Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
Existing user? Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Sign Up

Why are wettings in media more common from non-US releases?


Recommended Posts

It seems like actual wettings or messings are way more abundant in European, Chinese, and Japanese movies and anime. American ones are generally either the implied accident or already after the fact.

 

Most US horror flicks have a scene that should, in all likelihood, lead to a wetting but they almost never do. More fear wettings in movies and anime damn it

Link to post

For anything like this, the answer is almost certainly because of the MPAA. They're notorious for having some weird standards (for example, dropping more than one F-bomb is an automatic R rating) so I bet the answer is that they can't show the actual wetting without having their MPAA rating bumped up

I've seen a few on-screen wettings in R-rated movies (the one I can think of that immediately comes to mind is the Dredd movie from 2012) so if I had to guess, if a wetting is shown, it's an automatic R, and it would probably be NC-17 if it were even implied to be sexual

Link to post
  • 2 weeks later...

I can recall uk newspaper reporting on pee related issues but I can’t recall the reason why the article was published?

one of 2 articles - a police officer was in a car staking out a suspects house in a residential street, he was there a long time and was bursting to pee, he got out the car, knocked on a house door showed his badge and asked the lady to use her bathroom, when he resumed his duty the suspect had gone,

second was a picture of a drunk woman with jeans mid thigh squatting peeing while resting her bottom on the front bumper of an ambulance in the car park of a football stadium, the title was to do with ‘shame’ in relation to women who went to see a boy band in a football stadium maybe 30,000 ladies (some men, boyfriends etc), a lot behaving like ‘ladetts’ drinking too much before and during and peeing in public like the pic on the article,

makes you think about the long lines at the end of the show with 30000 women many been drinking and no portaloos outside as presumably enough toilets inside, but would the men’s inside still be for men only? Would there be sufficient toilets inside a football stadium for 30000 women?

Link to post

Good answer above from AdamantZoroark. 

But if I would sum it up simple, it's because US culture is very prudish. Conservatives and christians drag it way back in time, most parents are afraid that their 12 yo kids seeing a nip-slip or handcuffed play in bed will cause irreparable damage to their brain, peeing behind the bush in the park can literally land you in jail... People who grew up in the US love to chant how it's "land of the free" and many of them seriously believe in this myth, but actually living in the US for several years I can tell it's very oppressing culture with a lot of strict and unreasonable boundaries in every aspect of your life. And it shows everywhere, including media production.

Link to post
47 minutes ago, SpaceWonderer said:

Good answer above from AdamantZoroark. 

But if I would sum it up simple, it's because US culture is very prudish. Conservatives and christians drag it way back in time, most parents are afraid that their 12 yo kids seeing a nip-slip or handcuffed play in bed will cause irreparable damage to their brain, peeing behind the bush in the park can literally land you in jail... People who grew up in the US love to chant how it's "land of the free" and many of them seriously believe in this myth, but actually living in the US for several years I can tell it's very oppressing culture with a lot of strict and unreasonable boundaries in every aspect of your life. And it shows everywhere, including media production.

Well it's not really a myth per se, we do have "Freedom of Speech" in our constitution via the First Amendment which other countries do not have.  The UK can get pretty weird in itself, anyone remember when they tried to ban certain sex acts in porn like face-sitting and there was a protest over it?  Can't imagine anything like that happening in the US, at least we aren't a nanny-state.  

Honestly it depends on what state you live in, a lot of states in the south tend to be more repressed when it comes to sexuality due to the Jesus freaks being in power(for fuck's sake Alabama banned an episode of "Arthur" just for showing that Mr Ratburn is gay, close-minded assholes).  Whereas a lot of states in the East and West coasts and the midwest and the North generally tend to be more relaxed when it comes to that sort of thing.  It also varies by city, as you'll see more open-minded people in big cities then you will in small towns.  

On 7/13/2021 at 7:06 PM, AdamantZoroark said:

For anything like this, the answer is almost certainly because of the MPAA. They're notorious for having some weird standards (for example, dropping more than one F-bomb is an automatic R rating) so I bet the answer is that they can't show the actual wetting without having their MPAA rating bumped up

I've seen a few on-screen wettings in R-rated movies (the one I can think of that immediately comes to mind is the Dredd movie from 2012) so if I had to guess, if a wetting is shown, it's an automatic R, and it would probably be NC-17 if it were even implied to be sexual

Yes the MPAA are prudes but an erotic wetting does not necessarily guarantee an NC-17 rating, I believe the movie "Secretary" had an erotic wetting and it got away with an R-rating. 

