Do Parents have the right to complain?

[JustJack]

Back in the old days, many of todays parents, use to watch cartoons like Bugs Bunny, Daffy, and the whole gang. Remember those cartoons? Remember those characters?

Bug Bunny: Master of deception & lies. Held a carrot suggestivly like a ciggar. Cross Dresser. Also kissed more men than anything else. Seemed to have a large supply of explosives, and was happy to watch someone get shot.

Daffy Duck: Butt of every joke. A nutbag. Got shot, blown up, stabbed, cut, hung, etc.. Also was known for his kissing of men.

Wile-E-Coyote: Carnivorous being, who is constantly lunged, flung, shot, and hurled, all so he can kill and eat a bird. Prone to run with sharp objects. Uses explosives, and many other dangerous items, without license(haha), and often gets hurt by it. Has fallen off of cliffs, been blown up, shaved, and it isn't uncommon to see some nice red highlights over his wounds.


Hmmmm....
This brings up a good questions. These cartoons COULD bring up an arguement, that WB cartoons promote gun use, cross dressing, running with sharp objects, killing, homosexuality, cruelty to animals, smoking.
While that's not really all true, looking at the stupid parents of today, I seriously believe, THERE IS NOTHING TO COMPLAIN ABOUT!!!

Bugs & the Gang are classics, but parents today would wrather have their kids watching luney toons, than much of the less-violent, but more seriously-toned shows of today.

Compare to more modern characters who get a bad rap...

Batman: Hmmm, a guy who dawns dark clothing(heaven forbid), and fights criminals for justice, and all that is right. Batman, doesn't use guns, and doesn't condone it. The bad guys(who, BTW, mostly use guns) are always defeated. While there might be a little blood streak coming from the mouth or nose, the rest of the series is pretty well censored, but is still fun to watch. The worst you get out of it is batman using his fists for combat.

Samurai Jack: I actually read a post from a parent complaining this show was to violent?! BULL! It's probably the most educational & culturally diverse show on all of TV. The violence is NOTHING BAD. oh no, a little red streak, where Jack just got slashed? When the blood starts pooring out of his wound, THEN YOU CAN COMPLAIN. The creator specifically said that he wanted the show to prove that Jack isn't invulnerable. He's supposed to get hurt. And if you ask me, that teaches kids that no, you're not invulnerable.

Cartoon Cartoons(PPG, Cow & Chiken, Johnny Bravo...): Sure, a lot of the jokes are a tad bit to adult, but at the same time, they go right over the heads of most kids. Also notice, CC is a Primetime show? Yeah, Cow & chiken may be on at, 10am, when kids are AT SCHOOL, but hey...These shows are not nearly as bad in content, as the classics...

So, do parents have a right to complain? In my Humble opinion...NO! NO NO NO NO NO!!!!
First of all, cartoons have always had about the same amount of content. Nowadays, use of a real-looking gun, crossdressing, any form of killing, homosexuality, smoking, etc., are all condemned. Heck, if anything that resembles a cigarette is seen, there is heck to pay, with a lot of parents. They use to watch the same stuff when they were kids...but I guess, perhaps, they just don't want this generation to be like them?

But, in the end, if a parent can't look at the TV-rating system up in the top left corner of the screen, or sit and watch their kids shows, Or, Heaven Forbid, tell their kids what they can & cannot watch.......Parents have NO EXCUSE to complain. They have TV-Ratings for a reason, in the first place!

..stupid over-protective, yet irresponsible parents....ruining it for the rest of us....

[Joe Tully]

I actually read a post from a parent complaining this show was to violent?!

Then tell your kids not to watch it. That's what my parents did. I mean sure, I still managed to watch a few times when my parents weren't paying attention, but kids will always see stuff that their parents don't want them to see, whether it's something that they associate with kids like cartoons, or something like PG-13 movies or violent video games at a friend's house. You can't expect to control the rest of the world to protect your kid, so you have to control your kid. By doing that, you're having your own voice anyways. I mean, if Barney the dinosaur realizes he's a T-Rex and starts biting kids' heads off, and you tell your kid not to watch, the ratings go down and the execs realize that they shouldn't do that. (Though ratings would probably skyrocket for the teens demographic :) )

I'm sure I'm preaching to the converted. The ones that need to read this will never see it.

[BourgeoisBuffoon]

You said a mouthful. I too think parents should think twice before complaining. Heck, they dealt with drugs and racial stuff in old toons too. Many shows today do not have the outright violence those 'toons had...also, many kids today ARE kinda desensitised to these things...so no worries.

