People are always talking about being too much violence that kids see on TV. But weren’t the shows kids watched actually worse during the early years of cartoons? Do you think anvils falling on roadrunners and stuff being killed and the animals smoking and drinking affected the kids that much? ******************************************** ******************************************** 06-08-04, 08:08 PM Tree I was watching cartoons back in those days and I'm telling you I saw my fair share of Popeye beating the crap out of Bluto defending his lovely Olive Oyle!
You're right, cartoons - especially back then - had a very high violence content! Hmmm and I live to talk about it! I'm not an aggressive person at all - due to all of that exposure! Wink
06-09-04, 12:29 AM MommyTimesTwo I think that modern cartoons are just as bad. Just the other day I was watching Rugrats with my kids and the story line was how Tommy, a one-year-old baby, is kidnapped and how he manages to cause enough pain to his kidnappers that they return him. And its not just television--look at Home Alone (rated PG), Cat in the Hat (PG), or even Shrek (also PG).
However, despite all this violence, only about 0.0000001% of children grow up to be mass murderers. I don't think the cartoons and movies are the problem.
06-09-04, 12:51 AM juanruiz "and the story line was how Tommy, a one-year-old baby, is kidnapped and how he manages to cause enough pain to his kidnappers that they return him."
Wow, that is a steal from the O. Henry short story "The Ransom of Red Chief."
06-09-04, 12:56 AM MommyTimesTwo Is it? I've never heard of that. But that story line is used in just about every cartoon I've seen.
06-09-04, 02:07 AM FredPuli Obviously these kidnappers had never been parents themselves. The rest of us all have all suffered like that but we had to keep ours.... Smile
06-09-04, 12:41 PM Texan-In-Exile Good question, Jusork! I've thought about this issue many times. And I always come to the same conclusion: No!
It's true, kids see a lot of violence in cartoons. But I never shot anyone, set anyone on fire, or smushed anyone with an anvil, and I grew up with the Grandaddy of violent cartoons, Warner Brothers! Eek
Kids see violence every day; if not in TV programs and movies, then in newscasts or - shudder - in real life! And true, some of the things kids see, they may try to do to even their best friends. Red Face That's why God gave them PARENTS : To keep them from doing unto others what Wile E. Coyote unwittingly did unto himself! Roll Eyes
And if kids do grow up violent, maybe someone wasn't doing their job.....
quote:SpongeBob SquarePants is...light-hearted and funny, the main character "has an unending bounty of innocence and old-fashioned ethics," and the themes employed could satisfy even the most TV-cautious parents...Perhaps that point reflects the true horror of this rumor: parents who leave a three-year-old child to wander the decks of a cruise ship unattended and drown are the ones directly responsible for his death -- not television, Nickelodeon, or cartoon characters.
06-09-04, 03:47 PM puppyblues No, but that stupid SPONGE will scar them for life! Mad
Roll Eyes
06-09-04, 04:26 PM MommyTimesTwo Pup, you really need to see someone about your sponge allergy.
Big Grin
06-10-04, 06:45 AM clarebear There was a lot of violence in earlier cartoons but when I was a kid it wasn't "real". It was all make believe and I knew it. Nobody got shot sitting on their front porch and people weren't offering me drugs on a street corner. I never heard of someone being carjacked. There were no drive by shootings or street gangs. I could go out and play and my mom didn't know where I was. I just had to be in by the time the street lights came on. The violence wasn't real to me. I never heard about any of those things really happening. As a kid I used to watch the afterschool specials, School House Rock, Facts of Life and all the TVland shows. I never saw cartoons swear on TV. When someone got shot, they didn't die. They stood up with black all over their face and they were in the next episode. Even Sylvester the Cat would die and come back. Getting killed didn't mean you were dead. It wasn't real. Today is a different story. People are dying everyday. People get shot, kidnapped, murdered, stabbed and robbed. Parents need to know where there kids are all the time. The days of staying out until the streetlights come on are over. When my son was little and I would rather have him watch a cartoon than the 11:00 news. I personally think the kids today are desensitized. There is no longer the shock of someone murdered, shot or assaulted. I miss the old cartoons. It was really nice laughing at something that wasn't real, would never be real, or couldn't ever really happen. Ignorance is truly bliss.
