Protecting children from things adult and improper. Where should the boundaries be?

[4channel]

Protecting children from things adult and improper. Where should the boundaries be?

Today children are exposed to things that 20 years ago were unheard of. As time creeps on we see more and more things that challenge belief. In film and on television, extremely violent imagery is such an accepted and major part of entertainment that some cannot enjoy a film or program unless it is violent.

In what passes for music, the lyrics are more explicit and sexually laden than they ever were. A great deal of the video clips that appear on television would be considered pornography once upon a time. Other forms of music such as some rap have lyrics about killing people, guns and putting down women in the worst possible way.

Something that would be laughed off as impossible years ago, children before they can even walk properly are now exposed to adult entertainers such as drag queens as part of some supposed education or enlightenment program. Some of these drag queens have names of male and female genitalia. Some have names that relate to sexual scents and arousal. Some even have gone as far as doing stripping routines, twerking, teaching twerking, and  other blatant sexually suggestive behaviour. They are even reading childrens stories that are an alternative to the male and female relationships or the birth genders..

Children are playing violent video games which are much more graphic and interactive than what they were in the past. Many are not interested in a video game unless it is violent. They can play for hours and hours on these games, either connected to their own source or a source that is online. Some of the games are so violent that some adults are sickened to the degree that they refuse to even talk about it. Others that do find it almost impossible to comprehend.

* Where should the boundaries be set or where should they have been set?

* What effect is this having on children today?

* How will things be in ten or twenty years time?

[4channel]

---

@not_for_sale2025 wrote:

So now we are advocating for Singapore styled punishment which is a cultural practice of corporal punishment where adults and children are caned as a disciplinary measure. Where children are concerned we refer to such treatment as child abuse in Australia, and it is illegal. And we do not openly torture adult offenders.

“These practices of caning are largely a legacy of British colonial rule in Singapore.” And that is exactly where they should stay.

---

I don't believe in capital punishment. But for adults who peddle pedophilia, ultra violent games and other media which targets children, would  Singapore-style punishment be such a bad idea?  If people who encourage  / promote racial and religious hate had a taste of it as well, would they think twice?

Do you remember the tragic case of little James Bulger? This is something that deeply saddens me to this very day. Have you heard about the tragic case of Stefan Pakeerah?

---

Killing 'incited by video game'

Parents of murdered teenager call for ban

Colin Blackstock

Wed 28 Jul 2004 19.02 EDT

The parents of a 14-year-old boy who was bludgeoned and stabbed to death by another teenager yesterday blamed a video game for his murder.

Stefan Pakeerah was stabbed and beaten repeatedly with a hammer in an attack his mother described as mimicking the gameplay in the video game Manhunt.

Giselle Pakeerah, who had been in Leicester crown court yesterday to hear Warren Leblanc plead guilty to the murder of her son, said she believed the game had led the 17-year-old to kill.

To read more click here

https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2004/jul/29/ukcrime.colinblackstock

---

So with what has happened. Should people be allowed to make money from sick media that can affect some people and drive them to kill?

[the_great_she_elephant]

4 channel wrote: Do you remember the tragic case of little James Bulger? 

I do and it was, as you say, a tragic - not to mention horrorific - case. As I recall the boys who killed him were both from grossly abusive and dysfuntional families. I don't however recall anyone suggesting they were motivated by violent movies or video games. 

[4channel]

There were strong suggestions that the boys were affected by playing violent video games.

[not_for_sale2025]

---

@4channel wrote:

---

@not_for_sale2025 wrote:

So now we are advocating for Singapore styled punishment which is a cultural practice of corporal punishment where adults and children are caned as a disciplinary measure. Where children are concerned we refer to such treatment as child abuse in Australia, and it is illegal. And we do not openly torture adult offenders.

“These practices of caning are largely a legacy of British colonial rule in Singapore.” And that is exactly where they should stay.

---

I don't believe in capital punishment. But for adults who peddle pedophilia, ultra violent games and other media which targets children, would  Singapore-style punishment be such a bad idea? 

---

If you are asking me if I would support a system where physical pain is inflicted as a form of punishment on boys as young as six and adults, then NO, I would not support such barbaric laws. Thank goodness Australia has a legal system designed around Human Rights and Child Protection legislation.

[4channel]

Not talking about boys. I was talking about adults only. Adults who profit and peddle pedophilia. Adults who profit and peddle ultra-violent sick games (like gang rape / decapitation) etc. to kids.

[the_great_she_elephant]

---

@4channel wrote:

There were strong suggestions that the boys were affected by playing violent video games.