Also a wetting does not gurantee an R-rating either, as Billy Madison featured one and it got away with a PG-13 rating.

Edited by LifeIsStrange (see edit history)
Link to post
45 minutes ago, SpaceWonderer said:

Good answer above from AdamantZoroark. 

But if I would sum it up simple, it's because US culture is very prudish. Conservatives and christians drag it way back in time, most parents are afraid that their 12 yo kids seeing a nip-slip or handcuffed play in bed will cause irreparable damage to their brain, peeing behind the bush in the park can literally land you in jail... People who grew up in the US love to chant how it's "land of the free" and many of them seriously believe in this myth, but actually living in the US for several years I can tell it's very oppressing culture with a lot of strict and unreasonable boundaries in every aspect of your life. And it shows everywhere, including media production.

Also it depends on what state you’re in if you’re talking about culture. I have family in NY and some in CA, and they are MUCH more open when it comes to progressive values. But I have a cousin in AR, and she didn’t even have sex until she was married. Which is fine if she wants to live her life that way, but its different than my sister in NY. 

The MPAA is filled with old-mentality Hollywood though, so I guess I see your frustration

Link to post
6 hours ago, LifeIsStrange said:

Well it's not really a myth per se, we do have "Freedom of Speech" in our constitution via the First Amendment which other countries do not have.  The UK can get pretty weird in itself, anyone remember when they tried to ban certain sex acts in porn like face-sitting and there was a protest over it?  Can't imagine anything like that happening in the US, at least we aren't a nanny-state.  

Honestly it depends on what state you live in, a lot of states in the south tend to be more repressed when it comes to sexuality due to the Jesus freaks being in power(for fuck's sake Alabama banned an episode of "Arthur" just for showing that Mr Ratburn is gay, close-minded assholes).  Whereas a lot of states in the East and West coasts and the midwest and the North generally tend to be more relaxed when it comes to that sort of thing.  It also varies by city, as you'll see more open-minded people in big cities then you will in small towns.  

Yes the MPAA are prudes but an erotic wetting does not necessarily guarantee an NC-17 rating, I believe the movie "Secretary" had an erotic wetting and it got away with an R-rating. 

Also a wetting does not gurantee an R-rating either, as Billy Madison featured one and it got away with a PG-13 rating.

See I specifically think it has something to do with female urine; whenever a female wets their pants, it's either a skirt or you see a little bit out of the bottom of their pants leg. Whereas with men, it's much more common to actually see them "wetting." Like maybe the point of origin has something to do with it, but with female characters you almost never explicitly see them actually wetting their clothes.

 

Most of the better female wetting scenes in movies that I've seen are either Australian, German, Japanese, or Korean. Australia confuses me because I know how strict they are with video game censorship.

Hell even messing has cropped up in non-US films.

Link to post
18 hours ago, SpaceWonderer said:

Good answer above from AdamantZoroark. 

But if I would sum it up simple, it's because US culture is very prudish. Conservatives and christians drag it way back in time, most parents are afraid that their 12 yo kids seeing a nip-slip or handcuffed play in bed will cause irreparable damage to their brain, peeing behind the bush in the park can literally land you in jail... People who grew up in the US love to chant how it's "land of the free" and many of them seriously believe in this myth, but actually living in the US for several years I can tell it's very oppressing culture with a lot of strict and unreasonable boundaries in every aspect of your life. And it shows everywhere, including media production.

You’d be surprised, but the Left does it too, especially in the last decade. There’s a very vocal “sex-negative” faction in the American Left that decries...well...any expression of vulnerability from a woman in media as objectification or sexism (no such complaints from them if a man is given the same treatment though, they might even celebrate it).  That would include wetting and similar displays that might cater to the “male gaze”.  When the Bible Thumpers and the Rad-Fems clash...well, it’s sometimes hard to decide whether it’s a better idea to take cover or grab some popcorn.

Also, there’s a third factor to keep in mind, a lot of movie theaters, big box retailers, and even online outlets will outright refuse to sell X-rated films (not necessarily porn, mind you) or AO-rated games, which ruined the ability for big-budget adult-oriented projects, even softcore ones, to turn a profit in the US.

Edited by D0nt45k (see edit history)
Link to post
5 hours ago, D0nt45k said:

You’d be surprised, but the Left does it too, especially in the last decade. There’s a very vocal “sex-negative” faction in the American Left that decries...well...any expression of vulnerability from a woman in media as objectification or sexism (no such complaints from them if a man is given the same treatment though, they might even celebrate it).  That would include wetting and similar displays that might cater to the “male gaze”.  When the Bible Thumpers and the Rad-Fems clash...well, it’s sometimes hard to decide whether it’s a better idea to take cover or grab some popcorn.

Also, there’s a third factor to keep in mind, a lot of movie theaters, big box retailers, and even online outlets will outright refuse to sell X-rated films (not necessarily porn, mind you) or AO-rated games, which ruined the ability for big-budget adult-oriented projects, even softcore ones, to turn a profit in the US.

Yeah it's a real shame that so many places refuse to sell that sort of thing.  Though the adult industry was extremely profitable til Pornhub came along and everyone started uploading porn films on there without permission.  

Edited by LifeIsStrange (see edit history)
Link to post
On 7/25/2021 at 5:23 PM, LifeIsStrange said:

Well it's not really a myth per se, we do have "Freedom of Speech" in our constitution via the First Amendment which other countries do not have.

That's bullshit! You can look it up. Freedom of speech were written into laws and constitutions in Europe too, even before the USA was founded.

Link to post
6 minutes ago, ed2 said:

That's bullshit! You can look it up. Freedom of speech were written into laws and constitutions in Europe too, even before the USA was founded.

I meant to say "several other countries" don't have it, not all of them.  Anyways i did look it up.

Link to post
7 minutes ago, LifeIsStrange said:

I meant to say "several other countries" don't have it, not all of them.  Anyways i did look it up.

After reading the context, I think your point is right though. USA was the land of the free. The land of oportunities and wealth. Maybe more important were the freedom of religion, and separation of State and Church. Many sects and religious groups fled from Europe to the USA, to be able to live their lifes and practice their faith. Quite paradoxically, this has lead to the USA being alot more religious today. In your world, freedom became linked to the freedom to practicing your religion. Meanwhile, here on the old continent, religion have always been linked to autorities, control and hierarky, so therefore our idea of freedom became more like freedom from religion.

Link to post
22 minutes ago, ed2 said:

After reading the context, I think your point is right though. USA was the land of the free. The land of oportunities and wealth. Maybe more important were the freedom of religion, and separation of State and Church. Many sects and religious groups fled from Europe to the USA, to be able to live their lifes and practice their faith. Quite paradoxically, this has lead to the USA being alot more religious today. In your world, freedom became linked to the freedom to practicing your religion. Meanwhile, here on the old continent, religion have always been linked to autorities, control and hierarky, so therefore our idea of freedom became more like freedom from religion.

That's a good point, I never understood why some people are so obsessed with religion.

Link to post
1 hour ago, ed2 said:

That's bullshit! You can look it up. Freedom of speech were written into laws and constitutions in Europe too, even before the USA was founded.

Technically speaking, the First Amendment only restricts the government from arresting you for what you’re saying.  It doesn’t say anything about provate entities (unfortunately, this loophole has allowed for the suppression of dissent on social media by...”strongly encouraging” the companies in question to ban those engaging in it).

55 minutes ago, ed2 said:

After reading the context, I think your point is right though. USA was the land of the free. The land of oportunities and wealth. Maybe more important were the freedom of religion, and separation of State and Church. Many sects and religious groups fled from Europe to the USA, to be able to live their lifes and practice their faith. Quite paradoxically, this has lead to the USA being alot more religious today. In your world, freedom became linked to the freedom to practicing your religion. Meanwhile, here on the old continent, religion have always been linked to autorities, control and hierarky, so therefore our idea of freedom became more like freedom from religion.

You forget that a number of America’s earliest settlers were religious refugees that wanted to be able to practice their customs free of persecution, that’s why it’s so important here.  Granted, the most well-known of these groups, the Puritans, were persecuted because they were too hardcore even for their day (their association in England with Oliver Cromwell, read up on the English Civil War if you don’t know who that is, didn’t help their case either).

