+ Post New Thread
Page 13 of 13 FirstFirst ... 3910111213
Results 181 to 187 of 187
Jokes/Interweb Things Thread, BBC News - "MPs call for better porn filters to protect children" in Fun Stuff; Originally Posted by sonofsanta Sounds like you're getting a reputation there... hopefully, it's the reputation of "we're horrible... someone get ...
  1. #181

    X-13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    /dev/null
    Posts
    9,143
    Thank Post
    596
    Thanked 1,960 Times in 1,358 Posts
    Blog Entries
    19
    Rep Power
    818
    Quote Originally Posted by sonofsanta View Post
    Sounds like you're getting a reputation there...
    hopefully, it's the reputation of "we're horrible... someone get that man a drink" and not "this guy is a 31st century Brobot. He runs on alcohol."


    Quote Originally Posted by localzuk View Post
    Party at X-13's place tonight then!!
    If it wasn't for the fact it's my mum's house... I'd be up for that.

    Edugeek LAN barbecue.

    Quote Originally Posted by GrumbleDook View Post
    The last stuff I read was from 2007-8 and was talking about the difference between the impact of violent films and violent games ... as films are generally passive but games are active, which supports embedding of emotions linked with the game (both positive and negative emotions)
    There was something else I saw in this vein, suggesting that more realistic games [as in something they're more likely to encounter in real life, like football] lead to a higher chance of aggression.

    Sources:

    Eurogamer
    Gamepolitics 1
    Gamepolitics 2

  2. #182

    GrumbleDook's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Gosport, Hampshire
    Posts
    9,939
    Thank Post
    1,343
    Thanked 1,787 Times in 1,110 Posts
    Blog Entries
    19
    Rep Power
    595
    The UK Council for Child Internet Safety has its summit today in London. #ukccis and #ukccis2012 seem to be the hashtags and Dr Linda Papadopoulos (Psychologist and author of Home Office Commissioned Review on Sexualisation of Young People) is there ... in her review she did mention about the internet and video games as a source of sexualisation of Young People too ... so we are not just talking about violent imagery here.

  3. #183

    X-13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    /dev/null
    Posts
    9,143
    Thank Post
    596
    Thanked 1,960 Times in 1,358 Posts
    Blog Entries
    19
    Rep Power
    818
    Quote Originally Posted by GrumbleDook View Post
    video games as a source of sexualisation of Young People too ... so we are not just talking about violent imagery here.
    Usually, these games are rated 18.

    Children shouldn't be playing them.

    It's not simply a matter of the games being overtly sexual or violent, it's a matter of parents buying them for their children.

  4. #184


    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    2,700
    Thank Post
    970
    Thanked 356 Times in 271 Posts
    Rep Power
    213
    Quote Originally Posted by X-13 View Post
    Usually, these games are rated 18. Children shouldn't be playing them. It's not simply a matter of the games being overtly sexual or violent, it's a matter of parents buying them for their children.
    As much as I hate the phrase.. This.
    If people are complaining about children being exposed to adult-rated content, perhaps (as always suggested, but always ignored) they should tackle how the children are getting said content. More often than not, it's the parents or other relatives. Just play on XBOX Live for an hour and - as much as it's something that's thrown around a lot - you'll see how many kids are playing games beyond their age range. I can go play Mass Effect 3 online and in an hour, I wouldn't run into a single child. I think over a few months I've only found one person who sounded a bit young. Swap to games like Call of Duty and HALO, that pit human-against-human, well that's a different story. Suddenly there's children everywhere.

    What is it that Children find so engaging about killing another person? Personally I think it's a dominance thing. Co-op doesn't interst a lot of kids today because even if they win, they don't exclusively beat someone else. I think that's also why in your typical kid-infested games they swear and curse a lot, insulting other players, trying to prove they're the biggest, the best, the most dominant.

    Anything an adult does, to a child, is lame. It sucks. Why would anybody ever want to do that? - Until restrictions are in place. Suddenly, doing something an adult is allowed to do, but a kid isn't, well you're now st hot ain't ya kiddo? That's why kids brag about owning the latest Grand Theft Auto, Call of Duty etc. Again, I put that down to a dominance thing. Proving you're better than someone else because you have adult things. Problem is, a lot of these kids don't fully understand it yet. They fixate on it, become addicted to it, and sooner or later that spills over into the real world a lot more than it ought to. I'm not saying CoD directly produces gun-wielding murders, or GTA directly produces muggings, car theft and the like. They're not recruitment agencies for illegal activities, but in the end, it all boils down to the same thing.

    Desensitisaton at an early age.

    It's no secret that humans - in general - want to emulate things that intrigue or excite us. That's why we have first-person videogames. That's why we have sexual fantasies. That's why there's an ever-growing community of live-action role-play. But that's the point of entertainment - to throw ourselves momentarily into the fantasy. But think about it some more. Take your 12 year old kid to see Batman, and what's the next thing he plays-pretend? You're damn right it's going to be the crime-fighting caped crusader. An adult watches it and problably thinks (hell, I know I do) "All those geeky gadgets, awesome crime-fighting skills and cool outfit would be awesome, but there's no way I could actually pull that kind of stuff off." We rationalise more than a child does.

