[Studies That Show Childhood] Censorship Better for Society?

Page 1 of 3 [ 47 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next

LVBen
Toucan
Toucan

User avatar

Joined: 7 Jan 2008
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 257

14 Feb 2008, 2:07 pm

Does anyone know of any studies that show that censoring children from curse words, nudity, and sexual language on radio and television is better or worse for society?



KristaMeth
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 1 Oct 2007
Age: 32
Gender: Female
Posts: 926
Location: Hick town near Harrisburg?Pa

14 Feb 2008, 3:27 pm

Not specifically. But I was raised like that. My mom was pretty extreme. And well, we all know what happened there.

::flips everyone off::


_________________
Push the envelope, watch it bend.


Kalister1
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Sep 2007
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,443

14 Feb 2008, 3:29 pm

Knowledge, no matter how "vulgar", should be freely given to everyone.



MrMark
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 3 Jul 2006
Age: 62
Gender: Male
Posts: 8,918
Location: Tallahassee, FL

14 Feb 2008, 3:40 pm

Look into freeschool models. Read "Summerhill." I think the evidence shows that censoring children from curse words, nudity, and sexual language on radio and television does no harm and may be better.

Correction: I think the evidence shows that exposing children to curse words, nudity, and sexual language on radio and television does no harm and may be better.


_________________
"The cordial quality of pear or plum
Rises as gladly in the single tree
As in the whole orchards resonant with bees."
- Emerson


Last edited by MrMark on 14 Feb 2008, 7:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Dantac
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Jan 2008
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,672
Location: Florida

14 Feb 2008, 3:40 pm

Censorship is bad when it becomes too invasive.

For example, I do not mind when a PG-12 cartoon has swearing or partial nudity. Lets be realistic here, kids swear and can see porn on the internet since age 10 on average.

I do mind when a movie like SAW is not censored PG-18.

However, current censorship...where movies and cartoons for younger audiences can't even say a small swear word or show some leg ... or show some real life consequences (aka characters dying, losing limbs or being in pain) that's ridiculous. Anime is one of the most censored things in the United States and its criminal in the sense that they change the storyline and dialog in many of those works (which i'm sure if it happened to a US film overseas there'd be lawsuits and stuff).



KristaMeth
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 1 Oct 2007
Age: 32
Gender: Female
Posts: 926
Location: Hick town near Harrisburg?Pa

14 Feb 2008, 3:43 pm

Kalister1 wrote:
Knowledge, no matter how "vulgar", should be freely given to everyone.


Beautifully put.

I also think that in todays society there have probably been few parents to even successfully pull something like that off. The problem in that type of thinking lies with the fact that when people think "sexually explicit" they think "nudity" or when someone says "b***h" no one thinks "female dog" anymore. Very few people, it seems, are capable of separating tasteful or artistic nudity from flat out pornography. Most parents I know who've tried to censor LIFE "for" their children have failed horribly, creating people who become overly focused on all those "no-no's" either by obsessive avoidance, or the total opposite.

Bad, bad, bad idea.

Yeah, I'm biased. But I really believe a lot of that to be true.


_________________
Push the envelope, watch it bend.


KristaMeth
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 1 Oct 2007
Age: 32
Gender: Female
Posts: 926
Location: Hick town near Harrisburg?Pa

14 Feb 2008, 3:57 pm

I'd like to add though, that I think the better course of action has less to do with censorship and more to do with positive reinforcements. Exposure to positive ideas about sex, use of language, etc.

It's kind of a utopian dream to raise a child like that. If the world weren't as it is, then yeah, there'd be no need to expose kids to things like that. But... at what age do they learn what life is really like? And how will they react? Parenting is training for the real world. Hiding dirty things from your children is not the real world.


_________________
Push the envelope, watch it bend.


richardbenson
Xfractor Card #351
Xfractor Card #351

User avatar

Joined: 30 Oct 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,553
Location: Leave only a footprint behind

14 Feb 2008, 4:00 pm

i really dont like censorship at all but obviously not everyone was born with the same morals (especially the obvious ones) so its an unfortunate necessity


_________________
Winds of clarity. a universal understanding come and go, I've seen though the Darkness to understand the bounty of Light


gbollard
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Oct 2007
Age: 53
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,009
Location: Sydney, Australia

14 Feb 2008, 4:04 pm

It wouldn't be too hard to find on the internet - but would you believe it anyway?

We were taught at Uni about the openness of certain European countries and Scandanavia about sex/porn etc... They did a study at the 20 year mark on sexcrime before and after the new laws.

1. Despite the introduction of "easy access to sex materials" sexcrime had still risen.
2. Comparative to other countries, it had increased significantly less.

So, the conclusions were that easy access to material does actually reduce sex crime but that the amount of sex crime in the world was constantly (and rapidly) rising with the population explosion.



EvilKimEvil
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Sep 2007
Age: 41
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,671

14 Feb 2008, 4:04 pm

If there are advantages to this type of censorship, I suspect it is situational. In some situations, it may do more harm than good. Examples:

1) A child is prohibited from learning anything about sex until she is 16. Throughout her childhood, she is sexually abused. She is deeply traumatized by these experiences but because of her lack of knowledge, she does not know that it is considered wrong and that she has the right to report the abuser and ask for help.

