I don't think they are in the slightest.

Cartoon violence:
Suppost to be funny, it's slap stick violence. If the characters get hurt, they are fine the next scene. If their face gets blow up or their tail gets cut off, it's there the next scene. Like it never even happened. Cartoons usually don't have bloody violence or violence were the injuries stays. It's slap stick, which is comical violence. Where someone gets hurt is a funny way, with sound effects and silly faces.

Anime violence:
Much more serious, yes anime has slap stick too. Such as when Winry throws her wrench at Edward. He could be seen laying on the ground with a fountain of blood coming out of his head. But the next scene, he's ok (may even have a bandage there). But even that is different from cartoon slap stick, because of the blood.
But anime violence is usually very serious, good guys fighting the bad guys. And if they loose an arm, it's stays gone. If they die, they are dead.

So Cartoon violence is comical, while Anime violence is more serious and is important to the plot.

Why the hell would be it similar? I've watched Tom and Jerry when I was a kid. It has violence, but it is nothing compared to the violence seen in anime's like Dragon Ball, Higurashi or Bleach. Cartoon violence is just humor and can make kids laugh. Anime violence however is way worse due to it being graphic and bloody. Kids would probably prefer cartoon violence then anime violence.

We all know this sort of question is asked to troll the people who don't know anime, but I'll give my reasoning anyways.

Tom and Jerry as a cartoon; a piano is dropped on Tom for a twelve story building (probably a hotel or apartment) and flattens him. His bones and organs are crushed, splinters pierce every inch of his body, and his teeth have been replaced by the piano keys. If you press them, you can even play the piano like that. Next scene: Tom is bandaged up with his body rearranged back to its normal shape, his arm is in a sling, he's using a crutch, and both of his legs are in casts. Jerry runs across in front of him and sticks his tongue out, and he chases after Jerry, all of the bandages holding in his blood abandoned in an instant along with everything else, as he is perfectly fine.

Anime version: Piano drops on anthropomorphic cat. Sad music plays as a female bystander makes a bloodcurdling scream. An ambulance arrives and the entire street is taped off, though the gathering crowd can still see the blood stains on the sidewalk. The news arrives to interview the person who dropped the piano by mistake, who is crying while apologizing over and over again. The anthropomorphic cat may or may not survive (since Tom is a main character, he'd been in a coma at worst. Hurray for plot device!! *cough* Kamijou Touma *cough cough*).

Similar? OF COURSE.

I kind of agree. Anime violence is way much more brutal then Anime violence. I would have to prefer Cartoon violence because Anime Violence is too graphic and bloody in my opinion. In my opinion, I don't think that they are the same

silver: Since when does Tom & Jerry show organs or blood? Just him as a pancake and a few bandages. It never shows bones or blood. What Tom & Jerry are you watching?

...I know where this question is coming from.

Of course they're rather different. Violence is supposed to be much less graphic in many cartoons (I won't say all, because that's not true, and many do include blood) than in most anime (again, not true for all). I'll say this again, though, as I've said before - violence can be comical independent of the medium. Slapstick humor can be found in anime action scenes, just as much as it can be found in American cartoons.

If the main difference you see is realism, then yes, cartoons tend to be less realistic than anime. That much is true. But realism doesn't change comedic value. It might make slightly lighter of it, but I don't think that changes the fact that what we are laughing at is essentially the same. Injury is still injury. Death is still death. And sure, there are differences in lasting effects of injuries (in many cases, again, not all), I just don't see that as a reason to view one as comedic and one as not.

white: Ummm....because one is suppost to be funny and the other isn't? Again, slap stick is suppost to be funny, in the next scene they don't even look like that scene even happened. Cartoons use it as their comedy threw out the whole show. Anime uses to take a break from the plot and make people laugh. But in serious scenes, when a character is seriously hurt or dies, well, if you laugh at that you're a sadist.

...Wait, what? How is anime slapstick not meant to be funny? Sure, it's often a break from a plot that's heavy, but there are plenty of anime that employ it regularly and, in several cases, throughout whole episodes. Tengen Toppa Gurren Lagaan was practically nothing but slapstick over most of its duration, and that was with people being injured and carrying those injuries with them for a while. I get that characters in cartoons are, in later scenes, perfectly fine, I just don't understand how that has anything to do with whether the scene is funny or not. It lightens the mood afterwards and gives everyone some sense of relief, but it isn't the impetus for the laugh. I didn't know that Ed wouldn't have a concussion and cranial bleeding after he got hit by that wrench, and yet I laughed all the same at the ridiculousness of the fact that he was being hit by a wrench. The fact that he was fine afterwards didn't make it any funnier.

*facepalm* I was talking about violence, you know, what this question is about. -_- Do you even understand half these questions or peoples replies? I said Cartoon violence is suppost to be funny, because cartoon violence is slap atick. The characters never stay smashed up or hurt. While in anime, the violence is serious. If they die, they stay dead. They can bleed to death. If they loose an arm, it's gone.
Look at the disagree image, she is hurt, she is bleeding. That isn't funny, if you laugh at that you have problems and need help.
Look at the Agree image, that is suppost to be funny. He'll scream comically, a fire engine sound with play, h'll stick his foot in the fish tank, it'll make a steam sound, and the next scene he is fine.