...and if they don't get a joke, the parent can and have a chuckle! That's what a lot of CN and KWB Silver Age shows put a lot of more adult jokes in for!

Still, I would not call parents totally "irrisponsible"-they are trying to look out for thier kids. They just look out a bit to far in my opinion...

[Psycho Fox]

Originally posted by JustJack

So, do parents have a right to complain? In my Humble opinion...NO! NO NO NO NO NO!!!!
First of all, cartoons have always had about the same amount of content. Nowadays, use of a real-looking gun, crossdressing, any form of killing, homosexuality, smoking, etc., are all condemned. Heck, if anything that resembles a cigarette is seen, there is heck to pay, with a lot of parents. They use to watch the same stuff when they were kids...but I guess, perhaps, they just don't want this generation to be like them?

But, in the end, if a parent can't look at the TV-rating system up in the top left corner of the screen, or sit and watch their kids shows, Or, Heaven Forbid, tell their kids what they can & cannot watch.......Parents have NO EXCUSE to complain. They have TV-Ratings for a reason, in the first place!

..stupid over-protective, yet irresponsible parents....ruining it for the rest of us.... I totaly agree and this is the reason why some forien cartoons have problems getting into the US.

[Trent Lane]

Most parents would rather blame a cartoon or something of that nature for their children's actions than actually take that blame themselves. It's called the easy way out.

[happyheathen]

Yeah, right!...

where to start:

a. do parents have a right to complain? Yes. They are the ones who pay the bills, put up with your whining, and will be blamed when you turn out bad:) Yes, they have a right to complain about ANYTHING they want to!

b. do parents have valid grounds for objections? Yes! (and, for the record, while I am old enough to be the father of 90+% of the folks on this board, I am NOT a parent).

i. your comparison to the 'classic' 'toons we watched is flawed - notice that the characters in the old 'toons bear no resemblence to real people, rabbits, ducks, or life - the viewer was made to understand that 'this is not how life Really is'.
The modern 'toons cited (or at least the snippets of them I have seen) attempt to depict REAL people, places, and situations. To the extent they do so, they are teaching that the actions depicted are credible, and violence is a good thing.
I, for one, find this disturbing.

ii. the 'Many shows today do not have the outright violence those 'toons had...also, many kids today ARE kinda desensitised to these things...so no worries.' argument wins the 'ghastly logic' award for at least this month - because kids have already been de-sensitized to evil and violence, you think more such programming is OK?!

did you see the post about the US kids cheering when the WTC towers collasped (they thought it was 'cool') ? desensitized enough for you?


oh - historical trivia - circa 1967, researchers found a pair of kids (brother and sister, 10-12 yrs old or so) who had lived their entire lives without ever seeing TV. They sat them down for an evening of the usual TV fare of the time (old west gunfights, spy-shoot-spy, cops-shoot-baddies).
the result? - the kids lost their lunches

do kids really need to see 4,000 humans killed (in full, living color) by the time they're 8? maybe just a Little insane?

[Leaping Larry Jojo]

I'd already seen 4000 or more animated/fictional deaths by the time I was 8, and I am STILL shocked and sad when I hear of murders or massacres in the news.

So it doesn't apply to all kids. It's basically getting them to distinguish between fiction and reality.

[BourgeoisBuffoon]

Sure, Hppyheathen-thanks for the award.:rolleyes:

Sure, modern 'toons are realistic. We have superheros going against some of the craziest villains you've ever seen (Ripping Friends), we had Ash get flamed from a monster of his on a regular basis (Pokemon) and also, we have Animaniacs. Which is really a modern updated version of some of the Gold Age toons. Realistic today, indeed. We also have a Dexter's Lab, Courage the Cowardly Dog, and the like. Which really don't seem realistic to me.

As for your studies, I'll grant ya that.
Let's not forget that KIDS are not the ones who are making the shows parents today love to complain about. All the people who work on these shows are adults themselves, some probably older than you. Which really can prove there's something wrong here...

[The Mad Hatter]

My only question is: what brought this on? Some parents are always going to complain that cartoons are bad, and I personally haven't seen a big backlash lately. It just seems to be the same level of complaints as always.

[Maxie Zeus]

Looney Tunes were much criticized during the 1970s, and ABC and CBS both chopped them to bits. My "favorite" example was the Bugs-Daffy-Elmer short with the "mongoose/pigeon/dirty skunk/etc." seasons. ABC edited out EVERY SINGLE beak blowing; it was like getting a series of joke without the punchlines.

