Children - Vyoos

Vyoos

follow this blog

32 followers

263 daily readers

rank of 27

E-mail Subscription

Receive an e-mail notification of new posts on this site:

Children - Vyoos

Who would you rather have as your mother?

November 12th 2010 02:53

: Vyoos news

Choice 1: Pink
Pink is also known as P!nk and Alecia Beth Moore. She was born September 8, 1979, and is described by Wikipedia as an American singer, songwriter, musician, acrobat, dancer and actress.

She has been a celebrity for 10 years, famous for the things listed above plus for being beaten as a child.

The beatings became known this week during an interview with celebrity news site Access Hollywood. Pink told the site political correctness had gone too far, that her father had beaten her regularly, that she believed those beatings had saved her life, and that she intended to beat her own children.

"I think parents need to beat the crap out of their kids," she said.

Pink, whose parents divorced when she was seven, was widely reported this week to be expecting her first child with husband Carey Hart.

Choice 2: Angelina Jolie
Born Angelina Jolie Voight on June 4, 1975, Jolie she is described by Wikipedia as an American actress and humanitarian.

She has received an Academy Award, two Screen Actors Guild Awards, and three Golden Globe Awards, and works as a Goodwill Ambassador for the UNHCR.

Jolie got a start in film alongside her father Jon Voight in the 1982 film Lookin' to Get Out. She later famously fell out with her father for many years, but there are no reports that he ever beat her.

Jolie has six children, including adopted Cambodian and Vietnamese orphans, for whom she employs Cambodian and Vietnamese nannies so the children can grow up knowing their native languages.

Angelina Jolie can't cook but is happy to spend time in the kitchen with six-year-old Pax, who loves to cook.

The choice
We can't choose our parents, and so much of what we are is a legacy of what our parents were as we grew up. In adulthood, however, and especially, in parenthood, there are strong instincts which can overcome prejudices and guide our choices.

Who would you choose to be your mother?

Wikipedia, theage.com.au, mx.net.au

103

Vote

Comments (2)

Add Comments

[ Link ]

Posted By: Chris Champion - Category: Celebrity watch, Children, Psychology

Email this Post to a Friend

Lolly pops and violent video games

November 3rd 2010 08:14

: Vyoos news

VYOOS EDITORIAL
They are trying to make the sale of video games containing graphic violence illegal in California to people under 18.

Plenty of people are pushing the process, saying kids of all ages play video games these days and who in their right mind could be comfortable with a legal system which condones eight-year-olds having unfettered access to games which contain violence?

Who could dispute that?

Well, one group which is isn't convinced, and which is putting up some interesting counter-arguments, is the judges who comprise the United States Supreme Court.

They don't like the "vagueness" of the proposed California law, which sounds like something which can be discussed and addressed. But secondly, and much more crucially, they fear the law conflicts with the First Amendment's protection of free speech.

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg put it this way, "If you are supposing a category of violent materials dangerous to children, then how do you cut it off at video games?''

Justice Antonin Scalia said, "You're asking us to create ... a whole new prohibition which the American people never, never ratified when they ratified the First Amendment.''

What the judges are concerned about is an apparent free speech double-standard, in that the California law appears to limit violent video games while ignoring the violence minors experience in other media such as online, in movies, in music and in books.

Justice Scalia repeated a crucial point: many children's books use violence to demonstrate that being bad doesn't pay. "Some of Grimm's Fairy Tales are quite grim, to tell you the truth,'' Scalia remarked.

Justice Sonia Sotomayor pointed to a study said that watching a Bugs Bunny cartoon had the same effect on minors that playing a violent video game did.

"So can the legislature now, because it has that study, say we can outlaw Bugs Bunny?'' she asked.

Think also comic books. Think kapow! Think comeuppance factor.

As often is the case with these debates, there can be legal, political or social mandates on both sides, and common sense can get squeezed out the back door.

There aren't enough headlines in common sense.

So let's let common sense have a say here. Is it common sense to leave violent video games around for kids to find? Of course it isn't.

Is it common sense to think kids will access violent video games despite the best efforts of parents, teachers, politicians and police to prevent them doing so. Of course it is. The more you hide something, the more attrractive it becomes.

Is it common sense to do everything you can, including legal imperatives, to ensure that any underage kid can not access violent video games? No, it isn't.

Apart from the legal arguments above (and in the US anything that might compromise the First Amendment is a very serious legal argument indeed), and apart from political self-agendas from the Our Kids Are Pure and Sacred lobby, one has to ask what a law banning access by minors to violent video games would achieve.

It certainly won't prevent access by minors to violent video games. The games will still be out there, legally accessible by parents, older siblings, and anyone with an internet connection who knows where to find free copies on the net. Which is, like, you know, every teenager.

Then there's the life lesson argument. If this law is passed, and we somehow effectively prevent every individual viewing video violence until the day they turn 18, we are going to have some shocked and shaken 18-year-olds walking around. Is this the way to prepare kids for the rigours of the real world?

Kids are tougher than many people give them credit for, and they need to be. Surely it is common sense to let them learn some of life's harsher, uglier lessons in their time and in their space.

If an eight-year-old is old enough to find a violent video game, he or she is old enough to start learning perspectives associated with it. The first lesson, that the world isn't full of lolly pops and mum can't, in fact, kiss everything better, can be a hard one, but it's better learned sooner rather than later.

Vote

Add Comments

[ Link ]

Posted By: Chris Champion - Category: Children, Law, North America, US, Politics, Vyoos Editorial

Email this Post to a Friend

[ Vyoos Home ] [ Create A New Post ]