...Alright, time to clarify.

1. I really want to make this clear - I am not saying all anime violence is funny. I am not saying that the image you've placed under "disagree" is funny. I am not saying that any violent image, in and of itself, is funny. But everything is about context. Everything. An image that includes blood can be funny - you pointed this out yourself when you talked about FMA when Ed gets hit on the head by a wrench. The blood is there, and so is the laughter. We agree that there's a difference between anime violence and cartoon violence, at least in the majority of comparisons. I'm not saying all anime violence is funny, just as I don't believe all cartoon violence is funny. Most of anime violence is serious, whereas most of cartoon violence is not. I get it. That's why I clicked disagree. We clear on this?

2. The main reason you keep bringing up for why cartoon violence is "supposed to be funny" is because the characters are fine in the next scene. I really don't get this. It's reassurance following the laugh, it's not the impetus for the laugh. We don't laugh at Wile E. Coyote because we know that he'll be fine after falling off the cliff, we laugh at him for falling off the cliff and hurting himself. Finding laughter in other peoples' pain isn't a bad thing, even if that pain causes sustained injury. You're essentially saying that the only violence that's OK to laugh at is when the person's going to be fine in the next scene. And that's what I'm disagreeing with.

Anime violence tends to be more brutal and graphic. You can see it with a lot of different anime, like Bleach, One Piece, Fairy Tail, D. Gray Man, Higurashi No Naku Koro Ni, Gantz, FMA and many others.
The difference between anime violence and cartoon violence is that anime violence is supposed to be serious and cartoon violence is supposed to be funny, even though cartoon violence can be brutal, too, at least, if we refer to Tom and Jerry again, which funnily enough, I happen to be currently watching. However, some anime violence is probably intended to also be funny, which I would readily agree with. However, most of it I tend to find epic during an anime fight, whereas cartoon violence I find funny on occasion. Though, to be perfectly honest, I find that cartoon violence is not really necessary for laughter. I wish that there was less of it featuring in children's programs, I don't think they need to be watching cartoon violence at a young age. Of course, such is life.

@Liam: I agree. It does tend to be brutal and gorey than cartoon violence. Tom and Jerry has painful violence, yet it's provided for humor and comedy. Anime violence is way worse, with actual deaths and gore.

As for Pumpkin and Whiteflame, I should suggest that both of you should stop fighting and shut the hell up. You are not doing any good than just arguing at each other. You have even done this on the rape question too. So, stop arguing and shut up. You guys are not going to do any good by fighting.

Late reply, but I never said we could SEE the organs and bones. I was just describing what we know is happening, even if we can't see it.

And if there is a person here who watched all of Angel Beats and didn't laugh at the horrible and bloody deaths that partook from episode 1 to episode 12, speak up. Each death was realistic. Each death was ALSO funny. Sure, they were revived soon after. But does that make ther deaths any less graphic, horrible, and hilarious? I think not.

^ Don't worry about them. They're just debating the topic. I know Flame well enough to know that he isn't 'fighting'... This is what the Anime Debate club is for. Not all debates are lighthearted, or friendly. Sometimes debates get heated. You should see some of the 'arguments' that occur on the Debate club. Besides, let me worry about things like this. You just do keep doing your thing and I'll worry about any problems that occur on here, yeah?

Alright Liam. I understand. I'll just worry about my stuff instead of Pumpkin arguing with Whiteflame.

Okay, that's good. Just remember that debates often get heated and it's not really a bad thing. I'm not worried about anything as long as users aren't rude to other users on this club. That's all.

Riley, I'm always trying to keep this civil throughout, but I am rather stubborn when it comes to arguments. You'll have to forgive me for it, but I don't just back down on an issue like this. I feel the same was true on the rape argument, and a point I made was basically just transplanted here instead of continuing it there.

Some is. I think it all depends on the show. There's plenty of anime that has violence similar to cartoons. I think a lot of us found it humorous when Death the Kid was trying to get his name perfect on the exam and then ripped his paper which resulted in blood spewing out of his nose, eyes, and mouth. Soul Eater, Angel Beats, FMA, there's plenty of anime with humorous violence.
However, in most cartoons the violence will always be humorous. *points to the picture for "disagree"* I do not find that to be humorous. Sure, there's plenty of anime that is dedicated to pure comedy. But I have yet to see a cartoon that is capable of the type of gore in Higurashi, Elfen Lied or others. Cartoons are specifically directed at children / all ages. They simply cannot have any of that violence in shows for youth. Violence in cartoons is always presented in a way children wont find sad or traumatizing but lighthearted and enjoyable. Anime has the opportunity to make violence as gruesome and brutal as possible because older more mature people will be viewing it and able to comprehend it better. That and it usually adds to the story line and makes the series more complex.

^ An interesting opinion, but I agree totally. You're right about some anime series having similar violence to cartoons and also about the way that anime violence is projected towards the younger audience. Kudos.