Can listening to sexually aggressive lyrics prompt teenagers to have sex at an earlier age?
That's the issue raised by a new study, and it could unleash a fierce debate over whether a teen's music player is potentially risky and -- if so -- what should or can be done about it.
In an unusual piece of research, investigators at the University of Pittsburgh graded the sexual aggressiveness of lyrics, using songs by popular artists on the US Billboard chart.
The lyrics were graded from the least to the most sexually degrading.
They then asked 711 students aged 15 to 16 at three local high schools about their music preferences and their sexual behaviour.
Overall, 31 percent of the teens had had intercourse.
But the rate was only 20.6 percent among those who had been least exposed to sexually degrading lyrics but 44.6 percent among those highly exposed to the most degrading lyrics.
The study's lead author, Brian Primack, said music by itself was not the direct spark for sex but helped mould perception and was thus "likely to be a factor" in sexual development.
"These lyrics frequently portray aggressive males subduing submissive females, which may lead adolescents to incorporate this 'script' for sexual experience into their world view," he told AFP.
The study took social factors, educational attainment and ethnicity into account.
"Non-degrading" lyrics described sex in a non-specific way and as a mutually consensual act, while "degrading" lyrics described sexual acts as a purely physical, graphic and dominant act.
"Lyrics describing degrading sex tend to portray sex as expected, direct and uncomplicated," said the paper, which appeared last week in the American Journal of Preventive Medicine.
"Such descriptions may offer scripts that adolescents feel compelled to play out, whether they are cast in the role of either the female or the male partner."
Steven Martino, author of a study published in 2000 that also made the same association between music and sexual behaviour, said the findings were a wakeup call.
"The need [is] for parents to be aware so that they can place limits and criticise and understand what their children are listening to," said Martino, a behavioural scientist in Pittsburgh with the Rand Corporation.
More than 750,000 American teenagers become pregnant each year, giving the United States one of the highest rates of teenage pregnancies in the rich world, according to figures quoted in the study. Nearly a quarter of all female teenagers in the United States have a sexually-transmitted disease.
Nearly a quarter of a century ago, lyrics by Prince on his album "Purple Rain" prompted wives of senior politicians in Washington, led by Tipper Gore, to set up the Parents Music Resource Center.
They pushed for the music industry to develop guidelines and a rating system for lyrics, similar to the ratings for movies. The system was criticised by many as unworkable and counter-productive, making it more daring for teens to buy songs they deemed taboo.
"Government needs to help parents to regulate the industry," said Helen Ward, president of the Kids First Parents Association of Canada.
Today's technology means it is "physically impossible" for parents to monitor what their children listened to or watched on their MP3, she said.
But Raymond MacDonald, a specialist in music psychology at Glasgow Caledonian University, described it as "a perennial debate that cropped up with artists like Frankie Goes to Hollywood, the Sex Pistols and Elvis Presley before that."
"Do we really need a solution to the problem?", he asked.
MacDonald said that even if every generation rehashes the discussion differently, there's an important difference today: age lines have blurred and now everyone is listening to everything.
"Maybe we should do a study to see if the music has as a bad influence on grandparents," he said wryly
40 comments:
This is an age-old debate that, as MacDonald said, is rehashed by every generation. I think it is lazy and inaccurate to say it is "impossible" to monitor what your children listen to or that the government "needs to help parents". It is not Obama's job to ground your kids when they break curfew and it is not his responsibility to make sure they don't listen to rap or rock 'n roll. That is a parent's job and as a child grows older, it becomes their job. There is a rating on music and that is as far as I personally think things should go. As kids mature, they have to be given the chance to make choices about what they expose themselves to. If you make these decisions for them, they will not develop standards, values, or ideals. I don't personally enjoy lyrics that are too sexually aggressive or explicit, but I choose what I listen to and other children should be given the same freedom. The people who lobby for government control of all potentially harmful things are in turn lobbying for stunting the emotional and intellectual growth of coming generations and creating a paranoid society, even if that is not their aim. If the sexual behavior of teens today is not pleasing to parents, something needs to be done about societal views and sexual education. You don't mess with the first amendment.
I think that is is a revelant issue with todays teen but i do not think that is the place of the government to regulate music available to teens. Parents should be made aware of the music and they can chose whether or not it is necessary for them to place restrictions on their own children.
back in the olde days of the original rock n' roll genre, parents and older generations berated and condemned the music industry for having lyrics that were highly unedifying. Did these complaints change anything? Not really. Today we face the same issue, but on a more explicit scale. Are these complaints going to be any more effective than the last 50 years worth? Unlikely.
But does this mean that going after lyrics that suggest and prompt baby-making is not worth the while. Of course not - it's the thought that counts.
This is actually really funny. I don't think that the music teenagers listen to is the sole reason for so many teens getting pregnant each year. Our minds are very stobborn and once we have made up our minds, not much can change it. The rating system is a good start but thoes of us who are old enough to even know what sex is usually don't ask our parents if we can buy the CD or not. So really I don't think there is much anyone can do about this...
"As a man thinks in his heart, so is he." It's sad but realistic that what we fill our minds with will naturally "ooze" out. Our thoughts have sooo much impact on our actions. The degrading lyrics make it easy to account for the 14% increase in sexual behavior among teens. And beyond adolescence, I agree that the music we listen to affects us at any age, status, and circumstance.
Personally I believe there is a corolation between raunchy music but I really don't understand why the heads up in Washington really care if we young people are having sex. And they should just educate us in these things rather than removing all things that make us want to have sex. We need to watch the government regulations, less we become like 1984 where all passion and emotions have been declared evil and in need of elimination.
I think that the content of today's music is a worrisome issue. But there are other factors that cause the misconceptions of teenagers. The teens in Europe and other developed countries listen to the same music that we do. So what differentiates us from them? I believe that the difference is education. I have never taken a sex ed class, but my(European) parents have made the issue perfectly clear to me. Also, many teens are unaware that condoms and birth control cannot make sex "safe". The problem lies in the lack of information that teens recieve. The government can do nothing about the music with the first amendment blocking the way. It can however focus on the root of the problem and make sex ed a standard in all high schools.
I do beleive that music has a very strong impact on todays youth. And if songs have lyrics telling kids that sex is fun and cool then they are gonna try it, which ultimately ends up with teenage pregnancy and STDs.
It wouldn’t be surprising if teens who listened to music which condoned sex were slightly influenced by it, but I think there are also other factors that need to be incorporated in this study. Did the researchers also ask what television shows the teens watched; what religion they are a part of; if their friends were sexually active? I don’t know… I think there are a lot of other things besides music which influence teenage lifestyles and could contribute to this increase in teenage pregnancy. Chances are, if you love to listen to “sexually degrading” music all the time, you aren’t at all uncomfortable with the idea of having sex, but if you subjected a group of 17th century puritans to the same music, they would probably feel differently and ask you to please change the song. I think it all has to do with your previous upbringing and your own belief system (whether or not you think something is either appropriate or inappropriate) and while music can be an influential part of someone’s life, it isn’t going to be the only thing you consider before choosing to have sex with someone. If everyone was taking the advice of song lyrics seriously, chances are we wouldn’t be doing too well…
i think that the music might have had a little impact on the peoples sexual lives but there are many other influences.
This is so funny. Sometimes I wonder "Are they using our tax money to fund experiments like this?!" I truly believe that music plays a SMALL factor in the choice of having sex. Instead of just focusing on music, how about they look at what they display on the internet. Various amounts of porn are released each day. Do they even take the time to see that the most likely factor is that these kids most likely have seen porn and just did it? Haha, I don't know how else to explain it. I hope that they do not discontinue music with graphic sexual content because, why would you not want to have the right to free speech? I mean even Obama had a little fun free speech the other night at the Wizard's game :P So please stop the stupidity and just let us keep our freedoms! Peace.
