View Full Version : Nickelodeon to air program on same sex parenting despite massive protests


bonsor
06-18-2002, 05:29 PM
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20020618/ap_wo_en_po/us_tv_gay_par ents_2 (http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20020618/ap_wo_en_po/us_tv_gay_parents_2)

<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">NEW YORK - A children's TV channel is going ahead with a program about same-sex parents, despite receiving so many e-mails that the network had to create a separate address to avoid a computer crash.


The Nickelodeon network received 100,000 e-mails and phone calls to protest the program, set to air Tuesday night in the United States.

The Washington-based Traditional Values Coalition ( news - web sites) has spearheaded the campaign against the show "Nick News Special Edition: My Family is Different."

"It is a cover for promoting homosexuality for kids," said Andrea Lafferty, the coalition's executive director.

Nickelodeon said that's not so. Linda Ellerbee, in the show's introduction, says, "The following program is about tolerance ... It is not about sex. It does not tell you what to think."

Ellerbee said she conceived of this show upon reading that the word "fag" had become the most common schoolyard epithet.

The public acknowledgment by Rosie O'Donnell, who is also featured in the half-hour show, that she is a lesbian put the subject in the news, Ellerbee said. The former talk-show host has adopted three children.

The program is largely a discussion. Although it also features a gay school principal and a gay New York City firefighter who is a father of three, children are the focus.

Some children with gay parents talk about feeling uncomfortable about what other kids say in school. Other children discuss their objection to homosexuality.

Parents are upset because many thought they never had to worry about Nickelodeon's content, Lafferty said.

"They have been led to believe that Nick is a safe harbor," she said. "Now they've been exposed. The skirt has been lifted and Nick has been exposed."

Herb Scannell, Nickelodeon's chief executive, said he had no hesitation about airing the special, calling it another way of "looking at the world from a kid's point of view."

"The whole philosophy of Nick is that it's tough to be a kid in an adult world," he said.</font>

[This message has been edited by ****** (edited 06-18-2002).]

Random Female
06-18-2002, 05:32 PM
why wouldn't you agree wtih it? All it does is get the message out that there exists families different from a daddy and a mommy so hopefully it won't seem unusual to a child when he encounters it in school. Maybe they'll be less likely to tease if they learn about it at a young age. it's not explicit - it's just laying out facts.

Random Female
06-18-2002, 05:32 PM
ahhh changed your mind already, eh?

Ghetto_Squirrel
06-18-2002, 05:33 PM
My good buddy Jerry Falwell was on Wolf Blitzer's show a minute ago talking about it and doing his best to not seem like the fucking bigot he is.

------------------
http://www.toolcity.net/~burt/images/pimp3a.jpg
My anti-drug is non-consensual sex with minors.
AIM: Mista Saki

bonsor
06-18-2002, 05:38 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by Random Female:
ahhh changed your mind already, eh?</font>

Yeah, I just looked at it and thought 'Wow, that looks stupid. I'm not stupid.' So I deleted it.

Here's a snippet from another article I read:

<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">The half-hour report, produced by Ellerbee and featuring O'Donnell, includes comments from the Rev. Jerry Falwell, who later joined conservative activists in urging Nickelodeon not to air it. </font>

This will probably shoot steam out of my ears. Words cannot describe how much I hate this man. Billy Graham, too.

Mayfuck
06-18-2002, 05:39 PM
Good for Nickelodeon. Seriously.

beamish13
06-18-2002, 05:48 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by Mayfuck:
Good for Nickelodeon. Seriously.</font>

yes. Linda Ellerbee is hosting the special and she's gay, no?

Delta
06-18-2002, 05:50 PM
that really makes my skin crawl. im all for same sex parenting, but i dont like the idea of a children's tv network trying to dumb down the issues to try to promote forced tolerance. the idea of a children's network trying to promote *any* side of any charged debate like this just seems wrong

bonsor
06-18-2002, 05:54 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by Delta:
that really makes my skin crawl. im all for same sex parenting, but i dont like the idea of a children's tv network trying to dumb down the issues to try to promote forced tolerance. the idea of a children's network trying to promote *any* side of any charged debate like this just seems wrong</font><font color="0084ff">Forced tolerance? Explain how it's forceful.

Ghetto_Squirrel
06-18-2002, 05:56 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by Delta:
the idea of a children's network trying to promote *any* side of any charged debate like this just seems wrong</font>

Well, you do have a point, and Falwell did also make one that the pro-homosexuals would benefit more from the discussion than his group would, despite how fair the network tried to make it.

I suppose the point behind the thing is to try to instill some open-minded views in the kids before they grow up with a dislike for people different than themselves. Not every kid has the opportunity to grow up in a diverse environment, and the television may be the only exposure they have to people of different races, beliefs, and sexual orientations.

------------------
http://www.toolcity.net/~burt/images/pimp3a.jpg
My anti-drug is non-consensual sex with minors.
AIM: Mista Saki

bonsor
06-18-2002, 05:58 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by Ghetto_Squirrel:
Well, you do have a point, and Falwell did also make one that the pro-homosexuals would benefit more from the discussion than his group would, despite how fair the network tried to make it.</font>

<font color="0084ff">If the program benefits pro-homosexuals despite how fair the network tried to make it, shouldn't that tell you a bit about the opinion that anti-homosexuals hold?

Just a thought.

Ghetto_Squirrel
06-18-2002, 05:58 PM
At the same time, that's a far cry from the "Hey, kids, go grope someone of the same gender" message that the opponents seem to claim it is.

------------------
http://www.toolcity.net/~burt/images/pimp3a.jpg
My anti-drug is non-consensual sex with minors.
AIM: Mista Saki

Ghetto_Squirrel
06-18-2002, 06:01 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by ******:
<font color="0084ff">If the program benefits pro-homosexuals despite how fair the network tried to make it, shouldn't that tell you a bit about the opinion that anti-homosexuals hold?
</font>

Heh. I guess it's the same with everything. If there's a pretty objective segment about marijuana on the news, there are probably a hell of a lot more kids thinking that looks like fun than there are thinking they should stop smoking it.

------------------
http://www.toolcity.net/~burt/images/pimp3a.jpg
My anti-drug is non-consensual sex with minors.
AIM: Mista Saki

Mayfuck
06-18-2002, 06:03 PM
"Pro-homosexual" and "anti-homosexual" look silly.

Ghetto_Squirrel
06-18-2002, 06:03 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Other children discuss their objection to homosexuality.</font>

Eleven-year olds quoting biblical passages...now this sounds interesting to me.

------------------
http://www.toolcity.net/~burt/images/pimp3a.jpg
My anti-drug is non-consensual sex with minors.
AIM: Mista Saki

FearFactory
06-18-2002, 06:03 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by Delta:
that really makes my skin crawl. im all for same sex parenting, but i dont like the idea of a children's tv network trying to dumb down the issues to try to promote forced tolerance. the idea of a children's network trying to promote *any* side of any charged debate like this just seems wrong</font>

<font color="orange">Yeah, 'cause you know... being tolerant is like, bad 'n stuff.
</font>

Delta
06-18-2002, 06:05 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by ******:
<font color="0084ff">Forced tolerance? Explain how it's forceful.</font>

maybe forced is a bad word. i dunno, induced tolerance maybe?

all i mean is that the program will obviously have a pro-homosexual bias, and that if the show does in fact have an impact on the impressionable young viewers it will likely induce them to be more tolerant towards homosexuals. and while i do completely think it would be a very cool thing if everyone were more tolerant, i really disagree with the method. it sets a precedent that im not comfortable with. sure, this time the network is advocating the position i agree with, but what happens next time, or the time after?

i dunno, i agree with the ends, but not the means.

Delta
06-18-2002, 06:06 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by Mayfuck:
"Pro-homosexual" and "anti-homosexual" look silly. </font>

i know, but "pro-gay rights" or "pro-gay equality" is less readable

Ghetto_Squirrel
06-18-2002, 06:07 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by Delta:
and while i do completely think it would be a very cool thing if everyone were more tolerant, i really disagree with the method. </font>

I totally understand what you're saying, but what is the alternative? Not discussing it at all?

Indifference is probably as detrimental to the pro-gay cause as outright gay-bashing.

