's a bunch of "what the f---'s"
Dude is dating so and so, blabbering 'bout such and such
And that ain't Jersey Shore, homey, that's the news
And these [are] the same people supposedly telling us the truth

However, it depends strongly on your definition of innocence. Many people think of it as the way that makes people feel best in our society, however it varies from one country to the next. For example, Skitty you mentioned "corrupting the idea of sex and innocence". This has the assumption that once a child knows about sex, they're not innocent - and I would disagree with that. In our society often sex is seen from a Puritanical standpoint, that sex is something that "dirty" people do and that it's wrong. However, I strongly believe that there's nothing wrong with it and in fact it's a moral good in and of itself. It makes two consenting people happy physically and sometimes emotionally as well, and it can be a beautiful expression of love. It can be abused, but so can many other things that aren't inherently immoral.

I think that the idea of sex is too causal now. Sex is used in jokes, conversation, and lots of other things. Sex is no longer an act of love - it is just viewed as a pleasure and often used for jokes.

 

[NarutoActor]

That's a personal '' how reality should be", but you should expand on your claim, why should sex be connected with love. Why should it be more private, and how all of it relates to the original topic of innocence.

 

[Skitty1]

That's a personal '' how reality should be", but you should expand on your claim, why should sex be connected with love. Why should it be more private, and how all of it relates to the original topic of innocence.

There are approximately 1 billion plus Catholics on the planet (and counting) - the vast majority thinks being a virgin is a sign of purity. I am not catholic however saying 1 billion people are stupid is just plain ignorant.

Why is sex related to love? it is life without sex there would be no humans. Sex is probably one of the most important things for humans (for reproducing not screwing for pleasure).

Why should it be more private

So what? you think people should have sex in a glass box in public? sex should not be so damn causal - at least I don't think so any way.

 

[NarutoActor]

Okay, virginity equals purity, which equals innocence. There is your logic now make supporting claims.

I never said it should be causal, or public, just asking for a reason as to why YOU think it should be private. Restating your opponing in a counter form, doesn't support your beliefs, or prove your point.

 

[Oryx]

There are approximately 1 billion plus Catholics on the planet (and counting) - the vast majority thinks being a virgin is a sign of purity. I am not catholic however saying 1 billion people are stupid is just plain ignorant.

Why is sex related to love? it is life without sex there would be no humans. Sex is probably one of the most important things for humans (for reproducing not screwing for pleasure).



So what? you think people should have sex in a glass box in public? sex should not be so damn causal - at least I don't think so any way.

But why shouldn't sex be so casual? You can't just say "a lot of people think it shouldn't be", that's not how morality works. You have to make an argument as to why it should be immoral, who it's harming, what bad values it's instilling in children. Why is "sexuality is okay" a bad value?

In my opinion, although I'm the type to connect sex with love and not do it otherwise, I don't see a problem with casual sex. If the idea of having sex wasn't so strange and "wrong", we would be able to supply anyone who might possible need it with the tools to prevent unwanted pregnancy and avoid STDs. Just because he feels that sex isn't wrong and shouldn't be hidden doesn't mean he thinks everyone should only be allowed to have sex in public or that you shouldn't have control over your own body and your own morality.

 

[Skitty1]

Okay, virginity equals purity, which equals innocence. There is your logic now make supporting claims.

I stated: There are approximately 1 billion plus Catholics on the planet (and counting) - the vast majority thinks being a virgin is a sign of purity. I am not catholic however saying 1 billion people are stupid is just plain ignorant.

Where did I say that I fully support and back the Catholics on the beliefs they have? oh wait didn't.

I never said it should be causal, or public, just asking for a reason as to why YOU think it should be private. Restating your opponing in a counter form, doesn't support your beliefs, or prove your point.

I think that sex should be private because it is between the two people doing it... unless you're into doing it with more than two people than it should between whatever amount.

There is no way to prove it should be right or wrong it is a moral thing. In other words: Is There Always One Right Answer? no.

But why shouldn't sex be so casual? You can't just say "a lot of people think it shouldn't be", that's not how morality works. You have to make an argument as to why it should be immoral, who it's harming, what bad values it's instilling in children. Why is "sexuality is okay" a bad value?

Keep in mind in my OP I was talking about YOUNGER people. I think that the way society exposes young people to sex so fast is not good at all.

So let me tackle each of your points properly...

*why it should be immoral - I did not mean it that way - I mean it is wrong the way people expose it to younger people.
*who it's harming - young people (1-19 ish) or people who don't know about love and sex.
*what bad values it's instilling in children - it is showing kids its ok to throw around sex as if it is no big deal and it makes light of things that shouldn't be.

