Posted on 09/07/2004 5:44:38 AM PDT by Pharmboy
CHICAGO (Reuters) - Teenagers who watch a lot of television with sexual content are twice as likely to engage in intercourse than those who watch few such programs, according to a study published on Tuesday.
The study covered 1,792 adolescents aged 12 to 17 who were quizzed on viewing habits and sexual activity and then surveyed again a year later. Both regular and cable television were included.
"This is the strongest evidence yet that the sexual content of television programs encourages adolescents to initiate sexual intercourse and other sexual activities," said Rebecca Collins, a psychologist at the RAND Corp. who headed the study.
"The impact of television viewing is so large that even a moderate shift in the sexual content of adolescent TV watching could have a substantial effect on their sexual behavior," she added.
The study found that youths who watched large amounts of programming with sexual content were also more likely to initiate sexual activities short of intercourse, such as oral sex.
It found that shows where sex was talked about but not depicted had just as much impact as the more explicit shows. "Both affect adolescents' perceptions of what is normal sexual behavior and propels their own sexual behavior," Collins said.
She said the 12-year-olds who watched a lot of sexual content behaved like the 14- or 15-years-olds who watched the least amount. "The advancement in sexual behavior we saw among kids who watched a lot of sexual television was striking."
Her comments were released in a statement in conjunction with publication of the study in the September issue of "Pediatrics," the journal of the American Academy of Pediatrics.
The survey did not break down the amount of sexual exposure in terms of hours per week or percentages of material viewed, Collins said in an interview.
It did find that the 10 percent of those who watched the most television with sexual content were twice as likely to have initiated sexual intercourse when checked a year later than adolescents who were among the 10 percent who watched the least amount of sexual content.
"The best way for parents who are trying to figure out what is a lot versus little is to realize that the average (U.S.) child watches about three hours of television a day, and that the heaviest rates of sexual content are in prime time which is probably what those hours are made of," she said.
The report said earlier studies found that about two-thirds of TV entertainment programs contain sexual content, ranging from jokes and innuendo to intercourse and other behaviors.
The study was funded by the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development.
DING DING DING. We have a winner, folks! Of course, you'll never see a sociologist write something like that—far too judgmental.
No, I don't agree. I am over 50yrs old, and when I was a kid, we wanted, and had, sex, as much as we could. I believe that it was the same even 200 yrs ago. Today, it's easier, because kids have cars, and both parents are working, so there is less supervision....the desire has always been there, it was just harder to get away with it in earlier times.
Who are they gonna sue that's deep pockets? The TV and cable channels? the producers? Movie reviewers? what?
Unspoken in the discussion thus far, I notice, is what has been driving this since the late 70s.
But I ain't going there.
Give me a break! And they know the contents exactly how?
I have never watched the shows mentioned in this thread more than perhaps a 1/4 episode each, and I still don't have an urge to go blow up a school...
I'm not justifying anything...like the study, I am just pointing out the obvious facts. Many kids today wait also. I really don't think we were the exception.
I would make that the 1920s in the person of Antonio Gramsci. The Sexual Revolution of the 1970s was the achievement of his ideological successors in the Frankfurt School: Maslow, Fromm, Marcuse...
When there's blood in the water, they'll eat their own.
Duh.
Did they think that kids just spontaneously started to pierce their bellybuttons, expose their midriffs and get tattoos?
If they are willing to mutilate and mark their bodies for life, giving up their chastity is an easy next step.
Thanks MTV.
'swhy I was always surprised that the Clintons had children.
in my opinion, it is not just the sex on TV, but the fact that there is no parental discussion of morality. If parents don't provide a standard of behavior for their kids and they are left to watch what they see on TV and adopt that as what expectations are, then they will have sex. If you don't provide morals for your children, the popular culture will. if you DO provide morals for your children and discuss what is on TV and why it is wrong, your kids will be fine.
'swhy I was always surprised that the Clintons had children.
Maybe they ate all but one.
Something tells me if we cleaned up our TV shows, they'd find another reason.
They left the least-attractive one, evidently.
LOL!
They fed on Chelsea politically instead.
She looks pretty good. I thought she looked good before but if you see her now it's evident she had plastic surgery.
I wonder if anyone's done a study on the impact of the Lewinski scandal on teen behavior?
Maybe they tried but couldn't keep her down.
Amen sister!
Same with public school sex ed classes and the Catholic dioceses which are starting to mandate 'sexual safety' programs (which I weasel my kids out of but they still have to deal with the other kids who take those classes). You can either form your own kids' morals or let total strangers do it for you.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.