------------------
http://www.toolcity.net/~burt/images/pimp3a.jpg
My anti-drug is non-consensual sex with minors.
AIM: Mista Saki

bonsor
06-18-2002, 06:11 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by Delta:
maybe forced is a bad word. i dunno, induced tolerance maybe?

all i mean is that the program will obviously have a pro-homosexual bias, and that if the show does in fact have an impact on the impressionable young viewers it will likely induce them to be more tolerant towards homosexuals. and while i do completely think it would be a very cool thing if everyone were more tolerant, i really disagree with the method. it sets a precedent that im not comfortable with. sure, this time the network is advocating the position i agree with, but what happens next time, or the time after?

i dunno, i agree with the ends, but not the means.</font>
<font color="0084ff">Well, it's a pretty bold move on the part of Nickelodeon. They will probably lose a lot of viewers because of this special. I know a lot of families who would do that. While it may not be ethically right for children's network to air this special, I like the fact that they're making the decision to try and influence the next generation to be just a little more tolerant.

FearFactory
06-18-2002, 06:12 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by Ghetto_Squirrel:

Indifference is probably as detrimental to the pro-gay cause as outright gay-bashing.

</font>

<font color="orange">Exactly.

"Well, what they do behind closed doors is their business... I just don't want to see it happen in front of me"
</font>

bonsor
06-18-2002, 06:12 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by Ghetto_Squirrel:
I totally understand what you're saying, but what is the alternative? Not discussing it at all?</font><font color="0084ff">Exactly. If you can provide a better alternative for it, I'd like to hear it.

Delta
06-18-2002, 06:17 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by Ghetto_Squirrel:
I totally understand what you're saying, but what is the alternative? Not discussing it at all?

Indifference is probably as detrimental to the pro-gay cause as outright gay-bashing.</font>

but tv precludes discussion. and besides, these are kids we're talking about, they arent capable of this sort of discussion. and what's nickolodeon's target age group? 6-12? theres no way a 12-year old can critically think about this sort of topic. and thats my fear, that the kids wont be thinking about it, that they're just going to absorb whatever they're shown, without being able to realize they're being handed a skewed perspective

bonsor
06-18-2002, 06:21 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by Delta:
but tv precludes discussion. and besides, these are kids we're talking about, they arent capable of this sort of discussion. and what's nickolodeon's target age group? 6-12? theres no way a 12-year old can critically think about this sort of topic. and thats my fear, that the kids wont be thinking about it, that they're just going to absorb whatever they're shown, without being able to realize they're being handed a skewed perspective</font><font color="0084ff">It's not going to be a skewed perspective, though. It's about tolerance and how one shouldn't hate. It's not about why being gay is right or wrong, it's about how much being the target of hate really sucks.

Delta
06-18-2002, 06:22 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by ******:
<font color="0084ff">Exactly. If you can provide a better alternative for it, I'd like to hear it.</font>

an alternative? let the kids be, and work on the thinking, reasoning adult population instead. let abc do a 20/20 special on gay parenting, give publicity to the sociological studies showing that being raised by two men or two women doesnt cause emotional damage, sign the petitions to ease restrictions on gay parenting, but dont indoctrinate children with your viewpoint

Ghetto_Squirrel
06-18-2002, 06:26 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by Delta:
but tv precludes discussion. and besides, these are kids we're talking about, they arent capable of this sort of discussion. and what's nickolodeon's target age group? 6-12? theres no way a 12-year old can critically think about this sort of topic.</font>

I assume the kids in attendance are to make sure that the discussion doesn't morph into a high-level debate on ethics and morality, with specific references to the bible. Still, while young children won't understand everything, they'll at least recognize that rather uncommon types of families do exist, hence the title "My Family is Different." Also, it might help those who are being raised by two parents of the same gender feel like they aren't alone just because nobody in their school is in the same position.

------------------
http://www.toolcity.net/~burt/images/pimp3a.jpg
My anti-drug is non-consensual sex with minors.
AIM: Mista Saki

bonsor
06-18-2002, 06:26 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by Delta:
an alternative? let the kids be, and work on the thinking, reasoning adult population instead. let abc do a 20/20 special on gay parenting, give publicity to the sociological studies showing that being raised by two men or two women doesnt cause emotional damage, sign the petitions to ease restrictions on gay parenting, but dont indoctrinate children with your viewpoint</font>

<font color="0084ff">I think it's a well known fact that kids at younger ages are much more highly impressionable than kids who are older. If Nickelodeon exposes a nation of kids to another perspective, it will help, I am sure of it.

Ghetto_Squirrel
06-18-2002, 06:30 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by Delta:
an alternative? let the kids be, and work on the thinking, reasoning adult population instead.</font>

The children now will be the adults of tomorrow. It's much easier to plant a concept in the head of a child than it is to totally reverse any opinions a 45-year old adult may have held during the half century of his/her life.

------------------
http://www.toolcity.net/~burt/images/pimp3a.jpg
My anti-drug is non-consensual sex with minors.
AIM: Mista Saki

Delta
06-18-2002, 06:33 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by ******:
<font color="0084ff">I think it's a well known fact that kids at younger ages are much more highly impressionable than kids who are older. If Nickelodeon exposes a nation of kids to another perspective, it will help, I am sure of it.</font>

</font>i know they're more impressionable, and thats my issue. im worried about this not because i dont want kids to be tolerant, im worried because of what will happen if they decide to do a half hour special on why we need to nuke iraq, or why martial law is a good thing, or why (insert anything im opposed to) is neccessary

Delta
06-18-2002, 06:36 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by Ghetto_Squirrel:
The children now will be the adults of tomorrow. It's much easier to plant a concept in the head of a child than it is to totally reverse any opinions a 45-year old adult may have held during the half century of his/her life.</font>

like i said, i agree with the ends, not the means. i think trying to intentionally plant ideas in a kids head is far more morally wrong than intolerance

Ghetto_Squirrel
06-18-2002, 06:36 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by Delta:
</font>i know they're more impressionable, and thats my issue. im worried about this not because i dont want kids to be tolerant, im worried because of what will happen if they decide to do a half hour special on why we need to nuke iraq, or why martial law is a good thing, or why (insert anything im opposed to) is neccessary</font>

Have you seen EWTN lately? Like the Angel Force isn't trying to influence kids into catholicism..

------------------
http://www.toolcity.net/~burt/images/pimp3a.jpg
My anti-drug is non-consensual sex with minors.
AIM: Mista Saki

beamish13
06-18-2002, 06:37 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by ******:
While it may not be ethically right for children's network to air this special</font>


"not ethically right?" I think that talking to kids about something this serious has been long overdue. What's not right is teaching kids that non-Christians are going to burn in "hell" and that guns are cool. The values of the people that are opposed to this show are what's scary to me.

B.T.W.: Jerry Falwell is an ignorant,bigoted bastard.


I'm so tired of the Christian religion in general.

Delta
06-18-2002, 06:38 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by Ghetto_Squirrel:
Have you seen EWTN lately? Like the Angel Force isn't trying to influence kids into catholicism..</font>

dont know what EWTN is, never heard of Angel Force, but just because they do it doesnt make it right for nickolodeon to do it

beamish13
06-18-2002, 06:39 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by Delta:
theres no way a 12-year old can critically think about this sort of topic. </font>


underestimating the intelligence of children is pretty low, even for you.

bonsor
06-18-2002, 06:40 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by Delta:
i know they're more impressionable, and thats my issue. im worried about this not because i dont want kids to be tolerant, im worried because of what will happen if they decide to do a half hour special on why we need to nuke iraq, or why martial law is a good thing, or why (insert anything im opposed to) is neccessary</font>

<font color="0084ff">I understnd that you're trying to be fair about it, but it's a special on tolerance where same sex parenting is the example. It's anti-hate. Not progay.

kypper
06-18-2002, 06:43 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by beamish13:

underestimating the intelligence of children is pretty low, even for you.</font>

Yup. 12-14 is when children tend to start questioning fundamentals like religion. Information is the best thing they can have.

Delta
06-18-2002, 06:45 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by beamish13:
underestimating the intelligence of children is pretty low, even for you.</font>

even for me? dunno what else ive done that was low, but, um, thanks

and 12 year olds (or at least the standard, non-prodigy variety of 12-year olds) dont have the mental machinery required to handle a discussion like that. and even if they did have the aptitude they still lack the actual ability to handle it, since they wont have the vocabulary, experience, or conceptual framework yet. this would be why 12 year olds dont vote

Ghetto_Squirrel
06-18-2002, 06:46 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by Delta:
dont know what EWTN is, never heard of Angel Force, but just because they do it doesnt make it right for nickolodeon to do it

</font>

I'm just saying that loads of kids' TV shows have some kind of message behind them. At least in this one they aren't even trying to be subtle.

------------------
http://www.toolcity.net/~burt/images/pimp3a.jpg
My anti-drug is non-consensual sex with minors.
AIM: Mista Saki

Ghetto_Squirrel
06-18-2002, 06:48 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by ******:
<font color="0084ff">I understnd that you're trying to be fair about it, but it's a special on tolerance where same sex parenting is the example. It's anti-hate. Not progay.</font></font>

Right, right. I mean, Nickelodeon is trying to address the issue as responsibly as possible.

------------------
http://www.toolcity.net/~burt/images/pimp3a.jpg
My anti-drug is non-consensual sex with minors.
AIM: Mista Saki

Delta
06-18-2002, 06:54 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by ******:
<font color="0084ff">I understnd that you're trying to be fair about it, but it's a special on tolerance where same sex parenting is the example. It's anti-hate. Not progay.</font>

</font>but it will be pro-gay, because if there was even a possibility that it was anti-gay every left-wing group and half this board would be going nuts. i dunno, maybe it will be somewhat balanced, we wont know til they air it. if it does turn out to be balanced then ill take back everything ive posted in this thread and admit that i was wrong, but until then im going to remain somewhat leery of the idea

kypper
06-18-2002, 06:55 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by Delta:
</font>but it will be pro-gay, because if there was even a possibility that it was anti-gay every left-wing group and half this board would be going nuts. i dunno, maybe it will be somewhat balanced, we wont know til they air it. if it does turn out to be balanced then ill take back everything ive posted in this thread and admit that i was wrong, but until then im going to remain somewhat leery of the idea</font>

This is not a black and white world. It can be neither and simply be accepting homosexual parents.

[This message has been edited by kypper (edited 06-18-2002).]

Guen
06-18-2002, 06:59 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by Delta:
</font>i know they're more impressionable, and thats my issue. im worried about this not because i dont want kids to be tolerant, im worried because of what will happen if they decide to do a half hour special on why we need to nuke iraq, or why martial law is a good thing, or why (insert anything im opposed to) is neccessary</font>

in that case, it isn't the special you're against, it's the whole "nick news" show. because the show is all about explaining different viewpoints on pertinent issues in ways that kids can comprehend it.

also, your "6-12 year olds can't handle this" makes me a bit uncomfortable...that's not very far from the falwells who say we have to "protect our children" from same-sex "evils". six and twelve are not at all comparable as far as comprehension goes--those are pretty formative years, actually, so age twelve can handle things that a seven year old is still worlds away from. i'd say nine and up kids ARE old enough to comprehend this stuff, and if they aren't presented with different viewpoints in a mature way, they learn about it from kids at school. i.e., they learn about it when they learn how to use the word "fag".

i knew i was bisexual when i was twelve. but it would have been wrong, or just WEIRD for anybody to try and talk to me about it...right?

Delta
06-18-2002, 07:04 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by kypper:
The world isn't black and white here. It can be neither and simply be accepting that it is. </font>

a) what relevance did that have to the post you quoted?

b) duh. everyone *else* in this thread realized this wasnt a black and white issue and that there were two conflicting moral issues here. but i suppose you'd like a gold star for pointing out the obvious?

c) if you're going to try to post something profound you should try to keep your grammar above the 6th grade level. its more convincing that way

kypper
06-18-2002, 07:07 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by Delta:
but it will be pro-gay, because if there was even a possibility that it was anti-gay every left-wing group and half this board would be going nuts</font>

You make it a black and white issue, asshole. If you having a fucking problem with me, then come to ottawa and let me rip out your heart and feed it to my dog. In the meantime, stop being such a prick unprovoked.

tweedyburd
06-18-2002, 07:07 PM
Delta is the only in this thread making sense.

This type of thing is the epitome of the left's attack on free minds and free speech--causes they are supposed to champion. While an "anti-hate" program educating children on tolerance is a noble cause, I, like Delta do not agree with the means. At it's core, it's fundamentally an attempt at thought control. Opinions at their core cannot be wiped out by conditioning programs like this one. Even more dangerous, perhaps, is the supression of an opinion forming into cognitive rage later on in life. The risks of programs like this, not only in regards to this subject matter, but also in numerous other edgey subjects, far outweigh the benefits. The real befefits lie in allowing children to learn to form their own opinions and then deal with those directly in an open manner. The only way things like homophobia and other forms of hate can be dealt with in a way that brings change in thought is through an open flow of discussion, not instilled values at a young age.

It's like the Thought Police, only from the other side of the street. Get 'em while they're young.



[This message has been edited by tweedyburd (edited 06-19-2002).]

beamish13
06-18-2002, 07:08 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by Delta:
a) what relevance did that have to the post you quoted?

b) duh. everyone *else* in this thread realized this wasnt a black and white issue and that there were two conflicting moral issues here. but i suppose you'd like a gold star for pointing out the obvious?

c) if you're going to try to post something profound you should try to keep your grammar above the 6th grade level. its more convincing that way</font>

why don't you just take out your white flag and leave us? Conservative ninnie.

melancholia
06-18-2002, 07:09 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by Ghetto_Squirrel:
My good buddy Jerry Falwell was on Wolf Blitzer's show a minute ago talking about it and doing his best to not seem like the fucking bigot he is.

</font>

I am so happy that I'm not the only person on this earth who would love to see that man impaled on a stake.

tweedyburd
06-18-2002, 07:12 PM
Oh, did anyone hear about how Sweden is trying to pass a law that will send people to JAIL if they utter something even remotely unfavorable about an 'alternative lifestyle'?

Delta
06-18-2002, 07:12 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by Guen:
snipped for readability/brevity</font>

im unfamiliar with nickolodeon, i dont watch much tv and dont even get that channel, so i dont really know about nick news or its format. im going to sidestep commenting on it because i honestly dont know enough about it to say anything close to intelligent, and we already have kypper posting in this thread, so theres more than enough inane gibberish here already

re: the ages. ok, for the sake of argument ill give you that 12 year olds can handle it. but what about the rest of the 6-12 age group that'll be watching? will they be able to handle the issues critically?

and theres a difference between being in a situation and being forced to live it and just passively watching a tv broadcast. obviously there are children being raised by same sex parents (which i think is hunky-dory, honestly), and im not saying those kids shouldnt be involved in the discussion, im just saying i dont think nickolodeon is going to present an unbiased enough perspective to really help any kids understand it. at best there'll be no impact, at worst they're going to indoctrinate a bunch of children

Ghetto_Squirrel
06-18-2002, 07:13 PM
Still, 100,000 e-mails?

It's not like they're airing a half-hour videotape of people humping giant plaster reproductive organs while the words, "We're homo. Deal with it." continuously scroll across the bottom of the screen.

------------------
http://www.toolcity.net/~burt/images/pimp3a.jpg
My anti-drug is non-consensual sex with minors.
AIM: Mista Saki

kypper
06-18-2002, 07:14 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by Delta:
im unfamiliar with nickolodeon, i dont watch much tv and dont even get that channel, so i dont really know about nick news or its format. im going to sidestep commenting on it because i honestly dont know enough about it to say anything close to intelligent, and we already have kypper posting in this thread, so theres more than enough inane gibberish here already

re: the ages. ok, for the sake of argument ill give you that 12 year olds can handle it. but what about the rest of the 6-12 age group that'll be watching? will they be able to handle the issues critically?

and theres a difference between being in a situation and being forced to live it and just passively watching a tv broadcast. obviously there are children being raised by same sex parents (which i think is hunky-dory, honestly), and im not saying those kids shouldnt be involved in the discussion, im just saying i dont think nickolodeon is going to present an unbiased enough perspective to really help any kids understand it. at best there'll be no impact, at worst they're going to indoctrinate a bunch of children</font>
and yet I haven't contradicted myself in this thread, whereas you have.

beamish13
06-18-2002, 07:14 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by melancholia:
I am so happy that I'm not the only person on this earth who would love to see that man impaled on a stake.</font>

Same here. Falwell likes to pretend that he's such a loving and swell guy and that makes me even angrier than the things that he's said.

