Parents just don't understand (FLCL on CN)

Kracus · Post by **Kracus** » Thu Aug 28, 2003 12:56 pm

Chaos Angel wrote:Shuldn't she take the responsibility to monitor what her kids are watching if she's so concerned about it? Especially considering the God-damned warning bumper at the beginning of the block, which she said she is aware of. She says in no uncertain terms that she relies on the parental control chip in her television to block out PG-13 and above stuff, but if she KNOWS about the warning, then she should take it upon herself to monitor what they are watching rather than letting the TV decide. The TV's a damn machine, it can't think for itself (yet...).

It's called shifting the blame. She just doesn't want to be responsible for it. She wants someone else to monitor what her kids are watching for her. It is not, and fucking should not, be the broadcasting company's job to monitor what their kids are watching; iot's her damn responsibility.

Bah, I shouldn't rant at night.

That's crap and you know it. One she is doing her part by actively viewing what the child watched, that's how she made those comments. And she is also complaining to the people who put it on the air. So she is monitoring what her kids watch. She probably doesn't let them watch it anymore.

Its not shifting the blame, its not her fault it on and its not her fault she didn't know what it was before had. Don't assume you know how much of a headache parenting can be to assume they can be on 24 alert. Especially in most cases were the parent gets home after the child (which was my situation). CN has a responsiblity, just like Macdonald's has a responsiblity to what they sale. People don't necessarily go after Macdonald's cause they have fatty food, but because the majority of their advertising revenue forcuses on children. That's what CN does, advertise to child and teens.

I'm not completely on her side, but I understand her stance. I haven't watched FLCL, don't intend too. Looked stupid from the previews.

angelx03 · Post by **angelx03** » Thu Aug 28, 2003 1:15 pm

NOOO!

The article said, and I quote:

There is a new cartoon called "FLCL," or "Fooly Cooly."

Stop saying CARTOONS! It just diminishies the integrety of the anime series (even though I never saw). I have yet to see FLCL since it's created by Gainax. First of all, why would a little kid stay up pass their bedtime to watch FLCL?

Hitori · Post by **Hitori** » Thu Aug 28, 2003 1:25 pm

Adult Swim.... nuff said...

angelx03 · Post by **angelx03** » Thu Aug 28, 2003 1:33 pm

Hitori wrote:Adult Swim.... nuff said...

That says it ALL!

Jace Tsunami · Post by **Jace Tsunami** » Thu Aug 28, 2003 1:47 pm

The Article wrote:we trust in proper TV ratings and have our family television set with a parental code for anything PG-13 or above.

The parents are not complaining about FLCL being on CN, they complaining it was underrated, which is 100% true. I should have been atleast PG-13, and if it was, the kid wouldn't have even been able to watch it.

BTW, last week called, it wants it's thread back

Shun · Post by **Shun** » Thu Aug 28, 2003 1:48 pm

"We feel safe as parents of young teens..."

If your childern are young teens which im guessing is 13 or 14 ( my age ) then there shouldnt be a problem here at all. If you raised your childern correctly (and im not saying they didnt) then they should be able to distuinguish for themselves, especially at that age. This whole article is just plain stupid. They put a freaking warning on the begging, if you trust your childern in watching TV at late hours such as midnight then im sure they will change the channel when they see it.

All these parents do is start bullcrap, bullcrap, bullcrap, bullcrap. All i can remember when i read this is one statement "blame canada". Its kyles mom all over again

"Let me say that we are not extremists. We don't try to hide our kids from the real world, nor do we chase down every bad thing in life and try to abolish it or censor it. What we are saying is that this particular show is vulgar and dangerous and could possibly incite violence. We are outraged that it has been rated TV-PG to be openly viewed by kids on, of all places, The Cartoon Network."

Whoever said all "cartoons" were good and decent? This is what warnings are for. And as i mentioned before if you trust your kids they will see these warnings.

Hmm, i probly repeated myself a lot and sounded biased but i really dislike it when parents, or anyone for that matter, starts things like this.

Jace Tsunami · Post by **Jace Tsunami** » Thu Aug 28, 2003 1:52 pm

well, you're definetly 13 or 14, you debate like one and don't read

A WARNING is not enough. Cartoon Network did nothing wrong, it's THE CABLE COMPANIES FAULT.

The cable company underrated the show, making it accessable to children even tho the parental lock should have come on and kept him from watching it.

Please do read the article, and some legitament responce sin this thread, before you reply to me.

MistyCaldwell · Post by **MistyCaldwell** » Thu Aug 28, 2003 1:58 pm

Kracus wrote: CN has a responsiblity, just like Macdonald's has a responsiblity to what they sale. People don't necessarily go after Macdonald's cause they have fatty food, but because the majority of their advertising revenue forcuses on children.

That is an incredible load of bull. Unless you mean McDonalds should keep it's cooking temp. high enough for meat safety, not offer spoiled food stuffs in it's stores, and keep it's stores safe for patrons, that is 100% pure bull. Welldone.

What you get at Mcdonalds isn't necessarily that much more 'unhealthy' than some home prepared meals. It's eating it OFTEN that makes it unhealthy.

It's cheap and fast and people like that. I don't think that the majority of kids OR adults walk, run, or bike to the Mickey D's. Any parent that drives the kid up to the drive thru everyday after school instead of making a meal has no right to complain. There are tons of good snack and meals that are fast and easy to make. But if the parent goes to the fast food place because the kid cries, well then who is in charge there? Unless the kid possesses telekinetic powers and threatens to blow up the SUV and the parent, then the parent is just encouraging the child to cry next time to get their way every time they cave in.

I had better write something on topic too.

I see the problem here being based on the fact too many people think child and animation go hand in hand. Even with the Simpsons, Family Guy, and Duck Man, people still don't get that not everything that ends in "toon" is kid targeted.

I think instead of complaining about what cartoon network puts on at midnight, she should make a rule for bedtime before then, as for a child it should be anyway.

There is also the option of *lightbulb* getting rid of cable. She can always buy a VCR and a crap load of tapes and that is what her kids can have. God it seems simple, but people gotta have their cable don't they?

If she really thinks TV can be that dangerous a weapon, she should stop whining and put it under lock and key

Jace Tsunami · Post by **Jace Tsunami** » Thu Aug 28, 2003 2:02 pm

MistyCaldwell wrote:If she really thinks TV can be that dangerous a weapon, she should stop whining and put it under lock and key

She pretty much did lock it

Is NO ONE readin the article? jesus.

Seriously, any idiot that actually READS this article can tell it's a rating problem.

MistyCaldwell · Post by **MistyCaldwell** » Thu Aug 28, 2003 2:04 pm

Jace Tsunami wrote:
The cable company underrated the show, making it accessable to children even tho the parental lock should have come on and kept him from watching it.

Her kids didn't watch anything, she and her husband did.

Read the article