06-10-04, 07:03 AM Jelp01 Of course they did! Every time I watched the Roadrunner, I immediately went and fell off a gazillon-foot-high cliff just to see what would happen like the coyote did! Razz
06-10-04, 08:15 AM coldfuse LOL Jelp! I have a vision of you falling, with the whistling sound effect like a bomb falling, then the little "puff" as you hit the ground.
I actually think today's children's programming has a more subtle underlying that undermines respect for authority, which can be more damaging than seeing the bad guys get whomped. How does school violence today compare with that of yesteryear?
06-10-04, 10:23 AM MommyTimesTwo Clare
Who are these kids that are desensitized to injury and death? I have never seen a child like that in my life. Jeez, my sister fell off the pommel horse and broke her finger, and the entire gym of kids hovered around her crying and hoping she'd be okay! The type of children who carry guns and sell drugs did not get that way from watching South Park.
The "experts" actually say that the kind of 'pretend' violence that leaves no injury is actually worse for children to see, because then they think if they shoot someone in real life they will only get black soot on their face and be fine. Children need to understand the consequences of their actions, irregardless of what they watch on TV.
Cold
Studies have shown that school violence is actually less than "yesteryear". It is no longer common practice for the 'nerd' to be routinely beaten by his classmates or such. School violence has always happened, just now it makes the national news and we hear about it for months on end with indepth analysis of how everyone in the world--except, of course, the child who did the crime--is at fault for the incident and how it is all the fault of: (pick one) television, music, books, the Internet, society, parents, therapists, etc... .
06-10-04, 11:29 AM babthrower I'm really confused. Emotional health specialists keep saying that cartoon violence desensitizes kids. Then experts testify (when teens kill people) that the teens don't understand that their violence will harm others. They can't foresee the results of their violent actions. The teenaged brain has not finished maturing.
So if the problem is that the normal teen-aged brain cannot comprehend consequences then it does not matter what they have seen as children. If the kids have access to weapons (including skipping ropes, baseball bats, etc.) then it seems we are all at risk that the teens will 'play' with these items, sometimes involving the body parts of others in their games.
Yet I've seen teens babysitting younger children. They seem quite able to foresee danger that threatens the children, whether from strange dogs or bigger children or cars or unsafe playground equipment. So I don't believe that teens can't foresee consequences.
Maybe the teens who cannot foresee consequences are part of the 6% of humans who just don't measure up. What do you think?
Confusing.
06-10-04, 11:50 AM puppyblues LOL@Jelp Big Grin
And MTT, I think you're right Mad Razz
06-10-04, 11:52 AM MommyTimesTwo This is just my opinion and not backed by any studies that I know of:
I think that people make excuses. People ('experts') blame the actions of children on society, on music, on movies, on cartoons...when the plain fact is that 99.9% of the time the problem stems from bad parenting. Do I mean abuse? Not always. Bad parenting includes spending too much time on yourself and not on your kid. It includes spending all of your money on your child and giving them every single thing they want to make up for not being there. It includes being so involved in your relationships and jobs and blah blah blah that you don't pay attention to your kid.
The #1 risk factor in teen pregnancy today is free time. Teens who have unsupervised free time are infinitely more likely to become pregnant than teens that are involved in activities and/or have involved parents. Why? Because kids left to themselves do what they feel like doing.
It's not that the teen brain is unable to comprehend the consequences of their actions. A 15 year old knows full well that having sex may lead to pregnancy. The problem is that a kid who spends off of his or her free time with other kids loses touch with a base that keeps them grounded. And hey, would it be so bad to be pregnant? The baby at least would pay attention to me. That thought has been expression by thousands of young girls who had babies way too young. Just like the unexpressed thought of "if I am bad, my parents will have to deal with me" had instigated millions of kids into bad behaviour.
The boys who murdered the students at Columbine had 'graduated' from psychotherapy only about two months before the attacks. Each had been diagnosed with narcissistic behaviour, and the one also with sociopathy. The boys spent all of their time unsupervised and together. Their inherent problems were exacerbated by having parents that were so wrapped up in themselves and their lives that they did not even know their children had bedrooms full of weapons, and who indulged the childrens' every whim to make up for not being an actual parent. The boys, having every minute together with no reality base, fed off each other until they were so immersed in their own fantasy world that even mass murder didn't fase them. It wasn't TV. It was bad parenting.