Happyheathen's points are well-taken, which is why there will always be a tension between artistic responsibility and artistic freedom. Probably, we will always be negotiating the boundaries between them.

[Calhoun07]

Originally posted by Leaping Larry Jojo
I'd already seen 4000 or more animated/fictional deaths by the time I was 8, and I am STILL shocked and sad when I hear of murders or massacres in the news.

So it doesn't apply to all kids. It's basically getting them to distinguish between fiction and reality.

Do you think kids have a problem in distinguishing between fiction and reality today? I was personally shocked by the number of people who said the WTC towers collapsing looked like a movie. That thought never crossed my mind to equate it with fiction.

[Psycho Fox]

Originally posted by The Mad Hatter
My only question is: what brought this on? Some parents are always going to complain that cartoons are bad, and I personally haven't seen a big backlash lately. It just seems to be the same level of complaints as always. The problem I have is that America is more Oppressed. Take Watership Down for example the show is a high rating earner where it airs and Its merchindizing has strong sales. Thus why does it not air in the US? Becouse censors don't like it, why?

1)Humans are showed as evil.
Duh wild rabbits would plus in the Cristmas Special they learned that not all humans are.

2)Sexist
Yes some people didn't like Bigwig's comment of digging being Doe's work. Which I have to say get a life. All the females on the screen at the time scrunched their noses when he said it plus Blackberry rubbed that line in his face when he ordered everyone to start digging latter on. It is Bigwig's character like how he underestimated Hannah cause she is a mouse but she proves her self and even Bigwig in one ep learned he is wrong from time to time.

3)Oppression
Some people don't like that General Woundwort Oppresses. Well duh it is suppose to be the fight Between freedom and oppression.

4)Mythology - Some people don't like the shows Mythology like El-ahrairah for some stupid reason.

And there are other stupid reason why censors don't want Watership Down to air on American soil but the fact is the show opens kids minds which is why I from time to time I fear that one day these censors would go too far and American TV would become like Soviet TV was where it is bland and inoffensive.

[Leaping Larry Jojo]

Originally posted by calhoun07


Do you think kids have a problem in distinguishing between fiction and reality today? I was personally shocked by the number of people who said the WTC towers collapsing looked like a movie. That thought never crossed my mind to equate it with fiction.

Sometimes. Adults do it too. How many of us out there judge actors or actresses by how they acted in a _fictional_ role?

"She looks sneaky..."

Well, of course she does, if that's the kind of role she was playing! :rolleyes:

Still, when people said of the WTC tragedy, "It looked like a movie..." I think they were referring to the fact that the act was so unbelievable, so unreal, that this analogy was their only way of expressing their feelings. I don't think it should be construed as ignorance on their part.

[Calhoun07]

Originally posted by Leaping Larry Jojo


Sometimes. Adults do it too. How many of us out there judge actors or actresses by how they acted in a _fictional_ role?

"She looks sneaky..."

Well, of course she does, if that's the kind of role she was playing! :rolleyes:

Still, when people said of the WTC tragedy, "It looked like a movie..." I think they were referring to the fact that the act was so unbelievable, so unreal, that this analogy was their only way of expressing their feelings. I don't think it should be construed as ignorance on their part.

Good points. That reminds me that I know adults...yes, adults...who think the actors they see on TV are EXACTLY like that. I knew this one lady that was over at our house one time when Trapper John was on TV and she insisted that those actors in that show were doctors in real life. And when shows like Gilligian's Island were on, people actually phoned the coast guard to insist that they send a rescue party out there to get them. That kind of thinking just boggles my mind. And look at good actors whose careers got derailed because people had them so type cast they couldn't see anybody else but the character they made famouse. Paul Rubens is NOT Pee Wee Herman, he's just a character he played on TV. And Jim Varney is NOT Ernest, in fact Jim had alot of talent and could have done so much more if people gave him a chance, but they type cast him. So no wonder why there are adults out there who think kids are going to emulate what they see in cartoons, because there are adults out there who have a hard time in separating fact from fiction!

I just wonder...like that lady who thought the actors on Trapper John were all really doctors....what do these people think when they watch something like Star Trek???

[JustJack]

So many good and clear points.

