Results 1 to 10 of 71

Threaded View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #20
    FunkyDung's Avatar
    "Gatherer"

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Posts
    165
    Achievements:
    5000 Experience Points3 months registeredLoved

    Quote Originally Posted by Osiris View Post
    A parenting style would be to NOT let your children listen to something you felt would have a negative impact on them based on language, until a time when they are old enough to understand. For all intents and purposes, the parent is taking away the choice between the unaltered work and the censored piece. By your definition, you've agreed that it's censorship.
    I suppress lots of media. I don't just bleep or blur; I ban. Am I censoring? Maybe. I don't care, though, because I see that as part of my job as a parent. Do I ever provide "adulterated" media for my kids? Not often, but yeah. Every time I play something like "Forget You" instead of "Fuck You" or the clean version of Radiohead's "Creep", I'm doing that. Granted, the original artists not only approved of those alterations, but they participated in their creation. However, KC gave approval (within certain reasonable limits).

    If Duffusmonkey wants to make edits just for his kids, he's free to do so as far as I'm concerned. DMCA and other copyright law be damned. What anyone does to media for personal consumption is their own damn business and content creators and busybody art purists can piss off. Distributing edited works for others enters different territory, but permission has already been granted.

    I don't know if I would do what DM has done for my kids. They're not old enough to consider it, and won't be for several years yet. I don't think it's impossible, though. Yeah, there's violence, but it's not particularly bad, IMHO. It's not gratuitous, and even the really bad parts can only be imagined. I mean, it's not like the kids can see ludicrous gibs flying across a screen in 3D. [Bonus points to the first person to remember the source of "ludicrous gibs".] There's a little bit of implied sexual activity, but it's not like KC had the actress doing her best "Sally in a restaurant with Harry" impression. So, that just leaves the language. Given the amount and nature of violence, and the amount and nature of sexual activity, I could justify presenting a version of WA that's edited for language to my kids. Furthermore, if I thought other parents might appreciate having the same, and KC approved of it, I might provide it for others as DM has. Kids are very impressionable, and I don't want mine swearing like the characters in WA. As was said earlier, profanity is for lazy, uncreative people who can't think of anything more intelligent or witty to say. I ought to know; I'm very often that lazy, uncreative son of a bitch.

    Sorry for being all over the map with my response, but I just found out about this controversy, and I have a lot of soapbox time to catch up on.

    ADDENDUM: Another post in the thread reminded me of the attempted rape. Not sure I'd let that through my censoring to get to my kids.
    Last edited by FunkyDung; Feb 16th, 2014 at 06:54 PM.


 

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •