I agree. My goals are similar with my own children.
Spoilers Star Trek Picard - Only for Adults?
- Thread starter Kilana2
- Start date
No, you're fine.
My comment was meant to be well past the border of being
(didn't check the Spellcheck
)I was speaking from the viewpoint of folks who have never raised kids and have this funny way of depreciating the value of that experience.
Having helped raise my sisters three little ones (they all moved in with me back in the late 80's) till they all went off to college and the military service, I understand where you're coming from.
Last edited:
Ok, cool.No, you're fine.
My comment was meant to be well past the border of being factitious.
I was speaking from the viewpoint of folks who have never raised kids and have this funny way of depreciating the value of that experience.
Having helped raise my sisters three little ones (they all moved in with me back in the late 80's) till they all went off to college and the military service, I understand where you're coming from.
Didn't want to come across as a dick.
No worries ...Ok, cool.
Didn't want to come across as a dick.
I like Dick's ... and Tom's ...and Harry's ... and Jane's ... and Spot's ...
It's fun to watch them all run....
https://www.mentalfloss.com/article/68475/15-fun-facts-about-dick-and-jane
(Tom and Harry on the other hand, when I was younger, were more fun to chase)
It was not the original Icheb actor. I feel more connected with the Icheb litverse character Kirsten Beyer described. Picard is not bad, but for me it is just a different timeline and one of several possible futures for JL.
As I have noted previously, my son has been diagnosed with Autistic Spectrum Disorder and the line between real and make believe is fuzzier with him than with most children.
My children have a specific and unfortunately intimate relationship with death and violence, as we lost a baby almost a year ago (miscarriage), a great grandmother a few months before, and have had close friends suffer through violent assaults. All of that information was not kept from our children.
I respect the intelligence of my children, but they are NOT born as fully formed and mature individuals, capable of internalizing any and all stimuli and using that to make value judgments at an early age. I have a role to play, as does their mother.
Children on our street regularly pretend to murder each other, using play weapons modeled after their FPS games. They describe said murders in loud voices, and detail the tactics they are using, what parts of the body they are aiming for, and what effect their weapons are having on the body.
None of these children are older than 12. Say what you will about value judgments, something is influencing their thoughts and actions, and in a way I do not find to be positive.
Facetious.No, you're fine.
My comment was meant to be well past the border of being factitious.
I was speaking from the viewpoint of folks who have never raised kids and have this funny way of depreciating the value of that experience.
Having helped raise my sisters three little ones (they all moved in with me back in the late 80's) till they all went off to college and the military service, I understand where you're coming from.
I got where you were going. Kids are great at manipulating their parents.... but at an early age (infant) that is because their minds learn how best to satisfy their NEEDS (food, temperature, comfort)... it's shortly thereafter that they get how to manipulate adults to satisfy their WANTS (toys, cookies, tablet time).
I highly doubt it is Picard or Star Trek in general.
And I wouldn't dream of telling you how you should raise your own child, especially given he has needs I couldn't possibly have insight into.
No one is claiming children are born fully functional, that would be absurd, but what I am claiming is that our society is the exception rather than the norm in terms of the extent to which children are sheltered from what we are concerned might be harmful to their development. We cannot assert that as being representative of the experiences of most children throughout history, but we can point to the fact that despite all of our technology and our sophistication serious violent crime is not on current or long term trends reducing.
Whether violent media (or early exposure to it) is a factor in promoting violence is not a question we will settle here, many studies have been published indicating one way or another and been heralded by advocates of a particular position. Few are truly objective and without bias but the fact remains that in a society where children are sheltered to an unprecedented degree from supposedly harmful media we are seeing increases in youth violence in most western nations.
I'm yet to see any research that (to my mind) successfully links the influence of media to crime outside of individual case studies, nor can we reliably compare crime rates to those of previous ages with different law enforcement techniques and reporting criteria. Nonetheless the best (albeit flawed) data available suggests that murder rates over the past century have increased dramatically despite the comparative remove away from exposing children to the harsher realities of life.
That's not an open and shut case, as should be obvious, but given the strong and persistent evidence that social learning (ie learning by observing the consequences of other's behaviour, essentially operant conditioning by proxy and not merely learning by copying others behaviour) plays a strong role in the formative years I'm much more concerned about so called "cartoon violence" which shows little or no consequence to violent acts than I am about media which errs on the side of making the suffering more visceral.
Last edited:
That's a fair position.
Anecdotally, my son enjoys playing "racing games" which involve a lot of crashes. Therefore, when he plays with his Hot Wheel cars, he crashes them. I have spent a great deal of time explaining to him that crashes are not consequence-free, and that they hurt people and cars.
The lesson FINALLY hit home when we drove by a very bad car wreck on the Interstate. I explained to him that THAT is what happens when cars crash, and a car wreck like that is what hurt his mommy.
He doesn't crash his play cars as often anymore.
The decline of western society and the need to expose children to reality is a significant discussion. A worthwhile debate whether cartoon violence is less healthy on a child than graphic depictions of violence would have to depend on the specifics of the violence and the individual watching it. I don't think Tom and Jerry would affect a young child the same way Goodfellas would. But one may be a greater exposure to reality.
I think the best antidote is involved parents. Knowing your child and what they need in that moment is more important than what is on the screen.
Oh god, the velveteen rabbit. I'd forgotten about that. Definitely agree, I remember watching predator and aliens as a kid and thinking they were cool. Then along comes this episode of Alvin and the chipmunks where they get a kitten which ends up being hit by a car. I was apparently inconsolable for days.
I still can't sit right through Watership Down.
Watership Down is straight up awful.
Go sit in the corner.
Go on, over there.
Now stay there until someone tells you otherwise.
Gladly.
Some sage advice from bender Rodriguez about this issue.
showing a person who will forget the numbers is very different from telling a mega-company like amazon your ID number so they can store it forever.
They already know about you because you have already subscribed their services?
And while I know that in the USA mega-corporation can do whatever they want, in the UE they have to obey very strict UE regulations about personal data (i.e. GDPR)