The real dicerning factor that screams against blaming the media for childrens' behaviour is simply that the vast, vast majority of children do not commit crimes. Less than 0.0001% of children in America today commit violent crimes. Yet approximately 98% of American children watch television. It just doesn't fit. How can it be the fault of television if it is only happening to so few children?
On the other hand, if you look at the kids who do commit violent crimes, a huge majority have absent or otherwise occupied parents. Most have no activities or adult interaction for the majority of their time. They are surrounded by other 'free' children with no reality base and no one to keep them grounded. They go off on their own and feed off each other until they have completely lost touch with reality. THESE are the kinds of children who recreate stuff they see on TV and do not understand the consequences of their actions. And why not? There is no one teaching them responsiblity.
And that's the key. Kids aren't born understanding responsibility or compassion. It has to be taught. Now how can you teach your kid things like that when you only see them an hour or so a day, and you spend that hour staring at the TV? For example, my next door neighbors. Herport members may remember me talking about them. The children (twin 5 year old girls and a 3 year old son) go into the day care at 6am and are picked up at 6 pm (from opening until closing). Then they are sent out in the backyard to play until bed time. They are out there beating on each other, screaming in pain, sobbing, etc for hours on end, and their parents do not do anything but occasionally scream at them to shut up. Are these children learning compassion and/or responsbility? Nope. But they are learning a) they have no value and are unwanted and b) they can hurt other people and there are no consequences.
So this is why it kind of ticks me off when people try to blame cartoons for violence. Another reason is that violence--even among children--happened LONG before Bugs Bunny shot Elmer Fudd. What was the excuse then?
(Pup--I know you hate it when I'm right Wink Big Grin)
06-10-04, 12:57 PM babthrower I think I'll stop listening to experts and just listen to Mommy. Smile
06-10-04, 01:03 PM DvdGStwrt Huh? Um, Well lets see. I personally do not watch cartoons, however my 38 year old does - and he watches some of the weirdest things, seriously I am uncertain how I ever watched these things when I was a kid.
TV cartoons have a sense of unreality to them and I think children are able to discern that.
The Columbine incident wasn't full of anvils and complex plans to capture a bird, it was done with guns. The violence was more along the lines of something you see on the 6 o'clock news than what you would see on Bugs bunny.
Humans are animals capable of reasoning. We are not reasoning animals. We are animals first, reasoning beings second. It takes a lot of work for us to maintain control over our passions and maintain the thin veil of civilization. We are designed to kill, we have a great mental ability to use anything and everything for killing. It is in our nature to defend territory, to hunt, to make war to kill other species and our own.
We are the only species that hunt for fun - think on that for a moment.
Even if there were no cartoons, our children, unattended, would grow up to be violent sadistic killers.
Come on, go on to any playground and find me a groups of kids who wouldn't enjoy pulling the wings off of flys, or burn ants with magnifying lenses and the sun. Who form groups of Them and Us, call each other names, etc.
Children are sadistic, cruel, selfish little beasties who are trained in the art of sharing and being kind. It isn't really in their nature. This is why teasing, bullying and all of the other atrocities take place school yard. Children, those innocent little beings who everyone tends to rush to the defense of, are the most cruel human beings on earth.
We train them them, not through TV viewing, but through action and reaction (consequences for misbehavior) to be civilized. Its Lord of the Flies if we stop training.
By the time we become adults we have been told "Thou shalt not kill" enough times where we mostly believe that and will not kill, that and the fear of imprisonment, capitol punishment and/or eternal fire keeps us in line. Save for that training we would be at each other's throats.
We are naturally prone to selfishness, greed and survival of the fittest. Our civilization, a thin mask of contrary to our nature rules, requires a great deal of cooperation and programming to be maintained.
We hand to our children a legacy of Civilization through reward and punishment tactics along with great expectations and our sense of "right and wrong" defined through many avenues.
Cartoons are low on the list of things wrong with our civilization. Our society has created a couple of generations without parents. Both parents work, both are tied up being chauffeurs, business people, accountants, yada, yada, and no one is in the home 24/7 as nursemaid. That has far greater implications that if the Baby Sitter (TV) teaches us to use anvils and rockets and roller skates to capture the bird.
