Violence in Media and Movies.

Discussion in 'Truckers and Parenting' started by Sinister, Dec 27, 2013.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Sinisters Wife

    Sinisters Wife Well-Known Member

    I don't allow sponge bob in the house very often. I don't want my daughter to see it. It is were my son learned to call someone stupid when he was three. I saw that when we watched it and it was banned from then on. But my daughters daycare watched spongebob in the mornings. I complained and they still watch it now and then. She is not in that room until march but she will be exposed to it then. I heard it was being cancelled and was very happy. Although there are enough reruns to run forever.
     
  2. Duck

    Duck Quack Supporter

    Kids pick up on that stuff somehow. Other kids, watching TV at other kids' houses when their parents aren't paying attention, the cover of the Cosmo magazines displayed in the checkout aisle at Walmart, etc.
     
  3. Whirlwind

    Whirlwind Hard to Handle

    Non-parent here.

    I have never seen what's wrong about discussing sex in a biological way with children. Why shouldn't they know what their parts are and how they work? Little kids are going to play around with it- it's natural curiosity. It's adults that get embarrassed and freak out about it. Explaining how sex works to a 3 year old is not going to give you a grandchild 10 years later.

    Violence on TV is specific to each child. I have a nephew who couldn't watch Power Rangers without beating up his little sister. But not every child is going to respond that way. Personally, I'm not crazy about children watching TV at all. But most parents are watching it, so the kids grow up with it around.
     
  4. rigjockey

    rigjockey Token Canadian.

    A trainee and I had a conversation about this type of thing. I happened to make reference to something in the Simpsons and he went off about how he would never let his kids watch the Simpsons. I had to agree i would not let a young one watch the Simpsons either. He went into well it is a cartoon. I was like it is an Animated show, That does not mean it is for kids. Honestly some of the jokes and situations are pretty adult.

    If something is animated it does not mean it is a cartoon there is a difference! I point to Ren and Stimpy, Beavis and butt head. They are very much made for adults.

    Then again this is a whole different group of kids we are dealing with. Most of us grew up with bugs bunny road runner, Yo sammity sam ( not sure I spelled right but you get the idea) . We never tried the stunts we seen on the cartoon. The three stooges where a part of Sunday mornings. We did not imitate those things.
     
  5. Skateboard

    Skateboard ** Commie Express ** Supporter

    Little Rascals and Our Gang. Good stuff!
     
    rigjockey likes this.
  6. Sinister

    Sinister Smartass Emeritus Supporter

    There are nations and cultures that live in one room huts and have many children. Business gets done in front of the children. I'm not saying it's the right thing to do, or the best way to educate them, but it happens. And yes, it may just give you a grandchild at 13 years old. Because the places that have one room huts, are also fairly void of standards about such conduct. That's not enlightenment, that's just...primitive. It's not an example to be followed and there's no wisdom there to carry over to our own society.

    No....there isn't.
     
    Duck and rigjockey like this.
  7. Whirlwind

    Whirlwind Hard to Handle

    So does that mean you consider it better for children to get their (mis)information from other children? Because they will talk about sex, and they will experiment with sex. And the more adults try to hide it from them, the more curious they become. Do you remember being a kid yourself? I do. I remember giggling about "it" with my friends, fooling around with the neighbor boys, telling jokes with a punchline like "mommy, mommy, turn on your headlights! There's a snake crawling in your grass!" You cannot keep your children innocent, but you can contribute to their ignorance. And I would argue ignorance is more likely to lead to early grandchildren or some horrible disease than education.
     
    Injun likes this.
  8. Duck

    Duck Quack Supporter

    There's a pretty wide age range commonly referred to as "kids".

    Liberals want to teach kindergarteners about fisting & sodomy & why Johnny has two daddies.

    People who haven't committed their souls to Satan however, tend to disagree.

    Shortly before puberty seems like the most logical age to teach them the biological part of it, along with "DON'T DO IT CUZ IT'S NAUGHTY", then keep up with the "DON'T DO IT CUZ IT'S NAUGHTY" indefinitely, with the intention of keeping the kids pure & innocent until they're 30 yrs old, .... because they're gonna do it sooner or later anyway & the longer you can delay it, the less likely you'll find yourself lecturing your 13 year old about the dangers of smoking crack while pregnant..
     