~Isaac
This sounds kind of absurd to me, It'll bother me if they decide to further censor and dictate what I can and can't listen to. I think that the corespondence between these two things could be backwords, with more of the people going out and having sex who are less parentally controlled and therefore listening to that music anyway. Also, I believe it only effects people who don't see the line between the things said in the music and the real world. I'd prefer it if the PMRC wouldn't get further involved since you already have to be 18 to get CD's labeled explicit in certain stores, and all they could do is make it illegal which would be a horrible violation of free speech and a slippery slope toward controlling access to media and further censorship of what we can say.
I don't think that sexually aggressive lyrics prompt teenagers to have sex at an earlier age. For one lyrics aren't the first thing in a song that attracts teenager's ears that happens to be the beat or the rhythm of the song. Another reason is lyrics don't have as much of an effect as actually seeing what is being spoken. Teenagers do get more sexual thoughts from the lyrics but majority will never act on them. Those that do act on the lyrics probably were influenced by something like porn.
I don't think that sexually aggressive lyrics prompt teenagers to have sex at an earlier age. For one lyrics aren't the first thing in a song that attracts teenager's ears that happens to be the beat or the rhythm of the song. Another reason is lyrics don't have as much of an effect as actually seeing what is being spoken. Teenagers do get more sexual thoughts from the lyrics but majority will never act on them. Those that do act on the lyrics probably were influenced by something like porn.
I find this to be kind of useless. Music doesnt make a student to go have sex or go kill people. Students listen to music to have fun and to relate to things. I just think that this is all a waste of time for Mr. Brian Primack because music doesn’t not in my point of view make us go and have sex.
Although it may not be the direct reason that teenagers are having sex at an earlier age, the content and language used in modern lyrics raise questions about it's affect on teens.
I do not believe that listening to sex related music is the sole or even the main reason that teens are having sex at an earlier age. Although it is true that the lyrics may instill thoughts into the teenager's heads, I believe that it is the personal morals and beliefs that ultimately help the individual decide whether or not they decide to have sex.
I do not believe that it is because of exposure to explicit music but rather because of the lack of information and the change of society expectations as the generations progress that teens are choosing to become sexually active earlier.
It is true that more and more young people are having sex and getting pregnant at earlier times because it is now acceptable in the time and place we live and not as commonly frowned upon. So yes, the lyrics do put thoughts into the teens head but it is not the deciding factor.
I agree and disagree to this blog. Yes, i can admit some music can give some teenagers some pointers about sex, but some other teens who listen to the same music will probably not plan on having sex because of a "song". To me, the people who do have the mental capability to have sex because of a single song or artist are pathetic. Come on, think about giving up something so precious as your virginity is gone down the drain cause of a song or artist. That is like giving your candy that you paid for $1.00 and selling it for .50 cents. Well, there are some songs where they will give the allusion that if you so this, this will happen to you and the maximum stupidity of the rightful mind will fall for that lazy excuse of a song or artist.
Also, some people who have the disease will still have sex, but not because of a song. Come on, sex is sex people will still do it no matter what persuades them.
Of course any and all things sexual in society are completely horrible and harmful to today's youth, yet violence in today's culture is perfectly acceptable. Just like the books that are now banned in LISD. We can't read "Blindness" because it's too sexual, but graphic descriptions of torture, suffering, and gore in "Dante's Inferno" are perfectly acceptable. Ridiculous. Anyway, I realize that some lyrics in some songs are too sexually aggressive for many people's tastes, but the parents should be taking an active role in their kids' lives if they are really worried about that sort of thing. Lots of problems can just be solved through simple talking, instead of forming gigantic organizations that monitor music like this.
IT IS THE PARENTS RESPONSIBILITY! NOT THE GOVERNMENT! GOVERNMENT NEEDS TO TO BACK OFF, THIS IS MOST CERTAINLY AN PERSONAL ISSUE AND AGAIN NOT GOVERNMENT.
ps: sometimes someone just needs to tell government to mind their own buisness. they have plenty on their plate to be worrying about.