Organized religion is one of mankind's greatest fallacies.

melancholia
06-18-2002, 07:16 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by ******:
[QUOTE]
<font color="0084ff">Well, it's a pretty bold move on the part of Nickelodeon. They will probably lose a lot of viewers because of this special. I know a lot of families who would do that. While it may not be ethically right for children's network to air this special, I like the fact that they're making the decision to try and influence the next generation to be just a little more tolerant.</font>

I agree. The world is changing, and we can't continue to feed children with stereotypical families and situations. The younger they are educated about differences between people, the more they will learn to accept, tolerate and respect other people.

On a personal note, I recently visited my cousins in Georgia, and I was really shocked to hear my 7 year old cousin make the comment, "powerpuff girls are gay". This comment was not offensive to me...but I can see how it would be to a gay person. I'm sure that there are people in this world (and on this board) who would be offended at the comment "That band sucked, they were so JEWISH".

Maybe by slowly assimilating pieces of the "real" world into childrens programming, we will eventually be able to change some children (and parents) into more tolerant beings. By promoting discussion, we can get the issue into the media.

It is no longer taboo to talk about racial differences on television, why should it be in terms of sexuality? Ignorance and hatred are similar, regardless of who they are aimed at.

*jenn*

Delta
06-18-2002, 07:17 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by beamish13:
why don't you just take out your white flag and leave us? Conservative ninnie.</font>

are you dense? how am i conservative? in case you havent noticed, im further to the left than anyone else in this thread

slunky_munky
06-18-2002, 07:18 PM
Kids learning about same sex parenting at that age ?

You teach kids what it means to be gay, to be heterosexual, to love, to have sex, before you teach them how to raise a kid under their sexual identity.

beamish13
06-18-2002, 07:20 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by Delta:
are you dense? how am i conservative? in case you havent noticed, im further to the left than anyone else in this thread</font>

LOL

Ghetto_Squirrel
06-18-2002, 07:20 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by melancholia:
On a personal note, I recently visited my cousins in Georgia, and I was really shocked to hear my 7 year old cousin make the comment, "powerpuff girls are gay". This comment was not offensive to me...but I can see how it would be to a gay person.
</font>

I'm not offended by that as much as I am disturbed by the fact that particularly teenagers and pre-teens, while not attempting to be blatantly anti-homo, are making those subconscious connections between words like "gay" and "fag," and "bad."

------------------
http://www.toolcity.net/~burt/images/pimp3a.jpg
My anti-drug is non-consensual sex with minors.
AIM: Mista Saki

Delta
06-18-2002, 07:22 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by kypper:
and yet I haven't contradicted myself in this thread, whereas you have.</font>

you havent contradicted yourself because you havent made any attempt at addressing the topic, you're just spouting off your typical garbage ***'ing. its easy to be consistent when you only have the insight of a partially dethawed eggo

but just to play along, where's my contradiction?

Graveflower
06-18-2002, 07:22 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by tweedyburd:
Oh, did anyone hear about how Sweden is trying to pass a law that will send people to JAIL if they utter something even remotely unfavorable about an 'alternative lifestyle'?</font>

What the hell, is that really true? I have to go look that up.

melancholia
06-18-2002, 07:22 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by slunky_munky:
Kids learning about same sex parenting at that age ?

You teach kids what it means to be gay, to be heterosexual, to love, to have sex, before you teach them how to raise a kid under their sexual identity.

</font>


most people are not sure of their sexual identity until they are in their teens... why is it so wrong to teach kids that gay people do live in this world, and that gay people do not wish to rape them...and that if they or one of their friends turns out to be gay- that is not a crime?

At birth, we give children gender assignments. We teach them what it is like to be a "typical" boy or girl. We teach them at an early age that there people of all different colors and religions. We teach them to be proud of their own culture, but informed and respecting of other cultures... why the hell shouldn't we teach them about homosexuality?

Undone
06-18-2002, 07:22 PM
<font color="CC33CC">Tweetyburd, I don't see how this is indoctrination by any means. People have the choice to watch this show, and we still have no idea how the topic is going to be presented. Maybe a more general topic like homosexuality would have been a more reasonable thing to bring up, and perhaps in a different format than its own show. Maybe a gay character in one of their regular shows?

zekix
06-18-2002, 07:23 PM
Delta (I only read half this read), and anyone:

When was the last time you LIKED being insulted?


Say I'm sitting on the playground and someone comes up to me and goes "FAG! You're stupid!" or something to that effect... am I going to like that?

It's a simple question of right and wrong treatment of people different than you.

And I'm willing to bet that few kids are actually going to watch this...

melancholia
06-18-2002, 07:25 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by Ghetto_Squirrel:
I'm not offended by that as much as I am disturbed by the fact that particularly teenagers and pre-teens, while not attempting to be blatantly anti-homo, are making those subconscious connections between words like "gay" and "fag," and "bad."

</font>

I was disturbed more at the fact that at such a young age, those connections between "gay", "fag" and "bad" are already being made. My point- is that at young ages, kids begin to get opinions about things... it doesn't matter if they really understand the issues or not. This is why I believe teaching about cultural as well as sexual diversity at a young age is a good thing.

Ghetto_Squirrel
06-18-2002, 07:28 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by melancholia:
We teach them what it is like to be a "typical" boy or girl. We teach them at an early age that there people of all different colors and religions. We teach them to be proud of their own culture, but informed and respecting of other cultures... why the hell shouldn't we teach them about homosexuality? </font>

------------------
http://www.toolcity.net/~burt/images/pimp3a.jpg
My anti-drug is non-consensual sex with minors.
AIM: Mista Saki

beamish13
06-18-2002, 07:30 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by Ghetto_Squirrel:
I'm not offended by that as much as I am disturbed by the fact that particularly teenagers and pre-teens, while not attempting to be blatantly anti-homo, are making those subconscious connections between words like "gay" and "fag," and "bad."

</font>

It's not just teens. Just look at what crap posts permeate throughout this board. The same goes with the word "retard". It's enough to make me scream.

TheHappiestBoyInTheWorld
06-18-2002, 07:30 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by beamish13:
why don't you just take out your white flag and leave us? Conservative ninnie.</font>

Beamish, come on--this is a (relatively) mature and healthy discussion. What could you possibly accomplish with comments like yours, which are childish and obviously misinformed?

bonsor
06-18-2002, 07:35 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by beamish13:
why don't you just take out your white flag and leave us? Conservative ninnie.

</font><font color="0084ff">Why don't you grace this thread with some of your incredible intellect? Liberal ninnie.

beamish13
06-18-2002, 07:37 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by TheHappiestBoyInTheWorld:
Beamish, come on--this is a (relatively) mature and healthy discussion. What could you possibly accomplish with comments like yours, which are childish and obviously misinformed?</font>


it's childish to believe that Delta underestimates the abilities of your average child? that's rich. You haven't contributed anything to this discussion, so post or sit this one out, 'k?

TheHappiestBoyInTheWorld
06-18-2002, 07:43 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by beamish13:

it's childish to believe that Delta underestimates the abilities of your average child? that's rich.</font>

Let's put things into context, shall we? You'll find it helps. It's not childish to believe that he underestimates the abilities of a child, but it is childish to resort to name-calling when someone doesn't agree with you. Do you understand?

<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">You haven't contributed anything to this discussion, so post or sit this one out, 'k?</font>

I love a good non-sequitur--my input on the subject should hardly be necessary to politely ask you to stop being a jerk. Since my opinion is so important to you, I'm on your side to the extent that I think it's a good idea for Nickelodeon to air the program.

Delta
06-18-2002, 07:45 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by beamish13:
it's childish to believe that Delta underestimates the abilities of your average child? that's rich. You haven't contributed anything to this discussion, so post or sit this one out, 'k?</font>

um, i responded to you when you said i underestimated children, its at the top of the second page. but you never replied to it, you just said something about a white flag and ignored what i said. if you really want to challenge me on what a 12-year old is capable of then go ahead. you can start by refuting the first post i addressed to you, and until you do that you can go sit in the corner and stew

Ghetto_Squirrel
06-18-2002, 07:46 PM
I think this is called for:

http://www.toolcity.net/~burt/images/allfriends.jpg

It fits the topic and the thread.

------------------
http://www.toolcity.net/~burt/images/pimp3a.jpg
My anti-drug is non-consensual sex with minors.
AIM: Mista Saki

tweedyburd
06-18-2002, 07:55 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by Undone:
Tweetyburd, I don't see how this is indoctrination by any means. People have the choice to watch this show</font>

It's not indoctrination in the way that it would be if it were taught in public school's, but still, Nickelodeon is the kids network, and millions will watch the show because parents trust it as a babysitter, or just what their kids 'should be watching.'

beamish13
06-18-2002, 07:56 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by Ghetto_Squirrel:
I think this is called for:

http://www.toolcity.net/~burt/images/allfriends.jpg

It fits the topic and the thread.

</font>

definitely.

Injektilo
06-18-2002, 08:02 PM
The point of this TV show is not to tell kids how they should view homosexuality, its telling kids that discrimination is wrong, and homophobia is wrong. If this were on teaching kids of different races to get along, there would be no debate cause its a pretty obvious point that (most) everyone can agree on.
I really don't see how anyone can interpret it as Nickelodeon editorializing to kids. They're just saying that discriminating against gays and children of gays is wrong.

Julian

------------------
how'd this world get so fucking fun, all of a sudden?

Nate the Grate
06-18-2002, 08:03 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by beamish13:

I'm so tired of the Christian religion in general.</font>

are you stupid? that one comment totally contradicts everything you have said in this thread. if you can say you're tired of the Christian religion, I can say I'm tired of gay people. what's the difference?

Nate the Grate
06-18-2002, 08:05 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by Random Female:
why wouldn't you agree wtih it? All it does is get the message out that there exists families different from a daddy and a mommy so hopefully it won't seem unusual to a child when he encounters it in school. Maybe they'll be less likely to tease if they learn about it at a young age. it's not explicit - it's just laying out facts.</font>

yeah, but it IS unusual to have same-sex parents.

bonsor
06-18-2002, 08:06 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by Nate the Grate:
yeah, but it IS unusual to have same-sex parents.

</font>

You quoted and commented on the first of 70+ replies. Read more.

Lie
06-18-2002, 08:10 PM
I'm going to skip all of the delicate picking apart of points here and get right down to the common sensibility of this whole thing.

Is it wrong to teach kids about racial tolerance? Is it wrong to teach them about tolerance of handicapped individuals? Is it wrong to teach them about the dynamics of divorced families? Then why the hell is it wrong to teach them about same sex parenting?

The only argument people have in stating that it's pro-homosexual (whatever that means), is that it supports the rights of homosexuals. Frankly, it pisses me off to be reminded that the whole debate on whether or not people have control over their sexual orientation isn't over for some people. There are people in the world who are homosexual, just plain are, just like there are people who are black or disabled or anything else that they can't change, and their simple human rights need to be fought for and protected by themselves and supporters of tolerance. Some of these homosexuals are going to want to have children, okay? That's just the way it is. And it's not about sex, it's about kids being raised by two parents of the same sex. Get over it.

Nate the Grate
06-18-2002, 08:15 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by ******:
You quoted and commented on the first of 70+ replies. Read more.</font>

that ain't my style

Delta
06-18-2002, 08:16 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by Lie:
I'm going to skip all of the delicate picking apart of points here and get right down to the common sensibility of this whole thing.</font>

we know its a common sensibility, and thats why not a single one of the last 70 posts have had anything to say negatively about gays or same sex parenting

slunky_munky
06-18-2002, 08:21 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by Lie:
Is it wrong to teach kids about insert your choice here tolerance? .</font>

You have to ask yourself if tolerance is something that should be taught. Do we teach children to be tolerant of Palestinian ethical values that allow them to be suicide bombers ? I would hope not. Everyone has a right to their own beliefs but some things are just wrong and should not be tolerated.

We come back to schooling and education through the media. Who decides what we should be tolerant of ?

Just because being tolerent of homosexuals is morally right to some people doesn't mean it is something to be taught. Otherwise its indoctrination. Ethics is not like mathematics.



[This message has been edited by slunky_munky (edited 06-18-2002).]

Guen
06-18-2002, 08:30 PM
i don't see why you'd automatically assume that this is indoctrination...it doesn't seem like we really know enough about how this program is going to treat the subject matter to call it indoctrination. in fact, after all those emails, i bet nickelodeon will try to be pretty careful not to be too positive or too negative. they seem to want (and it appears to be in their best interest) to show both sides. and i have seen a few "nick news" episodes before--they've won some awards for impartiality in journalism and educational programming, i think--and they tend to draw no conclusions on their subjects. i expect it will be pretty tasteful.

but my expectations aside...how does profiling kids and adults from same-sex families and profiling kids and adults who disagree with it promote anything but discussion? how is it indoctrination?

slunky_munky
06-18-2002, 08:34 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by Guen:
how is it indoctrination?</font>

You can't form a grasp of the issue until you understand the foundations uponwhich the concept is based.

Is this program part of a series profiling sexuality in general ? If not it is jumping the gun, seeking controversy, being brave, call it what you will, it is NOT doing kids a service like it and its supporters believe.

So very sad about me
06-18-2002, 08:34 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by tweedyburd:
Delta is the only in this thread making sense.

This type of thing is the epitome of the left's attack on free minds and free speech--causes they are supposed to champion. While an "anti-hate" program educating children on tolerance is a noble cause, I, like Delta do not agree with the means. At it's core, it's fundamentally an attempt at thought control. Opinions at their core cannot be wiped out by conditioning programs like this one. Even more dangerous, perhaps, is the supression of an opinion forming into cognitive rage later on in life. The risks of programs like this, not only in regards to this subject matter, but also in numerous other edgey subjects, far outweigh the benefits. The real befefits lie in allowing children to learn to form their own opinions and then deal with those directly in an open manner. The only way things like homophobia and other forms of hate can be dealt with in a way that brings change in thought is through an open flow of discussion, not indoctrination.

It's like the Thought Police, only from the other side of the street. Get 'em while they're young.

[This message has been edited by tweedyburd (edited 06-18-2002).]</font>

so do you disagree with childrens programs like "clifford the big red dog" shown on PBS, which teaches kids to share and be nice to animals and things????

Seems like this is along the same line

If it was a show telling kids not to taunt children of other races, NO ONE would object to its airing, yet b/c its about people not taunting kids of homosexuals, AAW SHUCKS. CALL THE FAGS WHAT THEY ARE http://www.netphoria.org/wwwboard/rolleyes.gif



[This message has been edited by So very sad about me (edited 06-18-2002).]

tweedyburd
06-18-2002, 09:13 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by So very sad about me:
so do you disagree with childrens programs like "clifford the big red dog" shown on PBS, which teaches kids to share and be nice to animals and things????
</font>

Teaching kids to be 'nice to animals and things' is a long ways from having them swallow the liberal hook of an issue that is far more complex. Accepting sexuality that is different from the mainstream is a whole other machine aside from teaching basic human kindness. It would be nice if you could compare the two, but until homophobia dies, you cannot. Opinions will be much more strong and divisive on such an issue as long as homophobia still exists, regardless of conditioning.

Graveflower
06-18-2002, 09:21 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by tweedyburd:
Teaching kids to be 'nice to animals and things' is a long ways from having them swallow the liberal hook of an issue that is far more complex. Accepting sexuality that is different from the mainstream is a whole other machine aside from teaching basic human kindness. It would be nice if you could compare the two, but until homophobia dies, you cannot. Opinions will be much more strong and divisive on such an issue as long as homophobia still exists, regardless of conditioning.</font>

I don't see why accepting people regardless of a sexual preference isn't "basic human kindness", though.

Um. I shouldn't post here, this is way too far in for anymore entries.

bonsor
06-18-2002, 09:26 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by Graveflower:
I don't see why accepting people regardless of a sexual preference isn't "basic human kindness", though.

