Anti-Censorship Group Decries Arcade Machine Removals

[Hagi]

Brain development certainly does take 18 years, most likely even longer than that. There's evidence of minor development even happening at the ripe age of 30.

On top of that those age ratings are only preventing you from accessing those things without your parent's express permission, which they have every right to it. If they buy 18+ material for you at 15 that's completely fine. But you don't have the right to buy them yourself, just like you don't have the right to vote, drive a car or consume alcohol.

Age matters. Whether 18 is where the line should be or not is up for debate, but denying that there should be a line at all is simply being willfully ignorant.

Nobody is preventing those materials from being circulated in any way, shape or form. Every adult can have access to them if they so desire. Every child has access to them if their parents believe them mature enough.

Please do not mix biological developement with psychological developement.
I do not believe that parents should have a right to shelter children. denying certain material because of age is sheltering.
Cars and alcohol is different, because those objects can cause actual harm to yourself, and moreimportantly - others.
As for voting, i hated that i could not vote at 16 even though i knew more about politics than the average voter. i do think that 18 year voting restriction is rather stupid.
I agree that the line should exist. and the line should be based on actual human developement and not some aritificial number. currently its based on what used to "finish school and live on its own" type of deal, which not only no longer applies, but is not based in real cognitive developement.
The content circulation is restricted in some cases (like australia bans on certian titles) but yes those are exceptions and i agree that adults have full acess to them. however i believe that teenagers should as well.

P.S. you know i visit more than one forum, and in any other forum i would have been met with "omg your stupid idiot" retort. comments like yours is why i love this forum

I guess we'll have to disagree then.

I think biological milestones are the best we have since we frankly don't have enough knowledge to establish reliable psychological milestones. A biological milestone is flawed, but it's one we can most accurately determine.

And I fully believe parents have every right to shelter their children. Hell, I think parents have a duty to shelter their children. That doesn't mean locking them up in their rooms and letting nothing bad happen to them but it does mean providing a safe and reliable environment. A child most definitely should be allowed to make mistakes, but it should not have to bear the full brunt of the consequences not knowing what those were going to be. The parents should shelter the child so it has the opportunity to learn.

Besides, having to wait two years to vote might certainly be annoying but it doesn't invalidate the entire democracy. Likewise having to wait for certain materials for a few years can certainly be annoying but it doesn't invalidate free speech.

 

[Strazdas]

And I fully believe parents have every right to shelter their children. Hell, I think parents have a duty to shelter their children. That doesn't mean locking them up in their rooms and letting nothing bad happen to them but it does mean providing a safe and reliable environment. A child most definitely should be allowed to make mistakes, but it should not have to bear the full brunt of the consequences not knowing what those were going to be. The parents should shelter the child so it has the opportunity to learn.

Besides, having to wait two years to vote might certainly be annoying but it doesn't invalidate the entire democracy. Likewise having to wait for certain materials for a few years can certainly be annoying but it doesn't invalidate free speech.

I guess you have a right to that opinion even if it is wrong.
Parents should not shelter children as that not only does not give the opportunity to learn, but hampers it. instead, parents should, you know, be parents and teach children about life, not hamper their ability to gain knowledge.
It does not invalidate democracy, but it pains me to know that im not allowed to vote when people who know nothing is going to vote and it did result in electing a president that sold our country secrets to russia, so yeah.
sure, censorship of this kind does not invalidates free speech, it invalidates free hearing.

 

[Hagi]

And I fully believe parents have every right to shelter their children. Hell, I think parents have a duty to shelter their children. That doesn't mean locking them up in their rooms and letting nothing bad happen to them but it does mean providing a safe and reliable environment. A child most definitely should be allowed to make mistakes, but it should not have to bear the full brunt of the consequences not knowing what those were going to be. The parents should shelter the child so it has the opportunity to learn.

Besides, having to wait two years to vote might certainly be annoying but it doesn't invalidate the entire democracy. Likewise having to wait for certain materials for a few years can certainly be annoying but it doesn't invalidate free speech.

I guess you have a right to that opinion even if it is wrong.
Parents should not shelter children as that not only does not give the opportunity to learn, but hampers it. instead, parents should, you know, be parents and teach children about life, not hamper their ability to gain knowledge.
It does not invalidate democracy, but it pains me to know that im not allowed to vote when people who know nothing is going to vote and it did result in electing a president that sold our country secrets to russia, so yeah.
sure, censorship of this kind does not invalidates free speech, it invalidates free hearing.

Well... Luckily there's no such right as free hearing.

And luckily it's entirely possible for parents to both shelter their children from things they don't believe them ready to face yet whilst still teaching them about life and giving them plenty of opportunity to learn other things.

You don't leave your kids alone to deal with consequences they couldn't have known were there, you shelter them so that they have the opportunity to learn about those consequences.

 

[Strazdas]

And luckily it's entirely possible for parents to both shelter their children from things they don't believe them ready to face yet whilst still teaching them about life and giving them plenty of opportunity to learn other things.

You don't leave your kids alone to deal with consequences they couldn't have known were there, you shelter them so that they have the opportunity to learn about those consequences.

You dont leaven the alone. you show then the consequences while doing it together and teaching them of the process. Sheltering is removing the opportunity to learn. you cant learn if you dont know what it is your learning about.

Capcha disagrees too: not in kansas

 

[Hagi]

And luckily it's entirely possible for parents to both shelter their children from things they don't believe them ready to face yet whilst still teaching them about life and giving them plenty of opportunity to learn other things.

You don't leave your kids alone to deal with consequences they couldn't have known were there, you shelter them so that they have the opportunity to learn about those consequences.

You dont leaven the alone. you show then the consequences while doing it together and teaching them of the process. Sheltering is removing the opportunity to learn. you cant learn if you dont know what it is your learning about.

Capcha disagrees too: not in kansas

Well yes... If you define sheltering as removing the ability to learn then obviously sheltering children will remove their ability to learn.

Not the definition I'm using though.

What you say is sheltering. Doing things together and teaching them in the process means you're sheltering them from some of the hardships of doing and learning everything on their own. It's not a binary situation where sheltering means you have to protect them from everything ever. As I said before you can shelter your kids from some things and let them figure other things out themselves, then as they grow and learn you allow them more and more experiences. But you don't immediately unleash the full world on your child. You don't let a kid pick his own elementary school, he's not equipped to deal with that decision so you shelter him from it and make it for him. You don't let a 5 year old watch movies like the Human Centipede, he's not equipped to know the consequences (months of nightmares) so you shelter him from it and restrict that material.

 

[Strazdas]

Well yes... If you define sheltering as removing the ability to learn then obviously sheltering children will remove their ability to learn.

Not the definition I'm using though.

What you say is sheltering. Doing things together and teaching them in the process means you're sheltering them from some of the hardships of doing and learning everything on their own. It's not a binary situation where sheltering means you have to protect them from everything ever. As I said before you can shelter your kids from some things and let them figure other things out themselves, then as they grow and learn you allow them more and more experiences. But you don't immediately unleash the full world on your child. You don't let a kid pick his own elementary school, he's not equipped to deal with that decision so you shelter him from it and make it for him. You don't let a 5 year old watch movies like the Human Centipede, he's not equipped to know the consequences (months of nightmares) so you shelter him from it and restrict that material.

IT becomes quite clear that you do not know what sheltering is.
Noone is talking about unleashing everything at once, what we are talking about is giving a choice.
Yes, you should let a kid choose his own elementary school. because the one you chose may wery well be full of bullies and stupid teachers (yes, thats a thing) and will leave him thinking for the rest of his life that elementary school is awful.
You can let a 5 year old watch Human Centipede. Thing is - they wont. Its not interesting for them. And if you give him a choice, not force him to watch, then nightmares are very unlikely, as a child that would get mightmares likely wouldn't watch more than a few minutes before leaving. Well unless you already have destroyed the psyche of your child.

 

[Hagi]

Well yes... If you define sheltering as removing the ability to learn then obviously sheltering children will remove their ability to learn.

Not the definition I'm using though.

What you say is sheltering. Doing things together and teaching them in the process means you're sheltering them from some of the hardships of doing and learning everything on their own. It's not a binary situation where sheltering means you have to protect them from everything ever. As I said before you can shelter your kids from some things and let them figure other things out themselves, then as they grow and learn you allow them more and more experiences. But you don't immediately unleash the full world on your child. You don't let a kid pick his own elementary school, he's not equipped to deal with that decision so you shelter him from it and make it for him. You don't let a 5 year old watch movies like the Human Centipede, he's not equipped to know the consequences (months of nightmares) so you shelter him from it and restrict that material.

IT becomes quite clear that you do not know what sheltering is.
Noone is talking about unleashing everything at once, what we are talking about is giving a choice.
Yes, you should let a kid choose his own elementary school. because the one you chose may wery well be full of bullies and stupid teachers (yes, thats a thing) and will leave him thinking for the rest of his life that elementary school is awful.
You can let a 5 year old watch Human Centipede. Thing is - they wont. Its not interesting for them. And if you give him a choice, not force him to watch, then nightmares are very unlikely, as a child that would get mightmares likely wouldn't watch more than a few minutes before leaving. Well unless you already have destroyed the psyche of your child.

You don't know many children do you?

Trust me, young children will often hear about disturbing movies they then will want to watch them and upon doing so they'll sleep horribly for a long time after.

And you honestly think a kid of that age will make a rational, well thought out choice based on the teachers and fellow students? The kid will most likely pick whichever elementary school has the most attractive looking playground regardless of any other qualities.

Children aren't miniature adults. They're children.

 

[Strazdas]

You don't know many children do you?

Trust me, young children will often hear about disturbing movies they then will want to watch them and upon doing so they'll sleep horribly for a long time after.

And you honestly think a kid of that age will make a rational, well thought out choice based on the teachers and fellow students? The kid will most likely pick whichever elementary school has the most attractive looking playground regardless of any other qualities.

Children aren't miniature adults. They're children.

Once again you undervalue childrens ability to think logically. I had enough experience with children to know you are wrong. If you act with children like they are logical beings, they will react the same. if you go all pompous pretending you are somehow superior (yes, you are not superior to a child, none of us are) they will go defensive really fast.

 

[Hagi]

You don't know many children do you?

Trust me, young children will often hear about disturbing movies they then will want to watch them and upon doing so they'll sleep horribly for a long time after.

And you honestly think a kid of that age will make a rational, well thought out choice based on the teachers and fellow students? The kid will most likely pick whichever elementary school has the most attractive looking playground regardless of any other qualities.

Children aren't miniature adults. They're children.

Once again you undervalue childrens ability to think logically. I had enough experience with children to know you are wrong. If you act with children like they are logical beings, they will react the same. if you go all pompous pretending you are somehow superior (yes, you are not superior to a child, none of us are) they will go defensive really fast.

Guess all I can say is that I hope it'll be some time before you figure out how very wrong you are.

Children certainly aren't stupid, but to think they'll always act nice and logical if you just treat them that way is simply delusional. But I don't really hold much hope of convincing you, so I'll just leave it at this and agree to disagree or whatever.