But, yeah, my mom constantly yells at me, because she doesn't think I know the difference between fiction & reality. But, I do. The thing is...I just HATE reality. So, I get lost in cartoons like, Invader Zim, or Samurai Jack, or read Comics like..Johnny The Homicidal Maniac.

Adults do make the cartoons. And one way or the other, they will hide huge adult-oriented material. So, it's subconsciously engrained into our heads, at an early age.

Even I have to admit, When I first saw the WTC, one of the first thoughts that came to my mind was "wow, that's gona be a cool movie". Then, I realized it wasn't a commercial. So, yes, I was sickened by the event.

I may read such comics like Johnny: The Homicidal Maniac, Squee, or even Lenore....But I know it's fake...when I see a tragedy..I feel like losing my lunch as well...

[batboy2001]

My mom hates Bugs Bunny. So, she also hates all my cartoons, I mean she lets me whatch them but those looks *shuders*. She does like the angry beavers, well she doesn't hate them, just thinks they are a waste of time. I have to much respect for her taste to watch Invader Zim or Ed EDD"n Edy in front of her.

[RockItShipper]

The WTC explosions _did_ look like a movie. But 10 times worse, given that it wasn't a model or CGI.

I'm used to violence in movies, barely blinking when I saw the explosions in ID4 (I hated the 'us vs. them' of it, tho')... But to see it live on the news is entirely different. To live in the island where it happened, etc. It's what you don't see in movies. The buildings in ID4 were more potent images than anyone inside. And something like SW and ROTJ.... The enemy is so dehumanized with old British gents and masked men, that you revel in their destruction. But then again, it is the real enemy standing alongside the heroes in TPM's last scene as they all celebrate their victory over the Obvious Foreign Menace.

Anyway, what I find... Standards change. I have some Sat. Am Beatles toon eps. Racist depictions of various groups, loose women and their possessive husbands/boyfriends, alcohol.... It's a bad bad cartoon, to begin with, but the standards being what they are today... there's a bit that would be unheard of, and other parts too tame....

[kiddiesunshine]

the "movie look" is the fault of news reports, with the fancy graphics and dramatic music. ratings aren't far from the minds of greedy network execs!

[Psycho Fox]

Originally posted by batboy2001
My mom hates Bugs Bunny. So, she also hates all my cartoons, I mean she lets me whatch them but those looks *shuders*. She does like the angry beavers, well she doesn't hate them, just thinks they are a waste of time. I have to much respect for her taste to watch Invader Zim or Ed EDD"n Edy in front of her. My mom is neutral about Bugs Bunny she is more of a Betty Boop fan. My dad likes Bugs Bunny though. Which I guess is proof that cartoons can't hurt you. I mean my parents still watch cartoons and they are kinda normal.

[RockItShipper]

Betty Boop's early cartoons were pretty risque, eventually being cut for television- and the bulk of the shorts from the mid/late '30s onward being very tame and often bland.

[DR. BELCH]

RockItShipper:
The WTC explosions _did_ look like a movie. But 10 times worse, given that it wasn't a model or CGI.
That's what made it so chilling...a nightmare come to life, a thousand times worse than any Freddy or Jason or Leatherface. I can see a thousand murders on screen, but there's something about violence right in your face--a loved one attacked before your eyes, the realism of blood drops pattering on one's own floor; their beaten, bloody, swollen, pain-contorted face--that jars you to reality and says, "Son, this ain't no dream anymore, it's the real thing!"

Betty Boop's early cartoons were pretty risque, eventually being cut for television--and the bulk of the shorts from the mid/late '30s onward being very tame and often bland.
You can thank the Hays office for that, lass...there's even a reference to them in Bob Clampett's "Tale of Two Kitties", by Babbott--one of the greatest lines in cartoondom, IMO.

[Frozen]

JustJack wrote:

..stupid over-protective, yet irresponsible parents....ruining it for the rest of us....


I am neither over-protective, stupid, or irresponsible - but I am a parent. And, yes, I have a DUTY, to my daughter to review what she watches, or wishes to watch. When I was a kid, if my parents told me I couldn't watch something, then I respected that decision - I trusted them then, as I do now, to know what they think is best for me. Thankfully, my daughter has the same attitude. I'm not a Nazi, I don't tell her she can't watch something just to spite her - and I doubt your parents do either.