Thats stupid..music has nothing to do with what you do with your life.
Half of the stuff in these songs are just said but these artists aren't evem participating in those things.
I think sexually aggressive music does affect some people, but not everyone. Besides, our society is so permeated with sex in general(used to sell in ads, glamorized in films, etc...)that restricting the music will not change the rates of teenage pregnancy and premarital sex significantly.
The government cannot start regulating the music industry because it is a violation of the freedom of speech. Admittedly, sexually aggressive lyrics is degrading to women and some of the stuff they play on the radio does make me wonder "are they serious??". However if they start restricting sexually aggressive lyrics it will eventually lead to restriction of many other things such as criticism of the government or anything that could be potentially "dangerous" for the people. I believe that it is a parent's job to control what their child listens to, and the government should not get involved in this.
I read somewhere that the rate of teenage pregnancy has actually decreased since the 1990's but then I'm always skeptical about statistics, so you just never know.
I feel that it is solely the parent's responsibility to regulate what music their children listen to. If the government intervenes in any way, than they are merely interfering with our rights to freedom of speech! We have every right to sing the songs, and we have every right to listen to them!
I also feel that it is another way that parents are trying to skirt their duties towards their children. It seems that if parents find something too awkward or distressing to discuss with their children, they turn to the government to make regulations about it so they just have to say "its illegal." Not: "this is WHY it is bad for you, and i do not want you to do it."
I feel that there should be as little government intervention as possible in our lives, and this is just one more thing that intervenes with our rights to all freedoms of mind, body, and soul.
"OH NO! Teens having sex?! Whatever will we do?" said the one politician to another. "I know," the other replied, "instead of teaching our children about safe sex habits, we should pour taxpayer money into completely useless surveys to absolve ourselves of all responsibility." Great, so now my parents get to monitor the lyrics of the songs I like? Of course, teens are completely malleable and have no wills or morals of their own so we would all go off and have sex at the slightest inclination. This is just bogus, I seriously can't believe the lengths people go to explain why teens have sex.
This is ridiculous why does society blame everything else for teenage intercourse, besides teens themselves. Music really? I think that’s silly especially when you ask a teen "why did you have sex?" Do you really expect for them to say "well I was listening to this song and decided to try it." No, that’s probably not going to be the answer. Teenagers know what they are doing, and if they say it’s because of music then they must not be mature enough to even be doing it at all. I think if we are going to blame music, ethnicity, or financial situations why not realize our school's health classes hardly touch on the "risky" topic.
Honestly, i believe that children should be prevented from listening to music that has degrading sexual content. However, i don't think that it is a link to teenage sexual behavior. It all depends on that person if they have strong self-control or they just don't care. Also i do agree with the fact that teenage pregnancy is a big issue. It is very much an issue within Lubbock High. However, things can change if children are molded into moral and obedient people, but it all starts with the parent's and how they teach them.
music does have an impact on people and their lives, but when it comes to sexual behavior, i believe that the idea that sexual behavior is influenced by the music is a bit too much. i mean i'm pretty sure that movies do a better job than music would. and on itunes, some songs are said to be explicit, but is it stopping people from or teenagers from buying it? no, it doesn't. it all comes down to the person and if they have enough self control over themselves.
i think that sexually aggressive lyrics do not prompt teenagers to have sex at an earlier age. this is just like the issues with violent video games making kids want to kill people. I think that kids who listen to sexually aggressive lyrics and have se blame their music for maing them do what they have just done so that they won't get into any trouble. some people listen to very violent lyrics and they don't go out and kill people, they just listen to their music.
I don't believe that music takes a major part in teenagers having sex at an earlier age. The cause of that usually lies with television or peer pressure. The reason to why the percentage who listen to music with sexually degrading lyrics and who are sexually active is so much higher might be because they are not as offended by the content of the lyrics as others may be. Even if the music is a big influence on teenagers, banning different songs from being played on the radio will not be effective. As we all know banning things really does not do anything to stop teenagers.