 

[NarutoActor]

Lol so it can be public, if it's a ********.

Kissing is an emotinal-physical reaction between two people. Should that be allowed, and regardless if something is public or private if one commits an immoral act wouldn't they lose their innocents?

 

[Oryx]

I stated: There are approximately 1 billion plus Catholics on the planet (and counting) - the vast majority thinks being a virgin is a sign of purity. I am not catholic however saying 1 billion people are stupid is just plain ignorant.

Where did I say that I fully support and back the Catholics on the beliefs they have? oh wait didn't.



I think that sex should be private because it is between the two people doing it... unless you're into doing it with more than two people than it should between whatever amount.

There is no way to prove it should be right or wrong it is a moral thing. In other words: Is There Always One Right Answer? no.



Keep in mind in my OP I was talking about YOUNGER people. I think that the way society exposes young people to sex so fast is not good at all.

So let me tackle each of your points properly...

*why it should be immoral - I did not mean it that way - I mean it is wrong the way people expose it to younger people.
*who it's harming - young people (1-19 ish) or people who don't know about love and sex.
*what bad values it's instilling in children - it is showing kids its ok to throw around sex as if it is no big deal and it makes light of things that shouldn't be.

But why is it NOT okay to treat sex as not a big deal? Why shouldn't it be a big deal is the question. Why is it bad to expose children to sexual topics young, so it's not seen as such a taboo? For example, I was aware of the topic of sex before most children, and as a result of the way my mother handled it with me I felt comfortable enough to talk to her when I started having sex so I wasn't left out in the cold, unaware of how to protect myself and things such as that. I wouldn't have felt comfortable if I had been completely sheltered from it as a child.

 

[Skitty1]

But why is it NOT okay to treat sex as not a big deal? Why shouldn't it be a big deal is the question. Why is it bad to expose children to sexual topics young, so it's not seen as such a taboo? For example, I was aware of the topic of sex before most children, and as a result of the way my mother handled it with me I felt comfortable enough to talk to her when I started having sex so I wasn't left out in the cold, unaware of how to protect myself and things such as that. I wouldn't have felt comfortable if I had been completely sheltered from it as a child.

Well personally I would not say I am sheltered - I knew about sex since 3rd or 4th grade and I think that that has helped me.

 

[Aerinoctis]

So I watched the video... and that was the most disturbing video that I've ever seen in my life (it even beats out Interior Semiotics), but I'm in awe at the same time. I'm surprised it's still on YouTube. It makes sense, though. My interpretation of it is a bit different (in that I think it's what the innocent view sex as, rather than realizing that that's what it's ultimately going to become them), but I do think that this video accurately depicts the mind of a truly innocent, prude person and I think it captures the way that society has conditioned sex to be viewed by the younger people, and the effect it has on those that aren't comfortable with it. Because of porn and over-sexualizing imagery in the media, sex itself has become something that some people view to be dirty, rather than natural. It's something seen by young people to be more of a one-night stand because of what they see on TV, rather than an experience between people who are in a relationship and want to share each other. The problem isn't of having casual sex: there is nothing wrong with a couple having sex casually - that's also been proven to be healthy.

Sex is perfectly natural - it's even an instinct (excluding asexuals) in human beings. If you believe exposing a child to sex is wrong, then I have to question your morals, because children start to discover their bodies on their own and grow curious regardless. As I said, sex is a natural part of life. When a child becomes of age and their body starts to change when they reach puberty, they're going to start exploring what's happening to them, and they'll eventually discover it for themselves. Teaching them about sex, especially during puberty, is incredibly important, and since you consider young people to be people between the ages of 1 and 19, that falls in the category of people who are going through puberty. I would consider it to be harmful to them if they were sheltered away from sex, since it's been proven to be beneficial and healthy to teach young people about sex. You wouldn't want them to enter adulthood and not know anything about it, now, would you? The problem is with the way that society has conditioned people to believe that sex is dirty. Exposing young people to sex isn't a problem when it's done right, and with the glorification of sex (clearly displayed in most shows on MTV), we're living in a time now where exposing young people to sex the right way is vital.

 

[Captain Fabio]

I am going to step in here, because that video isn't suitable for a PG forum.
I am sorry for anyone who has been impacted negatively by that video and sorry the staff didn't get to it sooner.

Like the video, this topic isn't suitable for PC; although it has generated some discussion, at the end of the day, it is down to the couple and their sex life. What they do in that sex life is up to them.

Locked.​

​