A parent who didn't monitor what their child watches would be worse than one who does. The trick, as a parent, is to have an informed point of view about what it is the child in question wiches to watch, listen to etc. My wife and I love cartoon, wrestling, rock music etc - all the stuff our daughter likes, so we're in an enviable situation in that we know what we're talking about when she asks if she can watch, say, Overfiend - OK, it's a 'toon', but it's an adult one, so that's a no no. Conversely, we know their's nothing wrong with Sailor Moon, or Batman etc - hell, we'll probably watch it with her. We know what we're talking about - and she respects that.

Your parents aren't trying to spoil your fun. An enormous amount of emotional, intellectual, and practical investment goes into raising a child, and a parents natural instinct is to protect its child. Your parents are instinctively doing what they feel is both right and beneficial for you. If you disagree, then don't throw your toys out of the pram, but have an intelligent conversation with them, state your case, and make a reasoned argument as to why you feel you should be allowed to watch this show - and 'allowed' is the right word. That TV is a luxury - not a right. If your folks still think you shouldn't be watching a show, then, sorry, but that's it. You owe it to them, for all they've done for you, and for all they will do, to respect their decision. Food, water, clothes, warmth, shelter, love, and an education are the only things you need - anything else, no matter how much you want it, is just set-dressing. Sorry, but that's the parents perspective, and, I'm, afraid, until you've flown the nest, then you have to respect that perspective, as much as a parent has to try and respect yours...

[Psycho Fox]

Originally posted by RockItShipper
Betty Boop's early cartoons were pretty risque, eventually being cut for television- and the bulk of the shorts from the mid/late '30s onward being very tame and often bland. In the late 80's City TV aired a Betty Boop marithon late at night including the risque ones. My mom still has it on tape.

[Psycho Fox]

Originally posted by Frozen


I am neither over-protective, stupid, or irresponsible - but I am a parent. And, yes, I have a DUTY, to my daughter to review what she watches, or wishes to watch. When I was a kid, if my parents told me I couldn't watch something, then I respected that decision - I trusted them then, as I do now, to know what they think is best for me. Thankfully, my daughter has the same attitude. I'm not a Nazi, I don't tell her she can't watch something just to spite her - and I doubt your parents do either.

A parent who didn't monitor what their child watches would be worse than one who does. The trick, as a parent, is to have an informed point of view about what it is the child in question wiches to watch, listen to etc. My wife and I love cartoon, wrestling, rock music etc - all the stuff our daughter likes, so we're in an enviable situation in that we know what we're talking about when she asks if she can watch, say, Overfiend - OK, it's a 'toon', but it's an adult one, so that's a no no. Conversely, we know their's nothing wrong with Sailor Moon, or Batman etc - hell, we'll probably watch it with her. We know what we're talking about - and she respects that.

Your parents aren't trying to spoil your fun. An enormous amount of emotional, intellectual, and practical investment goes into raising a child, and a parents natural instinct is to protect its child. Your parents are instinctively doing what they feel is both right and beneficial for you. If you disagree, then don't throw your toys out of the pram, but have an intelligent conversation with them, state your case, and make a reasoned argument as to why you feel you should be allowed to watch this show - and 'allowed' is the right word. That TV is a luxury - not a right. If your folks still think you shouldn't be watching a show, then, sorry, but that's it. You owe it to them, for all they've done for you, and for all they will do, to respect their decision. Food, water, clothes, warmth, shelter, love, and an education are the only things you need - anything else, no matter how much you want it, is just set-dressing. Sorry, but that's the parents perspective, and, I'm, afraid, until you've flown the nest, then you have to respect that perspective, as much as a parent has to try and respect yours...
I totaly agree with you but some parents try to censor the networks. From my point of view if you have a problem with a show that you kids watches then like you said tell them not to watch it. If it is on when you are not home then ask the network to air it later or disconnect your cable when you are not home. There are tons of things kids can do besides watching TV.

[Nightwing]

I agree completely with Larry Jojo, Psycho Fox, and pretty much everyone, and I wish there were more parents like Frozen. But I'm sure there are, since I'm a half full kinda guy. But anyway, I'll begin my babble.

I don't exactly agree with JustJack because of course I think parents have the right to complain, however it's easy to see where he's coming from. He's mad that some parents go too far, and try and censor networks and such, like Fox said. How we combat it, I wish I knew, because it's not like one person can simply change another person's point of view. That's who they are!

But my biggest complaint is how those outlandish parents complain without even understanding what they're watching. That gripes me to absolutely my most angered extent.