Personally I think today's cartoons are more violent and more laced with deceit, depravity and other not so nice things than my generations' fair. I also have a low view on most video games and the X-Box which promotes war, violence, street fighting. Most of these games program physical violence to reach the goal of another level.
I also think that the rod is spared too much. But then I live near a school and every afternoon when those children are released from Child Prison, they go walking by my front yard, and things they say, the words they use, the threats and the bullying are nothing I have seen on cartoons. They are getting those someplace else.
David
06-10-04, 01:27 PM clarebear Mx2,
I don't think that cartoons and TV shows are the sole reason for violence but I certainly think there is more violence in media today and that does affect the kids. It isn't the ENTIRE reason but I do think it plays a factor.
As for violence in media: If TV shows and movies had no effect on children then there wouldn't be a need for a age rating now would there? Would you let your 6 year old watch a R rated violent swearing movie? Based on your logic, you should. But you are good parent so what difference would it make? They wouldn't learn anything from it because you are a good mom right? Your child would never swear or pick up a gun in the house cause you taught them better right? It shouldn't matter what a cartoon says. If that is the case you should just let your kids watch South Park. Like you said, its not much different than violence in the past.
My son doesn't skip school, he doesn't do drugs, he doesn't smoke or kick small animals. He still mourns his friend who committed suicide. He would feel bad if he saw someone he knew was shot and killed. It IS different when it is someone you know. I don't remember life like that when I was kid. Maybe if you have seen what I have seen then you would feel differently. I think kids today are much more violent and no it isn't just media attention but I do think that is part of it.
I would like to see one study that shows that violence in schools was the same in 1984 as it is in 2004. That is impossible.
It isn't all about good parenting. Sometimes kids do things because they don't have the maturity level to make the right choices. Even with the best of parents, kids make poor choices. Even good parents involved in their kids life have teens who have babies so I doubt pup will agree with you on that one.
06-10-04, 01:36 PM MommyTimesTwo Clare
I didn't say you said all violence came from tv. Secondly, how does your example show desensitization? I'd run and find help too if I found a body in the park! After I threw up first, of course. But what else should a child do? Bury it??
Good parents not only are there but keep children from learning what they shouldn't. A good parent would stop a kid from watching a violent movie that would scare them (I see nothing wrong with swearing, however, they hear worse when they hang out with my parents). A good parent would think "hrm, my kid is 6 years old, maybe 13 Ghosts isn't the best for them to see". A bad parent would watch the movie and not care that the kid is watching. However, I do not think watching 13 Ghosts would make the kid into a murderer. Having a bad, inattentive, uncaring parent could.
Thirdly, I have no idea what you are talking about in the middle of your post. You are saying both that kids are desensitized and that kids are not. You are saying that kids commit murder and that your son misses his friend. I don't understand your point so I can't comment on that.
Finally, please remember in the 1980s is when everyone and their brother was high on coke and other drugs. The 1980s is when drug laws came about in elementary schools. It was also when gang violence in schools and elsewhere was at it's peak. So please don't act like the 80s were so innocent. I was in elementary school in the 1980s and a girl was stabbed in my school. And yes, BTW, we did care.
quote:
In 1987, the National School Safety Center estimated that nationwide 135,000 boys carried guns to school daily
Despite these sobering statistics, there are some encouraging signs as well. The FBI's annual statistical report on crime released in October 1999 indicates that juvenile arrests for serious crimes dropped nearly 11 percent between 1997 and 1998 (Lichtblau). And the U.S. Department of Education report emphasizes that despite recent violent episodes in school settings, "most school crime is theft, not serious violent crime." Although juvenile crime has been falling since 1993, federal officials indicate the drop in juvenile crime that occurred between 1997 and 1998 "is the most significant decrease in recent years."
http://eric.uoregon.edu/trends_issues/safety/
Crime in school is falling dramatically from the 1980s. The difference now is that when it happens we just about drown in news coverage. Back in the 1980s, the adults were desensitized and didn't care.
06-10-04, 01:45 PM clarebear I disagree with you. I will leave it at that.
06-10-04, 02:13 PM MommyTimesTwo Clare
I couldn't really care if you agree with me or not. I am however a little surprized that you asked me to find statistics that show school violence decreasing, and then end your involvement in the discussion after I do. Oh well.