I don't know. I feel that music might have to do something with it...but not much. Music doesn't make me do anything. I do what I want to do and the music doesn't set anything off in my mind that I need to do that because the song said to do so. I feel that it really is what the child/teen grew up with and around. It's really just learning about the facts and making your own decisions whether they be good or bad. I'm not going to say that other things like movies and music are innocent in this situation but, I really do think that the government should work on things like teaching better sex education before they start screwing with this one. Norway has one of the lowest percentages of teen sex--and it's because they start early and take every step that needs to be taken.
Music is a way of expressing yourself in any way that you wish. It is crazy to think that listening to certain lyrics make kids have sex. Ultimately it is still up to the individual to make their own choices. Yes lyrics may promote it, but they don't force you to do anything. And lyrics are already rated for this problem exactly.
This is weird. I think that music has influence on sex but if its a 15 or 16 year old you cant really blame the music because its there choice.
I do agree with this.
The music we teens listen to now a days could have something to do with why so many people are getting pregnet. I guess
it kind of does have an influence on sex which isn't good at all, because 15 or 16 is still young.
This is a issue but not that big of an issue to where the government should get into it.
I believe this is up to the teens parents weather or not they want to pick their music and if they don't care well ok thats them.
I think that this issue won't simply be fixed. It's been going on for a while. I don't believe that the music you listen to leads to "inappropriate behavior"; your choices do. Teens, as well as everyone else, choose to have sex of any kind. They would choose this regardless of music. Yes, it's not good to listen to that filth, but why start up a debate? It all comes down to the First Amendment: Freedom of Speech/Expression. I wish I could say it'd be easy to just ban all the bad music, but that'd be highly inprobable. Try adding sex ed classes to the ciriculum, or maybe parents should just be more parenting. Talk to their kids, monitor the music they listen to when they can. The government is the government, not our parents. Music and sex are related just as much as movies and violence. It all comes down to personal choice.
I believe music plays a small role but generally it comes down to the person and what they were taught and how they were raised. If your going to say that more censorship is needed then you are acting as that persons parent. People will make the choices they want and if you say that teens can't listen to certain songs or artist then it is going to make them want to more. Just let their parents monitor what they are listening to it's not just violating freedom of speech but also freedom of privacy by telling them what they can and cannot listen to in the privacy of their own homes.
This study does show a correlation between "sexually degrading" lyrics and teen sex, but it doesn't necessarily show that these lyrics are the cause of more sexually active teens. Stereotypically, if someone has incredibly strong moral values about not having sex ,then they would choose not to listen to sexually degrading music in the first place and vice versa. This doesn't apply to everyone, but perhaps these two factors are simply characteristics of different types of teens, not necessarily cause and effect.
I think that music doesnt affect you to have sex. Its your choice to do what you please. Kids just do what they feel is in style.
You can't regulate what artists say in their music, it's their freedom of speech. You can't make parents be more involved in their children's lives if they don't want to be. Therefore, it's not the governments job or responsibility to protect children from what they consider explicit material. I for one, don't want to listen to music that degrades woman making them only sexual items, but then again the first amendment doesn’t prohibit it. Part of it is the acceptance of the negative connotations of the music, making it seem ok to listen to music where woman are submissive and not given a mind of their own. Then again, we as a young generation don’t realize the effects that music actually has on us and allows us to admit and accept.
I dont think that music will make anybody do anything. I also dont think that it is up to the government to decide this. I think it should be left up to their parents.
I dont think that it is just music with this "impact". There are other things. Its not there place to tell teens what to listen to and what not to listen to.
If the parents don't like what thier children are listening to they can make them stop, chances are it won't do any good. People listen to different types of music, and if it is advocating sexually aggresive behavior it is the person's choice to listen to it, and they also have a choice in how much the music influences them.
Post a Comment