Edited by D0nt45k (see edit history)
Link to post
23 hours ago, dabboi said:

See I specifically think it has something to do with female urine; whenever a female wets their pants, it's either a skirt or you see a little bit out of the bottom of their pants leg. Whereas with men, it's much more common to actually see them "wetting." Like maybe the point of origin has something to do with it, but with female characters you almost never explicitly see them actually wetting their clothes.

 

Most of the better female wetting scenes in movies that I've seen are either Australian, German, Japanese, or Korean. Australia confuses me because I know how strict they are with video game censorship.

Hell even messing has cropped up in non-US films.

In an effort to steer this thread back on topic, i'm going to respond to this.  You are right that the more explicit wetting scenes tend to be in overseas movies.  Heck there was one scene on Family Guy where a woman pees herself at the People's Choice Awards that was changed to a woman using her umbilical cord as a lasso with a fetus on the end of it, wild how that was more acceptable for broadcast then a woman wetting herself.

Link to post
4 minutes ago, LifeIsStrange said:

In an effort to steer this thread back on topic, i'm going to respond to this.  You are right that the more explicit wetting scenes tend to be in overseas movies.  Heck there was one scene on Family Guy where a woman pees herself at the People's Choice Awards that was changed to a woman using her umbilical cord as a lasso with a fetus on the end of it, wild how that was more acceptable for broadcast then a woman wetting herself.

Gotta love the ratings’ boards priorities, huh?

Link to post
On 7/26/2021 at 2:15 PM, D0nt45k said:

Gotta love the ratings’ boards priorities, huh?

Yeah, doesn't help that they're not consistent in how they enforce it, considering their willingness to allow certain fetishes into media much more than others (as anybody who's seen works from certain directors *cough* QUENTIN TARANTINO *cough* will tell you).  The board members are only human, they're subject to the same biases as everybody else, but the lack of a proper appeal process and any accountability tends to amplify the impact of their personal biases a fair bit...and that's before you factor in the notoriously corrupt nature of Hollywood politics and the chain of favors, bribes, and connections that are all but required to get anything done over there.  It's not just the MPAA's Ratings Board that's guilty of this either, the Academy Awards have been infamous for this sort of behavior for a long, long time (this is part of why you often end up watching the Oscars and going "wait a minute, how did that win?").

Edited by D0nt45k (see edit history)
Link to post
On 7/25/2021 at 8:23 AM, LifeIsStrange said:

Well it's not really a myth per se, we do have "Freedom of Speech" in our constitution via the First Amendment which other countries do not have.  The UK can get pretty weird in itself, anyone remember when they tried to ban certain sex acts in porn like face-sitting and there was a protest over it?  Can't imagine anything like that happening in the US, at least we aren't a nanny-state.  

Honestly it depends on what state you live in, a lot of states in the south tend to be more repressed when it comes to sexuality due to the Jesus freaks being in power(for fuck's sake Alabama banned an episode of "Arthur" just for showing that Mr Ratburn is gay, close-minded assholes).  Whereas a lot of states in the East and West coasts and the midwest and the North generally tend to be more relaxed when it comes to that sort of thing.  It also varies by city, as you'll see more open-minded people in big cities then you will in small towns.  

Yes the MPAA are prudes but an erotic wetting does not necessarily guarantee an NC-17 rating, I believe the movie "Secretary" had an erotic wetting and it got away with an R-rating. 

Also a wetting does not gurantee an R-rating either, as Billy Madison featured one and it got away with a PG-13 rating.

They probably also have a different standard if the character doing the wetting is an adult. It's not really shocking or unexpected if the character is a child; I imagine they would have felt differently about that scene if Billy Madison had actually wet himself instead of splashing water on his pants

I wasn't aware of the film "Secretary", to be honest, but after a brief glance at the synopsis, it getting an R rating instead of NC-17 kind of surprises me.

Edited by AdamantZoroark (see edit history)
Link to post
8 hours ago, AdamantZoroark said:

They probably also have a different standard if the character doing the wetting is an adult. It's not really shocking or unexpected if the character is a child; I imagine they would have felt differently about that scene if Billy Madison had actually wet himself instead of splashing water on his pants

I wasn't aware of the film "Secretary", to be honest, but after a brief glance at the synopsis, it getting an R rating instead of NC-17 kind of surprises me.

There’s a pretty good chance that there were some...under the table dealings going on to get the MPAA to approve that rating, knowing how Hollywood works.

Link to post

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...