2) A child who has been protected from depictions of violence and information about violence is beaten by a relative or babysitter. Since he doesn't know anything about violence, he doesn't know how to explain the situation to another adult. He assumes he must deserve it, or he over-estimates the abuser's ability to retaliate and remains silent out of fear.

3) A child who has been protected from curse words is constantly called vulgar names by the other kids at school. She doesn't know what the words mean so she doesn't know how to respond or what to do about it.

These forms of "protection" can render kids powerless to defend themselves. Believe it or not, some parents who exercise these forms of censorship are unable to control their own violent impulses. Then the child is subjected to violence only within the family. You can imagine the consequences. I know that this happens because I am familiar with one such family.



Selo
Deinonychus
Deinonychus

User avatar

Joined: 15 Feb 2007
Age: 26
Gender: Female
Posts: 353
Location: MD

14 Feb 2008, 4:58 pm

Censorship is ugly and evil. It is only conservative fear that provokes the idea that it's a good thing, and nothing can be hidden from, say, a curious preteen.

There is nothing in this world that is so offensive that it should be hidden from everyone. Nothing.

EvilKimEvil wrote:
If there are advantages to this type of censorship, I suspect it is situational. In some situations, it may do more harm than good. Examples:

Those examples are all exactly why censorship is the root of nearly all ignorance and suffering. I can think of a thousand examples and none of them are good.



Last edited by Selo on 14 Feb 2008, 4:59 pm, edited 1 time in total.

KristaMeth
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 1 Oct 2007
Age: 32
Gender: Female
Posts: 926
Location: Hick town near Harrisburg?Pa

14 Feb 2008, 4:59 pm

EvilKimEvil wrote:
If there are advantages to this type of censorship, I suspect it is situational. In some situations, it may do more harm than good. Examples:

1) A child is prohibited from learning anything about sex until she is 16. Throughout her childhood, she is sexually abused. She is deeply traumatized by these experiences but because of her lack of knowledge, she does not know that it is considered wrong and that she has the right to report the abuser and ask for help.

2) A child who has been protected from depictions of violence and information about violence is beaten by a relative or babysitter. Since he doesn't know anything about violence, he doesn't know how to explain the situation to another adult. He assumes he must deserve it, or he over-estimates the abuser's ability to retaliate and remains silent out of fear.

3) A child who has been protected from curse words is constantly called vulgar names by the other kids at school. She doesn't know what the words mean so she doesn't know how to respond or what to do about it.

These forms of "protection" can render kids powerless to defend themselves. Believe it or not, some parents who exercise these forms of censorship are unable to control their own violent impulses. Then the child is subjected to violence only within the family. You can imagine the consequences. I know that this happens because I am familiar with one such family.


Powerless, thank you. The right word, I think.

Like you said though, situational. Most parents I see who exercise censorship with their children do it in an unhealthy way. Either completely sheltering all together as you suggested, or teaching the child only or mostly bad things about certain subjects. That cursing is wrong. That violence is wrong. That such and such and such kind of sex in such and such and such kind of instance is wrong. So either the child is too little informed about life to deal with it in a way that allows them to survive best, or they're too afraid to act on it. Like knowing what violence is, but being too scared to defend yourself when someone walks up and slaps you in the face. Because that's life. People get slapped in the face. Mom won't always be there to tell that person that "violence is wrong". But she'll still be there to yell at you when she finds out you hit back -.-


_________________
Push the envelope, watch it bend.


HolyAtheist
Tufted Titmouse
Tufted Titmouse

User avatar

Joined: 12 Feb 2008
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 31
Location: San Antonio, TX

14 Feb 2008, 6:49 pm

As I see it, censorship is for people who can't take the idea of actually talking about ideas.



alex
Administrator
Administrator

User avatar

Joined: 13 Jun 2004
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,149
Location: Beverly Hills, CA

14 Feb 2008, 6:58 pm

HolyAtheist wrote:
As I see it, censorship is for people who can't take the idea of actually talking about ideas.


that is an excellent point.

I see self censorship as a way to close yourself from exploring potentially rattling ideas.

I really don't censor anything from myself although some people want to be censored. The only reason Wrong Planet is censored is because some people would stop using the site if we didn't have censorship in place and I want Wrong planet to be accessible to as many people as possible. Plus I want to be able to use the site while I'm eating. :wink:


_________________
Follow me on Twitter: http://twitter.com/alexplank

Personal FB: http://fb.me/alexplank1


MrMark
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 3 Jul 2006
Age: 62
Gender: Male
Posts: 8,918
Location: Tallahassee, FL

14 Feb 2008, 6:58 pm

I think specifically we're talking about whether or not the ideas and images we work so hard to protect children from are actually harmful.


_________________
"The cordial quality of pear or plum
Rises as gladly in the single tree
As in the whole orchards resonant with bees."
- Emerson


alex
Administrator
Administrator

User avatar

Joined: 13 Jun 2004
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,149
Location: Beverly Hills, CA

14 Feb 2008, 7:01 pm

MrMark wrote:
I think specifically we're talking about whether or not the ideas and images we work so hard to protect children from are actually harmful.


ideas by themselves are not harmful because they can be countered with criticism. Some images are not pleasant and I don't really think there's anything wrong with keeping young children from seeing things that would mess them up.


_________________
Follow me on Twitter: http://twitter.com/alexplank

Personal FB: http://fb.me/alexplank1