Originally posted by happyheathen
......notice that the characters in the old 'toons bear no resemblence to real people, rabbits, ducks, or life - the viewer was made to understand that 'this is not how life Really is'.
The modern 'toons cited (or at least the snippets of them I have seen) attempt to depict REAL people, places, and situations. To the extent they do so, they are teaching that the actions depicted are credible, and violence is a good thing.
I, for one, find this disturbing.

This I don't exactly agree with, and use opinions such as that of Psycho Fox and Frozen to back it up. Without the proper parental guidance and teaching, I don't see why a child couldn't easily treat real people the same way as those silly fake looking animal characters, because they thought the actions the cartoons did to each other was funny.


ii. the 'Many shows today do not have the outright violence those 'toons had...also, many kids today ARE kinda desensitised to these things...so no worries.' argument wins the 'ghastly logic' award for at least this month - because kids have already been de-sensitized to evil and violence, you think more such programming is OK?!

did you see the post about the US kids cheering when the WTC towers collasped (they thought it was 'cool') ? desensitized enough for you?


oh - historical trivia - circa 1967, researchers found a pair of kids (brother and sister, 10-12 yrs old or so) who had lived their entire lives without ever seeing TV. They sat them down for an evening of the usual TV fare of the time (old west gunfights, spy-shoot-spy, cops-shoot-baddies).
the result? - the kids lost their lunches

do kids really need to see 4,000 humans killed (in full, living color) by the time they're 8? maybe just a Little insane?


I think this, again, points to how important the wize guidance of a parent is. I am also against desensitizing children to violence, but I still want them to be aware of it. Of course, that just can't happen at as young of ages as is happening in our culture, otherwise we get those kids responses to the WTC tragedy. So how do we find the happy medium? Who do we go to? Wize and loving parents.

Plus I think that experiment of the 1960s is a bit off compared to today, where kids have fully been desensitized. And I also think that kids were therefore less desensitized back then, not to mention how abruptly those kids were introduced to that kind of TV.

[Leaping Larry Jojo]

Originally posted by RockItShipper
Betty Boop's early cartoons were pretty risque,

They are often called the pre-code Betty Boops, and it's not just the risqueness that was cut out--a lot of the imagination was as well.

[JustJack]

By my statement...

"..stupid over-protective, yet irresponsible parents....ruining it for the rest of us.... "

Here's what I ment...

My parents use to watch TV with me & my brother. After watching it, they said "o.k" or "no.k" Now adays, they don't control what I watch, but they have grown up with what I've watched, & they know well enough, cartoons aren't for kids. My mom tells me "If you ever have kids, they better not watch what you watch!" Haha. Anyway, the point is, my parents were responsible, and monitored what my brother & I watched. They never once called in, or e-mail a station to complain.
BUT
There are many parents who never monitor what their kids watch. They just figure "cartoons are for kids", & leave it at that. Then, when they see a show like, Batman Beyond, where it isn't unusual to see blood running down someones chin, a lot of those parents freak out. Their first reaction is to "call the station!"

My arguement is simple, Why can't parents just tell their kids "no"? We have V-chips now adays. If there's a show you don't like, just block it. Why ruin it for the many teens & grown-ups, who do watch it? Or, for the kids who watch it, with parents who know the show isn't all-that-bad.

In my mind, a responsible parent knows when to tell their child "no", but an "irresponsible, ignorant" one, doesn't pay any attention, till something bad happens, then summons the forces of darkness?

That's all!

[Antiyonder]

By my statement...

"..stupid over-protective, yet irresponsible parents....ruining it for the rest of us.... "

There are many parents who never monitor what their kids watch. They just figure "cartoons are for kids", & leave it at that. Then, when they see a show like, Batman Beyond, where it isn't unusual to see blood running down someones chin, a lot of those parents freak out. Their first reaction is to "call the station!"

My arguement is simple, Why can't parents just tell their kids "no"? We have V-chips now adays. If there's a show you don't like, just block it. Why ruin it for the many teens & grown-ups, who do watch it? Or, for the kids who watch it, with parents who know the show isn't all-that-bad.

Cause they're probably too busy getting drunk at bars or fooling around to pay attention to their kids.

Why do they have kids if they don't have they time to supervise or
spend time with them?

[Nightflower]

Cause they're probably too busy getting drunk at bars or fooling around to pay attention to their kids.

Why do they have kids if they don't have they time to supervise or
spend time with them?
Okay, this thread is almost two years old, and some of it was done in a context that is long past (On the aftermath of 9/11 for one thing). Please try not to reply and dig up threads that are that old, because it really does confuse some people.