NationStates Jolt Archive

"A conservative is a statesman who is in love with all his old evils, a liberal is one who seeks to replace them with new ones"

Hi, My first post...

I should start by saying that i don’t watch much TV as im not a big fan of staying too still for too long, but as it happens today I watched a couple of hours and a couple of things interested me in a "theoretical country ruling” sort of way...and as its well known that "the outsider see's the ballgame" (or however that goes) i thought i might see if my thoughts were anywhere ear the mark.

Firstly there was The OC - which im sure lots of people here watch and enjoy - and y'know as things go its not bad I'll admit - except in one quite important way: The characters are meant to be around about 16/17 years old. I only found that out today and I dunno - but that makes it seem a bit...Im lost for the correct word...but lets go with "irresponsible" - actually I find it disturbing. The actors are clearly almost all in their twenties, and the dialogue fits this, as do their lifestyles and so on for the most part - but...well, I don’t know...is it only me who sees this as irresponsible programme making? Its the sort of thing that causes problems with teenagers (who...hey - lets face it are fairly impressionable for the most part), because its so damned good at convincing them that they are a great deal more mature and able to deal with life-issues than they are! Don’t get me wrong im not prudish or obsessively anti-young people (point in fact - I am 19) - anything but, in fact - but I do feel people should be a little aware of their limits or at least shouldn’t be actively encouraged to seek out all possible limitations of their emotional maturity - which is pretty much what this sort of teen show does - and its on at what...3pm? Add this to the sexualising of teenagers (more so than is healthy maybe - ironically im not against sex on TV, merely sex on TV that encourages kids to go and copy it - so eurotrash=okey but OC=morally...corrosive perhaps?)

Now - I feel quite strongly about this I guess - in fact id like to say I find it morally repugnant but im tired and id like to go away and think about it before saying that I am sure I feel *that* strongly (if you get what I mean)...So please, anyone at all feel free to air your views...maybe I am being silly but almost everything that makes up "popular culture" has wider implications...Hollyoaks doesn’t count I suppose because its made blatantly obvious that its not quite serious I think - the acting isn’t particularly convincing and the story is usually a bit overblown...But to use the OC as an example once again - the acting is convincing and its serious enough that it could be forgotten just how unrealistic it is in places...everything is too good not to have people wising to emulate.


Second (and last...its late...or early in fact) on my hit list is on it for differant reasons - America's Wildest Police Videos (or whatever its called). This is different cos about 10 minutes in I had the sudden thought (as y'do...) "Hell, this is a really good social control mechanism!" Think about it - it presents a black-white view of morality, presents the police force in a very positive way, and in places endorses things like America’s gun laws! All in all it reads like republican (now...im UK, so I think I mean republican - Bush, ja? rightwing-ish?) propaganda! Now, gotta back up a second cos I know someone’s gonna say:

"of course its black and white morality blah blah dangerous driving blah blah they were in the wrong so its gonna be black and white cos it only deals with cases of blatant wrong...blah"

Sound like what you were going to say? I explained it in a fuzzy way but if you were gonna say that you missed my point (which is more than half my fault...). I mean that it PROMOTES an overly simplistic view of the world where the police are always right etc. Im not sure I have explained myself well enough here, either - so im going to have to wait and see what people come back at me with before I say more on it - sorry for that I know its bad form..but its been a while since I tried my hand at debate and im out of touch with the etiqette required. Anyway - I couldn’t help seeing it like some camped-up Stalinist (or "insert dictator here" if you rather) propaganda tape "SEE THE GLORIOUS PEOPLES SOLDIERS CRUSHING THE INSURGENT DOGS" *alternating images of soldiers petting dogs/feeing children sweets and soldiers mercilessly beating political prisoners and homeless*

Just me? Think bigger picture.

As it happens im kind of conservative in some ways...many ways...Im pro-police but not pro-police videos...Im pro-health but im anti Discovery Health. Who was it that said something like "I am a conservative because I wish to preserve the good in our way of life, I am a liberal because I seek to change that which is bad..."...etc...im an idealist throughout.