---

After the murder, people wanted answers to the question we’re looking at here. Understandably so. How can two children commit such a brutal act against an innocent young boy? One theory was immediately put forward - horror films. A term first coined in the 1980s when a swathe of violent horror films made their way into people’s homes via the exciting new medium of VHS, ‘video nasties’ made for a convenient scapegoat. The films - packed full of gore and explicit scenes of violence - easily sparked something of a moral panic the decade before. And when rumours spread that the boys had watched the slasher film Child’s Play 3, the debate was reignited.

https://www.crimeandinvestigation.co.uk/article/born-evil-what-drove-james-bulgers-underage-killers

In a similar manner to today’s video games, the media coined the term ‘Video Nasties’. It referred to violent horror films that caused violent acts. The most famous example in the UK was the murder of James Bulger by two ten-year-old boys. The media claimed that the boys were recreating a scene from Childs Play 3 which the boy’s father had rented some months earlier. After police investigation, the link was discredited and the boys had likely never seen the film.

http://pop-verse.com/2013/09/25/violence-in-video-games/

AS ACCUSATIONS over the role of horror videos in violent crime mounted yesterday, senior Merseyside police discounted suggestions that they had influenced the murder of James Bulger.

Despite strong pressure from MPs for action, the Home Office responded cautiously to the statement by the James Bulger trial judge, Mr Justice Morland, that exposure to violent videos might have encouraged the actions of Robert Thompson and Jon Venables, the 11-year-olds jailed for the murder.

David Maclean, Minister of State at the Home Office, said the judge's comments would be closely studied but police had found no evidence linking the case with 'video nasties'. 

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/video-link-bulger-murder-disputed-1506766.html

[4channel]

Gosh *tippy*toes*. I'm just discussing an issue. What's with all of that?

FYI, the_great_she_elephant, rogespeed and countessalimirena have intereacted on this thread. Even katistrophic has interacted and sge appears to have concerns that are not unlike the concerns of others when they address this issue.

I enjoy these discussions and it's good to hear what others have to say. I find these things easily. Yes, I have concerns about where our society is heading. To say my outrage is a cover up for something is way off. Guess then my concerns at GM food and profits of big pharma makes be a rich executive for an agri-chemical company or a pharmaceutical giant. Or maybe does my concern about the fluoridation of our water supply make me a profiteer of selling an industrial waste to put the toxin i  our water. And does my concern about mobile phone tower radiation make me a major share-holder in a telecommunications company.

*SIGH*

[davewil1964]

My question would be "What sort of parent allows a 7 year old an iPad, much less unsupervised access to it?"

Parental responsibility, yet again.

[4channel]

Even though you have made a point davewil, the probllem is that many parents have no idea what their children are accessing. They go around their friend's place and as far as the parent knows everything is fine. But is it? Often it's not.  Anyway, what kind of adult would want to play a video game that has rape content?

[springyzone]

---

@davewil1964 wrote:

My question would be "What sort of parent allows a 7 year old an iPad, much less unsupervised access to it?"

Parental responsibility, yet again.

---

Almost all parents let children on ipads.They are looking at them from about the age of 3.

Kids absolutely had to have an ipad last year for home schooling.

I'm not saying all of it is unsupervised, most of it is but all the same, there is a lot of time wasting on it in my opinion. Any one else had to watch a Ryan episode? Kids love it, Ryam's a multi mullionaire at what? Age 8 or so? And it is nothing but a big advertisement.

Still, Ryan is wholesome compared to what 4 channel described. I'm not against gaming or online entertainment at all, but I think there should be limits. Any game that shows gang rape is not acceptable. Again, just my opinion.

I must say, I am finding some comparisons here in the comments a bit odd. I think she-elephant referred to Noddy and Big ears in bed, trying not to fall out of bed and then going to sleep.

I would read that to a child without a raised eyebrow. It isn't a sexual scenario and I don't think it would hurt any young minds. A realistic gang rape though is quite another thing. Scenes of extreme violence, ditto.

I think sometimes as adults we can read too much into things. For instance, I once had a year 3 where I wanted to introduce the work of some early Australian authors and decided to read a story by May Gibbs. It had beautiful colour illustrations, which is one of the reasons I picked it, but I was nervous as I wondered what sort of reaction I would get by a younger, sophisticated 21st century audience. After all, it contained pictures of half dressed characters and included phrases such as the 'gay nuts'.

A 5 minute read, field any difficult comments and onto something else, I thought.

But 5 minutes into it, I noticed there was dead silence, the kids were entranced. They loved the whole series. There's violence of a sort I suppose, where the big bad banksia men chase different people but good triumphs, you'll be pleased to know.

I learnt from that session that kids are perfectly capable of taking a story as it was meant to be taken and just enjoying good and evil through mild fantasy, with creatures they know are fictional.

I would prefer we leave the real life sordidness and violence till they are older, it is too scary for young children to properly deal with.