Um. I shouldn't post here, this is way too far in for anymore entries.</font>
<font color="0084ff">Yeah, Wayne'll close it because he's not involved in it.

Mayfuck
06-18-2002, 09:36 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by tweedyburd:
</font>

You've been using phrases like "liberal hook," "suppression of opinion," and "conditioning programs." With a rhetoric like that you're coming off defensive, paranoid and judgmental of a show we have yet to see. It seems you're treating the homosexuality issue as a political institution moreso than a social issue, which I believe isn't the best way to approach the topic. I've seen Nickelodeon run similar specials about racial tolerance, AIDS, etc. and they all have been rather innnocuous. I think the program will attempt to protect children from being slandered for having gay parents or encourage the abolishment of using the hateful word "fag" in schoolyards rather than promote any kind of political agenda. I don't know how you're so easily able to discern discussion from indoctrination. Hopefully Nickelodeon will represent all views on the issue.

melancholia
06-18-2002, 09:49 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by Ghetto_Squirrel:
I think this is called for:

http://www.toolcity.net/~burt/images/allfriends.jpg

It fits the topic and the thread.

</font>

<3 <3 <3

kypper
06-18-2002, 09:50 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by Lie:
I'm going to skip all of the delicate picking apart of points here and get right down to the common sensibility of this whole thing.

Is it wrong to teach kids about racial tolerance? Is it wrong to teach them about tolerance of handicapped individuals? Is it wrong to teach them about the dynamics of divorced families? Then why the hell is it wrong to teach them about same sex parenting?

The only argument people have in stating that it's pro-homosexual (whatever that means), is that it supports the rights of homosexuals. Frankly, it pisses me off to be reminded that the whole debate on whether or not people have control over their sexual orientation isn't over for some people. There are people in the world who are homosexual, just plain are, just like there are people who are black or disabled or anything else that they can't change, and their simple human rights need to be fought for and protected by themselves and supporters of tolerance. Some of these homosexuals are going to want to have children, okay? That's just the way it is. And it's not about sex, it's about kids being raised by two parents of the same sex. Get over it.</font>

Here here.

melancholia
06-18-2002, 09:52 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by Lie:
I'm going to skip all of the delicate picking apart of points here and get right down to the common sensibility of this whole thing.

Is it wrong to teach kids about racial tolerance? Is it wrong to teach them about tolerance of handicapped individuals? Is it wrong to teach them about the dynamics of divorced families? Then why the hell is it wrong to teach them about same sex parenting?

The only argument people have in stating that it's pro-homosexual (whatever that means), is that it supports the rights of homosexuals. Frankly, it pisses me off to be reminded that the whole debate on whether or not people have control over their sexual orientation isn't over for some people. There are people in the world who are homosexual, just plain are, just like there are people who are black or disabled or anything else that they can't change, and their simple human rights need to be fought for and protected by themselves and supporters of tolerance. Some of these homosexuals are going to want to have children, okay? That's just the way it is. And it's not about sex, it's about kids being raised by two parents of the same sex. Get over it.</font>

by the way, AMEN.

kypper
06-18-2002, 09:54 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by tweedyburd:
Teaching kids to be 'nice to animals and things' is a long ways from having them swallow the liberal hook of an issue that is far more complex. Accepting sexuality that is different from the mainstream is a whole other machine aside from teaching basic human kindness. It would be nice if you could compare the two, but until homophobia dies, you cannot. Opinions will be much more strong and divisive on such an issue as long as homophobia still exists, regardless of conditioning.</font>

Don't you think homophobia might be reduced significantly if kids are taught that it ISN'T such a complex social issue anymore? God there are so many gays out there! Accept it for god's sake and stop assuming it's a completely different form of sexuality. It was around in ancient Greece, it has been rampant in our history, and it's been shown in many animals as well. Religion and bigotry have been its two greatest opponents.
Besides, they aren't hurting anyone. They are deserving of human kindness, and quite frankly, acceptance from this approach leads directly to that.

Graveflower
06-18-2002, 09:58 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by kypper:

Besides, they aren't hurting anyone. </font>

But God says it's a sin, and jesus christ died for those sins.

kypper
06-18-2002, 09:59 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by Delta:
you havent contradicted yourself because you havent made any attempt at addressing the topic, you're just spouting off your typical garbage ***'ing. its easy to be consistent when you only have the insight of a partially dethawed eggo

but just to play along, where's my contradiction?</font>

I'm not the one with the over-inflated ego. You've been on your high horse from day 1. I've seen you admit that you might be wrong to a comment from someone else that I made minutes earlier. You are just being an arrogant prick, and I refuse to argue with you any farther.

Your contradiction was plain: you said that the program was either pro-homosexual or anti-fag. I said it wasn't black or white and you claimed that you hadn't made such a claim. You had. But you won't see that, so I refuse to answer any comment you make post this one.

Cheers brainfart.

kypper
06-18-2002, 10:00 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by Graveflower:
But God says it's a sin, and jesus christ died for those sins.

</font>

That's funny, I thought he died for pissing off the Romans.

Mayfuck
06-18-2002, 10:00 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by Lie:
That's just the way it is. And it's not about sex, it's about kids being raised by two parents of the same sex. Get over it.</font>

You know I want to agree with you, but this is where folk like tweedyburd have the edge up on us. It IS partly about sex. You're trying to make the case that acceptance of homosexuality is on level with the acceptance of racial minorities, women, the handicapped or any other group who has been treated like second class citizens, but actually it's different than that. Like you said there are people who are black or are disabled, but it was easier to abolish discrimination against these traits because these traits are far more rigid and defineable than homosexuality. Homosexuality is more complex than that, and it goes beyond just physical traits and into behavior. I'm definitely "pro-gay" (whatever that means) in all aspects of the issue, but I can also keep an open mind and sympathize with parents who want to keep the issue away from their children and I can understand and accept people who have the "gays are fine with me as long as they keep it in the bedroom" attitude. It's understandable because it is just as much about behavior and sex as it is a social issue along the lines of racism and sexism.

kypper
06-18-2002, 10:04 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by Mayfuck:
You know I want to agree with you, but this is where folk like tweedyburd have the edge up on us. It IS partly about sex. You're trying to make the case that acceptance of homosexuality is on level with the acceptance of racial minorities, women, the handicapped or any other group who has been treated like second class citizens, but actually it's different than that. Like you said there are people who are black or are disabled, but it was easier to abolish discrimination against these traits because these traits are far more rigid and defineable than homosexuality. Homosexuality is more complex than that, and it goes beyond just physical traits and into behavior. I'm definitely "pro-gay" (whatever that means) in all aspects of the issue, but I can also keep an open mind and sympathize with parents who want to keep the issue away from their children and I can understand and accept people who have the "gays are fine with me as long as they keep it in the bedroom" attitude. It's understandable because it is just as much about behavior and sex as it is a social issue along the lines of racism and sexism.</font>
You make sense, Julio, but homosexuals don't have to flaunt their attraction for each other in front of other people's kids to be two great and loving parents. If they demonstrate love for their child, then they're doing more for the neighbourhood kids than most people are these days.
I guess my point is: Keep it in the bedroom if that's what society demands, but don't let kids not see two great parents, regardless of them being the same sex.

Mayfuck
06-18-2002, 10:05 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by kypper:
Don't you think homophobia might be reduced significantly if kids are taught that it ISN'T such a complex social issue anymore? God there are so many gays out there! Accept it for god's sake and stop assuming it's a completely different form of sexuality. It was around in ancient Greece, it has been rampant in our history, and it's been shown in many animals as well. Religion and bigotry have been its two greatest opponents.
Besides, they aren't hurting anyone. They are deserving of human kindness, and quite frankly, acceptance from this approach leads directly to that. </font>

Stop making it sound like tweedyburd is some Bible belt bigot. He never said anything about rejecting homosexuality. I'm liberal too, but you don't need to spout your bleeding heart rhetoric like that. We might be on the same side of the issue here but I definitely wouldn't want you representing my team here.