  9. Injun

    Injun Rabid Squaw Staff Member Supporter

    Sex is a normal biological function. There is nothing "naughty" about it and there should never be shame attached to it. I have found that the highest rate of unintended pregnancies occur in families that are not open to candid discussions about a child's maturing body and biological urges. It rolls back to the worst brats are the preacher's kids.

    The appropriate time to talk to a child about their body parts and functions is when the child becomes curious about them. Children generally have no problem asking questions as long as they feel comfortable enough with the parent to do so. If the parent glosses over answers, acts uncomfortable about answering or comes up with some stupid yarn, the child will not trust the parent to be honest. The child, in most cases of honest, open discourse, can be the best guide for such discussions. They know how far they want to take the conversation and will become bored if the adult goes too far with it.

    I have a friend who had no problem talking to his kids about body pieces and how they work. He talked about self-stimulation (not sure if the m-word is acceptable to the Ad-sense nuns) with both of his sons and his daughter. It was never a big deal in that household and, like many kids, the daughter talked to her friends about it. Somehow or other, she said something like, "Well, my dad says...." and word got around to some prude who got all offended about it. CPS was called and this father almost lost his parental rights over it. What he was doing was trying to protect his teenaged daughter from unintended pregnancy by suggesting she take care of her needs herself. Eventually, the case was dropped, but not before extensive intrusion into his family and home.

    Oddly enough, his daughter did not fall subject to unintended pregnancy. But the child whose parent became so offended about what was going on in somebody else's house? She had three children by three different men before she was 21 and NONE of the pregnancies were planned.

    Funny how that works..
     
    Whirlwind likes this.
  10. Duck

    Duck Quack Supporter

    If you want to compare the 'new school train of thought' with the ultra-conservative 'prudes' of the past, you can do that. But then you should also look at how many teenage girls had kids back in the old days compared to now. Obviously the modern approach in which morals are left totally out of it is less effective at keeping kids from growing up too fast.

    Some kids are born to be brats though. Typically from my observations, they're also the kids whose parents punished them with a 'time out" instead of an ass-whoopin'.

    The "preacher's daughter" thing is an interesting bit of irony. The daughter of the pastor of the church I went to became a slut when she was about 14 or so, but his sons turned out OK. But I think it's more to do with the kid rebelling on purpose as soon as the kid gets old enough to figure out that the main reason for all that helicopter parenting was to protect the image of the church.
     
  11. Blood

    Blood Driveler Emeritus Supporter

    It ain't rocket science.
    The time to begin discussing natural tendencies is as they occur.
    Typically children all band together when very young, then self-segratate according to gender a few years after they start socializing. When they begin to mingle with the other gender again is your cue.
    When a kid is learning what to call his/her anatomy is not the time to tell them what is going to happen in several years.

    I remember in first grade or thereabout.
    Our class took a field trip to the zoo and a little girl kissed me when the train ride went through a tunnel. I just thought she liked me.
    I didn't get sexually aroused.
    I don't think I even remembered it past that day...
    until about junior high when I transitioned from, "Hi, Sharon" to "Hey baby!!" :D
     
  12. Injun

    Injun Rabid Squaw Staff Member Supporter

    Great point.

    I was about five years old when I discovered I was built different than boys. It wasn't until I was about seven that I found out there was a kewl name for my stuff. I was in foster care at the time. My foster mother told me my stuff was called "genitals," which I misunderstood as "penny-toes." Was I ever proud of myself for owning such a kewl thing as penny-toes.... I didn't care what they were for. I just thought it was neat to have 'em.

    It wasn't until I was about 13 that I figured out they were more than decoration, but I didn't go into any further exploration until late in my teens.

    Today, kids are getting started so much earlier.

    As for morality, I believe the parents can have these discussions with an emphasis on propriety, timing and wise choices without throwing shame into the mix. It's parents who avoid the issue completely who wind up with children making bad choices. A voice of maturity that a child can trust to talk straight will be a larger influence, if it's available. Otherwise, they'll get their information from their friends, from TV and from the internet.
     
    Blood likes this.
  13. Duck

    Duck Quack Supporter

    Huh?

    That's like addressing a craving for ice cream by eating a hamburger. Eliminating morals from the discussion is exactly what the liberal filth ruining this country want people to do.

    Soviet-era communists developed a plan to destroy the United States in 1963 & they've been hard at work & have achieved many of their evil goals. One of them is to destroy morals & values. This is found in many books & sites but here's the first one I found: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1595013/posts . Read #24-26.
    Apparently it was on the congressional record in 1963.
     