Night all and sleep well...but reply to this later.


Michael

Interesting post - I agree that these shows don't depict reality as closely as they really should, but I'd rather not the government come in to make these shows anymore "realistic" or "moral"

So, what do you think of the FCC?
Letila, please behave if you decide to answer this *wink*

conservatives think the harbringers of the media should make sure kids dont see stuff their parents think they shouldnt see. and sicne the media and people who distribute it dont know what parents think they should silence any and all questionable material: classic books, new books, books no one cares about

im not kidding, this is exactly what conservatives think, and ill prove it


Reading responsibly
Parents, not libraries, should decide what books are appropriate
Sunday, October 10, 2004
Huntsville Times

Librarians have no business in undermining the authority parents have over what their children read. It is up to the parents what they let into their children's minds.

If librarians must take some sort of stand on the issue, they should help parents keep garbage out of their kids' minds instead of thwarting their efforts, especially when some parents do not care what their children are exposed to.

If parents believe their child should read something that is banned by the library, then so be it. However, the library should not be rewarding children by giving them buttons or a free banned book for going against what their parents believe is right.

As ------, a Huntsville High School student indicated in a story published in The Times on Oct. 1, has indicated, kids are exposed to filthy language and immorality every day in the halls of their school. So, I ask you, what is the point in adding insult to the injury? Why add to an already vast problem. It is simply not right.

Some books that are banned may be worth reading at the proper age or when the child has been talked to about the content. There is a great difference between having a child read a book that may have some questionable areas a parent can discuss with the child and promoting the reading of questionable books.

Even some good books deal with difficult material that warrants discussion, but many of the banned books contain material that encourages promiscuity and immoral behavior. It is simply wrong to purposefully give children books that encourage them to behave in immoral ways that could be detrimental to their health and well-being. Parents should be extremely careful what kind of information is in a banned book before they let their child read it.

Why not put these questionable books in an area where parents can responsibly decide whether to let their child read a certain book? The library seems to be promoting the reading of these books in the young readers' area. Young people may not have the ability to distinguish between a book that is helpful and a book that is harmful.

Children need guidance as to what they read, and parents should supply them with wholesome books that help them learn and gain skills that will assist them in the future.

Yes, many children will rebel and try to get hold of materials that their parents have told them is not appropriate, but that does not mean parents should stop trying or that their efforts are fruitless.

Years later, children will look back and be thankful their parents tried to teach them what was right, and they will either regret the fact that they didn't obey or be glad they did.

Parents must take a stand because who else will? Obviously not our public library.


names have been excluded to protect the stupid.

interesting.

Okey..i guess to the first - no, i suppose not, probably - i still havent decided how strongly i feel about it. I would be all in favour of government guidelines as long as they were no more than that - but i really do think that at very least things like the OC should be put on post watershed - to be frank its the lack of *blatant* unsuitable material that causes the problem, because it makes it seem just close enough to a possible truth for a youngish teen to get rather carried away with themselves - and then you have the famous "bigger picture" to look at...lets face it, everything has implications whether we like it or not - show something to five people and they may well have forgotten it by next week, but to a million? 2 million? more? they keep it with them, talk about it and they all begin to believe it. In turn you ahve to ask - does showing a hugely idealised newport lifestyle to a million underprivileged kids in sink estates make those kids more resentful of their own lot in life? ("hate is so heavy when your weak"...tank you John rzeznich i knew that would come in handy one day lol) I think it could, and thats the tip of the iceberg. Hope you get what i mean...for an example of the sort of thing - Plato! Anyone read the republic? I did and to be honest i feel pretentious for doing so because i havent read a lot of other "important" books - catcher in the rye, tao te ching..all that stuff. Anyway - he deals with character late-ish into the book - the oligarchic, democratic and so forth types of character/s - he pointed out how giving people a certain set of freedoms tended to produce a given sort of individual - and by jove like many other tings which have been around so long there really is something to it - and more than a mere grain of truth at that - i know some of the book is questionable...forms makes me laugh ("i am always right...therefore i am right about this!") but still he had the right idea in many places...even the forms..even though its a little dodgy.

