Allowing them to see what they want removes that curiosity, and it becomes no big deal. Tell a kid they can't do something and they will. Tell them they can and it isn't as interesting anymore.
Yeah Youtube Har. If the powers that be are telling YT to remove videos, I'm not OK with that. Why should YT remove videos?
Yet you won't allow her to access porn. Why is that removed from the wider point you're trying to make?
I am the censorer, the parent, the one who is responsible for raising a productive member of society, not the government or anyone else for that matter.
Censorship makes kids curious. Allowing them to see what they want removes that curiosity, and it becomes no big deal. Tell a kid they can't do something and they will. Tell them they can and it isn't as interesting anymore.
Interesting way to put it. I think beyond politics or religion, the root of censorship is often just someone or a group of someones getting offended. It's probably hard to argue against the feeling of taking offense at something that disturbs you being a natural instinct as humans. We (especially some of us) are easily driven towards being passionate about our strong feelings.Censorship will exist as long as my politics or religion differ from yours which is why both are censored on this website.
If that's the case, what does it matter who does the censoring? Parent or government, it's all in vain anyway, no?
Well, I'm not sure what video you are referring to. I looked up "Kennedy Assassination", and a whole bunch of videos are out there. One's 15 minutes long. So .... why one got pulled? Who knows.I know one thing that Youtube pulls videos for, is copyright infringement. Could maybe be that.
Once again it's assumed that the government is running the joint when it's just the errand boy.
Most online places are privately owned and each owner decided their own rules and effectively acts as censors.
Censorship will exist as long as my politics or religion differ from yours which is why both are censored on this website. All societies have rules. As for yelling fire, the idea is to prevent injury before it occurs not just hold someone accountable.
It may all be in vain, but who determines what and why? That's my job, not theirs. Life is not censored, but entertainment is. What is the point?
If the YT owners pulled it....that's different. Their site, their rules. But if pressure came from government sources to pull the videos...I'm not OK with that. That's where a line needs to be drawn.
see your point, but presumably when your daughter turns off the TV and said she learned certain words (like a-hole...etc.) you had to guide her in their use (or non-use) somehow. Using your point, is that not censorship?
I don't really think so. My guidance as a parent involves communication, it is a two way street between me and my child. If something comes up that she is curious about or doesn't understand, I do my best to be as open and informative as I can. She then weighs what we have talked about and makes her own judgement call based upon the information given. But in order to have these discussions, she has to be allowed access to everything. I don't want her to grow up with a false sense of reality. The world is a harsh place, and I feel that as parents the only way to prepare our children for it is by not hiding reality from them. Guidance is just that, helping your child understand what is acceptable and what is not. After that the decision is up to them. Censorship is removing something completely, and labeling it as unacceptable for human consumption. It comes prepackaged with the idea that some things are wrong regardless of reason or intelligent thought. I just can't accept that.
But at the end of the day pornography (normal pornography....with obvious and clear exceptions) is just sex between two consenting adults.
It's your daughter...you must bring her up how you see fit.
But I find it utterly incomprehensible that on the one hand you are saying "no porn", yet on the other you seemingly sound fairly relaxed about things like violence.
Larry, I saw an in-depth show the other night (with a full laser survey/analysis of crime scene and a skull reconstruction) that pretty much convinced me there was no shot from the grassy knoll and only shots from the direction of the book repository.
The first bullet to hit JFK was in his neck and went clean through. ..... In the car directly behind JFK, the SS guys had a rifle loaded with hollow point bullets. Pictures bear this out. ..... The mans name was George Hickey. A very interesting theory that I wanted to explore more.
My daughter is not an adult. She is not of proper age to consent to sex. She knows what it is and how it works, but is not emotionally grown up enough to know what to do with or completely understand it.
Violence has no age of consent. She must be allowed to understand the horrors of the world, and how to protect herself from it. She must also be able to identify it, and act accordingly when the situation presents itself. After all, kids are targets too.
Kids are not stupid. They know what goes on in the world. I would rather they be informed and prepared than sheltered and clueless. By not teaching our kids about the world, aren't we just setting them up for failure, or a false sense of reality and security at the very least?