  14. Blood

    Blood Driveler Emeritus Supporter

    Injun didn't say to eliminate morality.
    She said not to use shame as a club.
    I'd agree with that...
    I've seen that backfire more than once.

    Tell a kid she's a slut enough times she'll start believing it...
    or stop fighting it...
    or however you want to phrase it.

    Same with most any form of degradation from someone who is influential.
    But I've seen that work the other way too.

    I can't figure it all out. :confused:

    God is great, beer is good and people are crazy.
    ;)
     
    Injun, rigjockey and Duck like this.
  15. Blood

    Blood Driveler Emeritus Supporter

    You ain't doing it right!! :p

    :rolllaugh2:



    OWWWWW DAMMIT!!!! :mad:

    MIKE!!!!!!
    Injun kicked me in the groin again.
    :(
     
    Duck and rigjockey like this.
  16. Injun

    Injun Rabid Squaw Staff Member Supporter

    I had to. You ducked the tomahawk again. You quick little weasel, you..
     
    Blood likes this.
  17. Injun

    Injun Rabid Squaw Staff Member Supporter

    There is a difference between teaching morals and instilling shame in one's bodily functions.

    My grandmother tried to teach my mom that women should never enjoy intimate contact. It was something to be endured. It was a duty that women performed for men. Only bad girls enjoyed it.

    My mother did not pass that teaching on to me. Instead, she taught me how to make the best choices for myself, insisted (although this part didn't work) that it was to be kept within the confines of marriage and that there is a reason "God" made it feel good.

    If that's not moral teaching, I don't know what is.

    Girls who are taught to be shamed by their natural reactions to stimuli end up being women who rebel against such teaching and become what the parent was trying to avoid in the first place because they realize they were lied to or they become wives whose husbands have no choice but to live miserable, sexless lives or step outside the marriage.

    There is a balance to be reached. Shame is not a good balance.
     
    Last edited: Jan 16, 2014
    Blood likes this.
  18. Blood

    Blood Driveler Emeritus Supporter

    There may be situations where correction causes shame though.
    I've told this before but it's really relevant here.
    Walking through the grocery looking down when I see a pair of legs...
    so I looked...
    I apologize for being a male. :D

    Anyway...
    pair of legs leads right up to a pair of booty shorts...
    with the fly open and peeled back to reveal panties with something written...
    I passed by that with every intention of revisiting the text after a summary evaluation. ;)
    Above the panties, a wife beater with no undershirt (or bra).
    HOT DIGGITTY!! :yahoo:
    Above the wife-beater a face about the age of my (at the time) 14 year old grandson!! :eek:

    This all occurred within a second or two.
    I was mortified.
    Next to the kid was (I assume) her pitiful excuse for a mother.

    Mom was giving me the stink-eye like I'm some kind of perv...
    And I felt like a friggin' perv.
    In fact, I'm flush now just remembering it...
    embarrassing, not erotic.

    I just shook my head at the kids mom and kept walking.
    Her look went from, "You perv" to "Mind your own business"

    WTH!!??
    If that's my kid, she ain't getting out of the house like that...
    or even running around the house like that.
    Nor my grandkid...
    or niece...
    or kids friend...
    or any kid that I'm transporting for any reason.

    Naw...
    HELL NO!!
    Get your butt out of here and get dressed!!
    If that makes anybody feel ashamed...
    TOO DAMN BAD!!
    Hopefully, word gets back to whoever is responsible for you and he/she will feel ashamed as well.

    Style my ass!!
    What the hell is the matter with people who let children dress like they just climbed off a stripper pole??? :eek:
     
    Last edited: Jan 15, 2014
    Injun and Duck like this.
  19. Blood

    Blood Driveler Emeritus Supporter

    :)
    Yeah...
    I'm agile for a geezer, huh?? :cool:

    You shoulda seen me 20 years ago.
    :grandpa:
     
    Injun likes this.
  20. Duck

    Duck Quack Supporter

    Sounds like your mom got it right.

    Your grandma's view was .. something else I guess. Not traditional. Traditional moral teaching wouldn't even address whether or not it's to be enjoyed or how they should react to "stimuli". They just said "save it for your wedding night", instead of today's "who cares if you're only 12, just make sure the boy wears a condom cuz I don't want grandkids yet".

    But she was a GOOD mother, ... because she probably bought her daughter a box of condoms & told her "make sure he uses these". :rolleyes:
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page