FCC - well...this week on British television, a Z-list celebrity (something to do with beckham?) was filmed...erm...*cough*'ing off a pig. Good answer?

:-D


contestant number 2!

Now! That’s interesting but im late for lunch with a friend so i have to make this quick...ill come back to it later cos its interesting.

...Your saying that there’s so much ill around that reading should be guided by parents - i assume this can be extended to watching also - please forgive the assumption if im wrong on that tho :-$

Right. I dont have time to bring much of myself into this argument right now i think - but very quickly - what children read is not a problem as long as they grow up in the right environment - so censure (very mild, admittedly) is not really the answer because the problem lies elsewhere - a kid has to have been exposed to many ill;s before reading will make them worse i think - ill go into why i think that later. Responsible parenting is definitely a needed thing - but (and im sorry i havent really answered but i really will later) interestingly modern culture (lol! the democratic character summed up!) does anything but promote it, or self sacrifice or much other than pandering to one's own desires im sorry to say - look at the prevalence of rap music in recent years -now before anyone gets enraged LISTEN..

Rap music is not inherently bad, and this is in NO WAY a racist comment - BUT - a whole lot of modern rap dwells on the importance of money over...everything else - and on...well. Excuse the phrase but it encourages being a gobsh*e... Example - "i keep my mind on my money, money on my mind" - you get a million fourteen year olds to listen to that and its ilk for an hour or so a day for a few months and you have just (wittingly or not) began to convince an impressionable young soul to follow suit! Because mostly, now more than ever, people are carried along by popular culture because of its omnipresence in every area of our lives - want proof? Look outside and tell me how many women are wearing identical ponchos and how many guys own the same pinstripe blazers and pin badges....Now, this post inst about individuality - its about how people get carried on waves of whatever is popular...its a scary thing really, if you understand it even a little...well...i think so...

To go on...yeah...i dont agree with censuring music - as i feel its 70% a symptom of the times even though its maybe 30% of the cause....It makes it worse but its not at the root of it all...and censuring is taking a big step towards controlling utterly. And each action has an equal and opposite reaction in social policy - look at the prohibition era - a few years later people do the opposite because they see the prohibition as dumb..and then things get carried away and now everyone’s a borderline alcoholic me included. Culture moves like a Sinewave...true story

Back later :-)

Actually, I am quite surprised at conservative objections to rap music. Let's break it down...

1) Gun culture. Rap music tends to be heavily pro private gun ownership, with a minimum of controls. There are exceptions to this, but that's more of an RnB thing rather than rap.

2) Money. Rap music glorifies money, its social importance, its acquisition, consumerism and ostentatious displays of wealth. So does much of RnB.

3) Government. Rap music often criticises as excessive the role that government and its instutions play in the lives of private citizens.

4) Sex and drugs. Here, the free-for-all attitude of rap does depart from conservative ideals. However, conservative objections to family planning and lack of any comment on population growth issues do render their stance ambiguous. Against promiscuity in word more than in deed? There is also the matter of the portrayal of women as subservient, and open hostility towards homosexuals.

Based on this, it would appear that rap music, with the exception of the drug issue, in fact closely corresponds to the conservative social agenda. So, one must ask, why do the conservatives really object to rap?

Um ... "OC?" :confused:

Tactical Grace:
Love the pun! ("lets break it down")
as i said - im only a conservative in a few ways - i am against gun culture as it happens - though not against gun ownership although i admit its hard to have one without the other, thats part of a wider issue which has little or nothing to do with the provision of firearms i guess...

Anyway - im not sure why you ask why conservatives are against rap - is that to me or as an aside? dont get me wrong! i dont mind asides (love 'em in fact) but i am unsure of how to respond..for now lets assume you just mean conservatives in general ("assume makes an ass out of u and me"...)

anyhow! lol..