    So, we can better rationalise sniping somebody in the head. We can better rationalise taking down a helicopter with a bazooka. We can better rationalise beating up that hooker we just boned to get our cash back - because these things are all within the game. That little sandbox of entertainment that is separate from our real lives. But children can't rationalise it to the same level we can. They'll want to emulate that at times when they can't boot up their game and play - so they emulate it in real life.

    It probably starts off as the aggression and dominance contest between children, but that soon escalites. When two children are equally dominant (i.e. the cursing and threatening), they have to step it up to the next level. That's how a dominance contest works, right? So what's the next thing they know? People are unable to contest your dominance if they're dead. I'm not saying they'll jump straight to killing, but they realise physically hurting someone has its advantages. So then we get fights and brawls. And they learn that - unfortunately - it works. They get in trouble off the teacher, but they've proven themselves to be more dominate to the other kid. Which brings us back to my earlier point of Co-Op vs PvP. Even though they got told off, they won! And for some kids, that's a worthy trade-off.

    That, my friends, is the moment it all begins. That's when the downward spiral into aggressive, law-breaking adult life happens. The moment a child is desensitised to violence and realises it's applicable to real-life. It doesn't happen overnight, it can take years, but it happens.

    Don't buy a child a game they're not old enough for. Don't leave your video games, films, graphic novels etc where younger siblings/children/etc can access them. Sure, they can probably still find it online, but if we give them less, then it will affect them less.

    This is why the online web filter won't work. Because it doesn't attack the primary medium for this behaviour happening - which, unfortunately, is young children playing adult video games, watching adult films, etc.

    Of course, none of this tackles the MP's complaint of online pornography (except maybe not leaving your copy of Playboy on your bedside cabinet where your 13 year old sister/daughter/sister-daughter-combo can find it) but I was replying to the current discussion. And yes, I rambled on more than I intended to. I'm gonna go ahead and stop typing now.

    tl;dr - It's okay to have it, just make sure kiddies can't use/find it. Nationwide blanket-filtering is silly.
    Last edited by Garacesh; 29th June 2012 at 10:38 AM.

  5. #185

    X-13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    /dev/null
    Posts
    9,143
    Thank Post
    596
    Thanked 1,960 Times in 1,358 Posts
    Blog Entries
    19
    Rep Power
    818
    Quote Originally Posted by Garacesh View Post
    Of course, none of this tackles the MP's complaint of online pornography (except maybe not leaving your copy of Playboy on your bedside cabinet where your 13 year old sister/daughter/sister-daughter-combo can find it) but I was replying to the current discussion.

    Actually, to some extent, it does.

    If people are letting their children use the internet unsupervised* then they have to accept that, at some point, they're going to try and search for something they shouldn't be.

    However, supervision in and of itself isn't enough. There are various ways to set restrictions as it is, but people don't use them. Regardless of whether it's because of lack of technical ability or the fact they don't know it exists, people aren't trying to restrict access themselves. [You have internet... GOTO google > "how do I restrict access to the internet" > ??? > CHILD PROTECTION!]

    Saying that, blanket filtering [for the reasons they've given] for everyone isn't appropriate. There are purely adult households, so this isn't necessary there at all. There are also households where the children either have no internet access [due to parental restrictions], they have their own filtering in place already or they always use the internet in full vision of a responsible adult*2.



    *By unsupervised, I mean allowing them access in their bedroom or in another place where you can't just look to see what they're doing.

    *2 A parent/carer/sibling that actively restricts age inappropriate material.
    Last edited by X-13; 29th June 2012 at 10:29 AM.

  6. #186


    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    2,700
    Thank Post
    970
    Thanked 356 Times in 271 Posts
    Rep Power
    213
    Quote Originally Posted by X-13 View Post
    Actually, to some extent, it does.

    If people are letting their children use the internet unsupervised* then they have to accept that, at some point, they're going to try and search for something they shouldn't be.
    I was mainly referring to the bit about violence more than porn, but I guess you still make a valid point.

  7. #187

    X-13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    /dev/null
    Posts
    9,143
    Thank Post
    596
    Thanked 1,960 Times in 1,358 Posts
    Blog Entries
    19
    Rep Power
    818
    Quote Originally Posted by Garacesh View Post
    I was mainly referring to the bit about violence more than porn, but I guess you still make a valid point.
    TBH, this argument applies to everything anyone would want to prevent children seeing.

    Violence, pornography, hate speech, specific political/religious views...


    It is good practice for staff to evaluate websites before classroom use. Staff should
    be aware that websites, search results etc. may be safe and appropriate one day but
    unsafe a day later. All members of the school community should be aware that filtering
    software is not always effective and cannot be relied on alone to safeguard children.
    From the social media file provided here

    While it was written for educational social media use, it should also apply to general internet useage at home aswell.


    Le EDIT: humorous AND related.

    Attachment 14463
    Last edited by X-13; 29th June 2012 at 01:03 PM.

SHARE:
+ Post New Thread
Page 13 of 13 FirstFirst ... 3910111213

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 8
    Last Post: 8th February 2012, 04:14 PM
  2. Replies: 3
    Last Post: 6th January 2012, 05:34 PM
  3. [Video] BBC news stumps Boris with his own quote
    By mattx in forum Jokes/Interweb Things
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 10th July 2011, 04:12 PM
  4. Replies: 12
    Last Post: 26th January 2010, 08:14 AM
  5. Replies: 41
    Last Post: 6th November 2007, 05:59 PM

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

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