Mayfuck
06-18-2002, 10:07 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by kypper:
You make sense, Julio, but homosexuals don't have to flaunt their attraction for each other in front of other people's kids to be two great and loving parents. If they demonstrate love for their child, then they're doing more for the neighbourhood kids than most people are these days.
I guess my point is: Keep it in the bedroom if that's what society demands, but don't let kids not see two great parents, regardless of them being the same sex.</font>

Well I definitely wouldn't argue with that.

kypper
06-18-2002, 10:11 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by Mayfuck:
Stop making it sound like tweedyburd is some Bible belt bigot. He never said anything about rejecting homosexuality. I'm liberal too, but you don't need to spout your bleeding heart rhetoric like that. We might be on the same side of the issue here but I definitely wouldn't want you representing my team here.</font>

He's being right wing in that he denounces an issue without introducing a better idea. There is no question that homosexuality is more complicated than 'share and be good', but we MAKE it more complicated than it has to be! Besides, we're taught that we should forgive and be good to everybody, yet we publicly bash everyone who is different. Gay bashing is done all the time. I don't think it takes a genius to figure out that regardless of whether homosexuality SHOULD be accepted, it needs to be to avoid the violence and persecution that has resulted FROM the bigotry and lack of acceptance.

I'm not afraid of my future kids becoming gay if they watch that show or one like it; that's their choice, and if one show changes their entire future beyond giving them a little more of an open mind, then i'm not doing my parenting right, now am I?

Edit: I wasn't implying homosexuality was something negative in that last paragraph http://www.netphoria.org/wwwboard/tongue.gif

[This message has been edited by kypper (edited 06-18-2002).]

Shparticus
06-18-2002, 10:16 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by slunky_munky:
You have to ask yourself if tolerance is something that should be taught. Do we teach children to be tolerant of Palestinian ethical values that allow them to be suicide bombers ?</font>

Yes. Yes, we should. It's the behavior that some people display as a result of those beliefs that we need to be wary of. Intolerance of a way of thought? Where does that get us? As uncomfortable as it is to think about, people who do awful things to other people do so for what generally seems to be a very good reason to them. I mean, Hitler ordered the extermination of an entire religious culture. So he wasn't about to win Humanitarian of the Year award. But it made sense to him at the time. For every nutcase and extremist who acts out on their opinions, there are hundreds, probably thousands who take them to their graves without ever once acting out. Sure, it's disturbing to know there are people like that out there, but we have to allow for differing opinions across a broad spectrum. It's BEHAVIOR that needs to be controlled for the good of a society, not ideology.

[/poorly-worded, self-righteous rant]

------------------
"Yeah, he's a retard, but he's free ...
Sort of a ... freetard ..."

kypper
06-18-2002, 10:19 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by Shparticus:
[/poorly-worded, self-righteous rant]
</font>

You made a good point.
But, as you probably well know, that above will get you flamed to no end http://www.netphoria.org/wwwboard/wink.gif

Guen
06-18-2002, 10:22 PM
damn. this is a good thread.

Delta
06-18-2002, 10:29 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by kypper:
I'm not the one with the over-inflated ego. You've been on your high horse from day 1. I've seen you admit that you might be wrong to a comment from someone else that I made minutes earlier. You are just being an arrogant prick, and I refuse to argue with you any farther.

Your contradiction was plain: you said that the program was either pro-homosexual or anti-fag. I said it wasn't black or white and you claimed that you hadn't made such a claim. You had. But you won't see that, so I refuse to answer any comment you make post this one.</font>

i dont know what "make post this one" means, but ill try anyways. and i hate letting you derail a really good topic like this, but just so you'll shut the fuck up and stop whining

06:54 PM Delta: but it will be pro-gay, because if there was even a possibility that it was anti-gay every left-wing group and half this board would be going nuts. i dunno, maybe it will be somewhat balanced, we wont know til they air it. if it does turn out to be balanced then ill take back everything ive posted in this thread and admit that i was wrong, but until then im going to remain somewhat leery of the idea

dumbed down translation: chances are, this show will either be pro-gay or anti-gay. it may be balanced, tho i doubt it, and we'll need to wait til it airs to find out. if it is balanced ill admit im wrong

06:55 PM kypper: The world isn't black and white here. It can be neither and simply be accepting that it is.

translation: i still have no fucking clue

07:04 PM Delta: a) what relevance did that have to the post you quoted?

b) duh. everyone *else* in this thread realized this wasnt a black and white issue and that there were two conflicting moral issues here. but i suppose you'd like a gold star for pointing out the obvious?

c) if you're going to try to post something profound you should try to keep your grammar above the 6th grade level. its more convincing that way

translation: self-explanatory

07:07 PM kypper: (quoting my first post *again*) You make it a black and white issue, asshole. If you having a fucking problem with me, then come to ottawa and let me rip out your heart and feed it to my dog. In the meantime, stop being such a prick unprovoked.




i believe i see the problem here. you started ranting about "black and white... black and white...", which you meant to use to refer to some partial comment i made that was only tangental to the original point, but which you felt the need to challenge me on anyways. if you had more than a 6th grade command of the english language i suppose that would have been more clear.

and anyways, if you bothered to read past the first sentence of that post you'd have seen that i acknowledged the possibility that the show would be balanced, before you said anything about "black and white". but again, this is still beside the point i was making, that i thought it was unethical to try to feed kids a polarized view of a complex issue

Delta
06-18-2002, 10:32 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by kypper:
He's being right wing in that he denounces an issue without introducing a better idea. </font>

this is why i seem to frequently get into arguments with you: you make absolutely no fucking sense. do you even know what it means to be right wing?

Eulogy
06-18-2002, 10:35 PM
I can't see why there's even a debate about this.

How could anything bad come from this?

(I don't really think it will help us make much progress either though)

Mayfuck
06-18-2002, 10:39 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by Eulogy:
I can't see why there's even a debate about this.

How could anything bad come from this?

(I don't really think it will help us make much progress either though)</font>

We're not debating whether teaching tolerance to kids is wrong or right (even though this is getting derailed on that), we're debating the means by how we teach kids tolerance and how it reflects the current gay-straight environment.

Eulogy
06-18-2002, 10:49 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by Mayfuck:
We're not debating whether teaching tolerance to kids is wrong or right (even though this is getting derailed on that), we're debating the means by how we teach kids tolerance and how it reflects the current gay-straight environment.

</font>


I really don't think the means are all that important.

But what do I know?

(Answer: very little)

Lie
06-18-2002, 11:10 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by Mayfuck:
You know I want to agree with you, but this is where folk like tweedyburd have the edge up on us. It IS partly about sex. You're trying to make the case that acceptance of homosexuality is on level with the acceptance of racial minorities, women, the handicapped or any other group who has been treated like second class citizens, but actually it's different than that. Like you said there are people who are black or are disabled, but it was easier to abolish discrimination against these traits because these traits are far more rigid and defineable than homosexuality. Homosexuality is more complex than that, and it goes beyond just physical traits and into behavior. I'm definitely "pro-gay" (whatever that means) in all aspects of the issue, but I can also keep an open mind and sympathize with parents who want to keep the issue away from their children and I can understand and accept people who have the "gays are fine with me as long as they keep it in the bedroom" attitude. It's understandable because it is just as much about behavior and sex as it is a social issue along the lines of racism and sexism.</font>

I'm not denying that there's more to it, and that it is partly about sex. I guess I'm just doing the argument for basic tolerance and not worrying too much about the specifics inside of that, because the fact that people are against basic tolerance is what really bothers me.

Yes, homosexual rights is a much more complicated issue than the issue of womens' rights or minorities' rights. It's more complicated because it connects to a wider range of other social issues. I do completely understand that the idea of homosexuality to begin with makes some people uncomfortable, which is excusable, as a lot of people have homophobic tendencies drilled into them from birth. I'm perfectly fine with people being tolerant towards homosexuals but not wanting it right in their faces. I can totally understand that. Depending on the way this program goes, I might disagree with some of their methods of promoting tolerance.

However, what I'm basically arguing here is that there are good intentions behind the idea, it doesn't seem to be in the least bit forceful or liberal-preachy, and I don't think there's anything wrong with letting it air.

kypper
06-18-2002, 11:54 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by Delta:
meow meow, kypper's a moron, meow meow, kypper's a moron, meow meow</font>

You don't dignify any more reply than this.

kypper
06-18-2002, 11:55 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by Mayfuck:
We're not debating whether teaching tolerance to kids is wrong or right (even though this is getting derailed on that), we're debating the means by how we teach kids tolerance and how it reflects the current gay-straight environment.

</font>

Although, as usual, our own personal biases are usually more than self-evident, and are clouding the argument.

Thermo
06-18-2002, 11:59 PM
This is basically different than the race issue because it is a relatively new argument. It took 100 years after the Civil War to get actual legislation to end racial segregation. We have now had an entire generation live with these laws and attitudes in place. Whereas the homosexuality issue has really only been in the mainstream for about 10-20 years. This is a basically more disturbing issue for a larger section of society, making the race comparison weaker. If this was 1963 and the issue was 'My Parents Are Different Colors' or something similar the backlash would be the same. We've simply had less time looking at the homosexuality issues. People inherently don't like change, no matter how much sense it makes.

DeviousJ
06-19-2002, 08:36 AM
Given the description of the show in the first post, I can't see how it's a bad idea. The fact is, there *are* gay parents out there, and this is rarely represented in children's programming. Families often feature on kids' shows, but how often do you see a gay couple? You can say 'oh, they only make up a tiny proportion of the parenting population, it's realistic to never show them' - but if they're never shown, then as far as the kid knows they don't exist. And when a kid meets another child, whose parents happen to both be of the same sex... it's alien, unnatural and they don't know how to deal with it. These things rarely resolve themselves without education - but some parents will either refuse to talk about it, or will force their own agenda on the child. Look at it this way - is any child educated solely through tv? Do you not think their own parents' beliefs and views on a subject will hold more sway over young children, than a tv show? If their parents disagree with the views, they will have no problem putting their side across. And at least then, the child has heard something from both sides - which is pretty conducive to forming a balanced opinion, right? If anything, not allowing kids to watch one half-hour show because it puts across ideas you don't agree with smacks more of indoctrination.

DeviousJ
06-19-2002, 08:49 AM
I think we should start with re-runs of My Two Dads

sawdust restaurants
06-19-2002, 11:21 AM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by DeviousJ:
Look at it this way - is any child educated solely through tv? Do you not think their own parents' beliefs and views on a subject will hold more sway over young children, than a tv show? If their parents disagree with the views, they will have no problem putting their side across.</font>

No, no child is solely educated through TV. Yes, many--most--children are educated if not primarily through TV, then to a great extent.

However, I am absolutely sick of arguments which claim that the messages absorbed in television are superceded by parental supervision. Note that I didn't say "can be." I said "are." Too often, they are not. Parents work two jobs. Sometimes they send their kids off to day-care, sometimes they leave them with a babysitter at home, or with a relative, perhaps. Half the time in this country, with the way it's run, parents have no fucking clue what's going on in their kids' lives, at least on a personal level. (Knowing that your son or daughter has a soccer game does NOT merit knowing what's going on in his/her life.) If my parents didn't go out of their way to ask me, they'd have no idea what's going on in mine, and I'm 18 years old.

Point being: never underestimate the power of television. If it's not as important as parents, it's getting up there quickly, and I think that's one of the main reasons why people in this thread are wary of it being aired.

Can you make a good argument for the show's airing? Of course. And lots of people have done that. But you can't do it by trying to downplay the importance that watching a program such as this will have on kids. It's way more important than you think, and that's why it's so important that Nickelodeon does its best not to take sides. And like Julio said, in the past, they've done a pretty good job with that.

I hate to say it, but Nick News is better than 75% of all television news I've ever seen. It's pretty damn good, and I have confidence that they will (have? I don't even know when the damn thing airs) pull it off.

Edit: So apparently it ran last night. What did everybody think?

[This message has been edited by sawdust restaurants (edited 06-19-2002).]

DeviousJ
06-19-2002, 12:12 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by sawdust restaurants:
Point being: never underestimate the power of television. If it's not as important as parents, it's getting up there quickly, and I think that's one of the main reasons why people in this thread are wary of it being aired.

Can you make a good argument for the show's airing? Of course. And lots of people have done that. But you can't do it by trying to downplay the importance that watching a program such as this will have on kids. It's way more important than you think, and that's why it's so important that Nickelodeon does its best not to take sides. And like Julio said, in the past, they've done a pretty good job with that.

</font>

I totally agree with that, but not to the extent of one single half-hour show. The most that will do is put ideas into their heads - make them think. Unless we're talking completely manipulative propaganda, no kid is going to be indoctrinated that quickly and easily. And they'll start to ask questions - which is where the parents come in. And if a parent doesn't have time to answer their child's questions (especially these important ones) then, whatever the circumstances may be, they aren't doing their job as a parent. This isn't a crack at people who have to work 2 jobs to support their kids, it's an unfortunate fact that part of their role as a parent isn't being fulfilled. And it isn't TV's role to provide a surrogate in these circumstances. If your child is getting all their knowledge from TV, and you don't like what TV is telling them, some reassessment is in order.

tweedyburd
06-19-2002, 01:20 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by kypper:
He's being right wing in that he denounces an issue without introducing a better idea.</font>

<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by tweedyburd:
The real befefits lie in allowing children to learn to form their own opinions and then deal with those directly in an open manner. The only way things like homophobia and other forms of hate can be dealt with in a way that brings change in thought is through an open flow of discussion, not instilled values at a young age.

</font>

Mayfuck
06-19-2002, 01:24 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by tweedyburd:
</font>

http://www.fantasysexy.com/gayezine/053102/03.jpg

tweedyburd
06-19-2002, 01:30 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by Mayfuck:
You've been using phrases like "liberal hook," "suppression of opinion," and "conditioning programs." With a rhetoric like that you're coming off defensive, paranoid and judgmental of a show we have yet to see. It seems you're treating the homosexuality issue as a political institution moreso than a social issue</font>

Since when is suppressing opinion and the process of conditioning not a social phenomenon?

Defensive? That's completely relative. Everyone in this thread is defensive in that they're defending their arguments. And it's ALL rhetoric.

<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by Mayfuck:
I think the program will attempt to protect children from being slandered for having gay parents or encourage the abolishment of using the hateful word "fag" in schoolyards rather than promote any kind of political agenda. I don't know how you're so easily able to discern discussion from indoctrination.</font>

C'mon. It's like Delta said--any program like this is obviously going to be biased in its execution. You don't have to call it a political agenda to still have a bias.

But you're right in the sense that I really don't know how the show is/was exactly, but then again all arguments in this thread have been more about a larger issue rather than what the show specifically entailed.

kypper
06-19-2002, 01:32 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by tweedyburd:
</font>

I missed that. I apologise.
I disagree to some extent, but still, I was wrong in assuming you hadn't put forth an idea that you feel would be more appropriate for children.

tweedyburd
06-19-2002, 01:34 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by Mayfuck:
http://www.fantasysexy.com/gayezine/053102/03.jpg

</font>

You're only encouraging me, baby!

Shparticus
06-19-2002, 09:34 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by kypper:
You made a good point.
But, as you probably well know, that above will get you flamed to no end http://www.netphoria.org/wwwboard/wink.gif</font>

Hell, I don't post here nearly often enough to get truly flamed. At worst someone will tell me to fuck of in some new, innovational manner. It'll be at least another year on this board before my opinion matters. And don't think I'm not counting the days...

------------------
"Yeah, he's a retard, but he's free ...
Sort of a ... freetard ..."

DeviousJ
06-20-2002, 05:55 AM
So, did anyone actually watch it then?

BeautifulLoser
06-20-2002, 05:57 AM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by DeviousJ:
So, did anyone actually watch it then?</font>

Heh. My bet- no.

------------------
I need a new sig.

melancholia
06-20-2002, 08:19 AM
i would've...but i don't have nick anymore.

kypper
06-20-2002, 01:53 PM
http://smiley33.20m.com/images/puppypunch.gif

[This message has been edited by kypper (edited 06-20-2002).]

bonsor
06-20-2002, 03:13 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by DeviousJ:
So, did anyone actually watch it then?</font>

<font color="0084ff">I watched it. It was exactly how the article described it.

DeviousJ
06-20-2002, 05:21 PM
<font face="Arial, Verdana" size="2">Originally posted by ******:
<font color="0084ff">I watched it. It was exactly how the article described it.</font>

So are we at FAGCON 3 yet?