06-10-04, 03:40 PM jusork I think we've all made some really good points. I agree with Times2 that violence in schools has decreased a lot. I agree that the media is not that responsible. But I also agree with Clare that the maturity level and/or choices of kids is not always in line with how well they were raised.
And about all this mention of South Park. South Park is not a normal Saturday morning cartoon show. Its age range is completely different. So these comparisons to other cartoons is kind of unnecessary becuase it's more like a regular adult show that you'd see at 10:00 at night. That's why it comes on at 10:00. I think the reason we have ratings though is to prepare ourselves for if something could scare our kids. The swear rating is for parents, who don't want their kids to swear, to know that it contains swearing. I don't think the ratings should be used as a level of what you're kid shouldn't watch. If he wants to watch something, and you think he's really ready for it and you don't think having him saying it is going to negatively affect him, then I don't think it's necessarily a bad thing. Swearing isn't always a bad thing. I don't think most things like swearing start from movies though. So you shouldn't watch what movies or TV shows he wants to watch and you shouldn't watch what he says or does, you should watch how he acts and thinks based on those things AND then determine if how he acts is serious.
06-10-04, 03:53 PM MommyTimesTwo That is an excellent point about South Park. I don't think anyone who has looked into the show at all would put South Park in the same viewership as, say, SpongeBob. South Park is not aimed at children, advertised to children, meant for children, or on at a time that children are watching televion. If a child is negatively affected by South Park, that is again the failing of the parent for allowing a child who is not emotionally developed enough to understand the show to watch it, NOT the responsibility of South Park for being offensive.
Remember, televisions CAN be turned off. They aren't following your children around blasting pornography. If you don't like cartoons, turn the channel. Unplug the TV. Don't let them watch it. It's really that simple. Smile Just kind of sounds un-American lol!!
06-10-04, 04:46 PM babthrower I wonder if there is some sort of middle ground. Dvd, sorry, but although children delight in teasing, and in the wrong circumstances and unchecked it can become very cruel, they are not by nature beastly. I've raised kids and I've taught kids (although not for very long), and I have been touched and delighted by many signs of compassion for animals and empathy for other humans that they all have shown. (I know there are psychopathic kids; I just never met any.)
I agree with Clare that there was not as much bullying before. But personally I think the biggest factor is that in 'the old days' there was more playground supervision, and misbehavior was checked. Here in Canada, when the teachers unionized, there emerged a 'work to rule' mentality that is, IMO, all wrong in the teaching profession. As for parents, I don't suppose much has changed. Some parents take an interest in what their children tell them, and if necessary they investigate disturbing reports. Others tell the kid to quit whining, and fight his/her own battles.
So whereas it would not surprise me at all to see that children who watch violent cartoons can be observed hitting each other across the head with toys right after the cartoon, I think that especially with parental (or daycare supervisor, or whoever) to explain that this is not how to behave, and that in 'real life' it hurts, the frequency of the behavior would drop off. At least that's how it worked with my kids.
06-11-04, 09:18 AM MommyTimesTwo A lot of adults delight in teasing too. Just look at unmoderated internet boards. As soon as they know they are anonymous, they become 12 years old. Roll Eyes
06-11-04, 12:35 PM Rakuchild I have always loved cartoons. The violence was slapstick and whether we admit it or not, that stuff is funny because our intelligence tells us it is faked. But we do laugh when someone stumbles, fumbles or falls and isn't seriously hurt...look at "America's Funniest Videos" and tell me many people don't laugh when someone falls.
I don't like that that many cartoons are overly merchandised to the point that the show seems like a 30 minute commercial. I do like that it's finally being recognized that much Japanese anime is made for adults and not children. I'm very happy to see new cartoons being made specifically for adults. The only thing wrong with "Adult Swim" is it comes on so late at night. LOL
06-11-04, 04:39 PM jusork Yeah, Adult Swim's fun. I watch it for Family Guy and sometimes Futurama but I've accidentally caught the others too and they seem interesting.
This message has been edited. Last edited by: DorianGreyed,
Posts: 6529 | Location: Grayson, Georgia, USA | Registered: 06-03-02
AnswerPool.com 