Right - its interesting - i suppose you are quite correct - very sharp of you actually, quite impressed - but away from personal comments i think you have to look at the fact that conservative's are usually for established order and rap is sort of its Mister Hyde if you will - same animal differant tendancies, as you point out with regards to sexual politics, drugs, violece, the police etc etc...so whereas i find what you say undeniably quite witty it doesnt hold up that well srry. R&B isnt great...to say the least...but at least some of the older R&B was less self involved and materialsm orientated


Eutrusca - its an american teen soap opera type of thing - very popular over here and as far as i know in the US


Now back to censure/guidance and literature...

A parents role in guiding their childs reading...this is a difficult one because each child is differant...im going to need to think about this for longer than i realized perhaps. I myself would not encourage guding a childs reading past the age of say...12...or maybey 13 - before then theres just a few things i would stop them reading anyway - abstract philosophy and really really gritty horror novels - not things by stephen king for example as theres a touch of unreality and usually a valid message somewhere in there even if its usually pretty simple...I would encourage more than i'd discourage i think..yeah?

I think a first step shoudl always be to try and make someone understand whats wrong with what you woudlnt want them doing - and that involves differentiating between what you dont like and what is in fact bad...and theres very little i can think of in readily available literature that i would actually say is BAD for a growing child...theres some stuff they could misread if they attempted to get through it at too young an age - but im still having difficulty thinking of what i would STOP a child reading...Ill get back to this again lol!


Chess squares - could you possibly..erm..."come again"?

I think what you are saying is thatchildren should be guided - but my question is "how much?" what woudl you stop a child reading? Im not getting at you please dont get me wrong (the internet can be a problem as theres no tone of voice) im just interested to know - i thnk i agree with you but it depends on the degree to which you think there should be guidance..


No one has come back at me about the Police Videos comments - anyone whos reading have any thoughts on it? Propaganda or just innocent entertainment? Control of the population or too-much-beer TV?

Chess squares - could you possibly..erm..."come again"?

I think what you are saying is thatchildren should be guided - but my question is "how much?" what woudl you stop a child reading? Im not getting at you please dont get me wrong (the internet can be a problem as theres no tone of voice) im just interested to know - i thnk i agree with you but it depends on the degree to which you think there should be guidance..

i was quoting a column written for the local paper from some lunatic dumbass


he was saying, in essence, since the parents cant take the time to actually do their job as parents, you know make sure their kids arnt doing shit they dont want them doing, that the LIBRARY (and thus the distributors of media) should remove all access to and even remove the item itself from the shelves even if it has a hint of controversiality in it (mark twain jsut rolled over in his grave when that column was published, no one will read his works ever again) so that the parents dont have to do their damn jobs. he is saying the it is the library's job to decide what your kids cant and cant see based on the decision by a bunch of whiny soccer mom with "sand in their vaginas (a la maddox) who think they should decide what all kids can and cant see

Im with you then - i hate suburban "out-of-the-box" morality ("you cant say that!" "have a more open mind *because i cant justify what im saying on any level because i think what i do because i saw it on daytime tv*") if you know what i mean - i call it that but im ironically unable to explain what it is i mean...

One day im hoping someone will say "so you mean--" and i will say "yes! YES!"...

do you see what i mean? the sort of absurdity that the rocky horror show lampooned...although before somone points it out to me i am also aware that it criticized excess without thought for consequences and shallow fulfilment at the expense of...i dunno what...Basically i know that it meant that both sides were as bad as each other (i think anyway...its what i got from it)...although perhaps donnie darko is a better example - although i dont like the film i do think its version of suburbia is suitably inane...edward scissor hands maybey good example?


So - censureship of television? ja/nein? im still undecided. a bit.

Thanks for the response, Nimano, that's pretty much what I was looking for, another view on the (side) issue of rap. I felt it kind of relevant to the thread as there is no getting away from it in the media these days.

I suppose you are right in saying that while there may be superficial similarities between rap and social conservatism, the former comes in far too radical a package to be viewed favourably by mainstream society.

thanks :-) was worried i had missed it

How about you, have you any particular feelings on the issue of rap or musics influence?