the monkey on my back.... children.... education.... violence.....
Last night as we discussed children and violence...

a few points and words about some of it...

children's lives are inundated with an increased amount of technology and therefore television and video games. the increase of technology in our world today enables them to view technology as an integrated part of their enviornment. this differs from previous generations in that technology has not always been readily accessible to everyone and was therefore not as prevalent in daily life. rachel, my name is rachel, made the distinction of being aware of using technology and not being aware of using technology. children of today, i believe, do not make this distinction, their lives are intertwined in technology, not necessarily their choice. they go to the mall and choose cd's from a stand alone database, they play nintendo and sega genesis after school, they watch mtv, they watch tv ALOT. all these activities involve technology and the children. when we discussed donna haraway's cyborg manifesto, one definition of a cyborg was 'us'. our lives, 'us' meaning SILS students, professionals, anyone involved in communication and information, do not occur on a daily basis without a large dose of technology. we don't function efficiently without a lot of technologically advanced tools and machines. are we then cyborgs? possibly. now, how has that or will it influence our children? not that technology (television) is the only influence on society today, but consider this abstract of Television: A Communication Tool To Help Your Children by Reed Markham

"Television has a pervasive presence in our lives and connects us to a larger world. Children spend more time watching television than any other activity (except sleeping)."

does that seem problematic/disgusting/horrifying/upsetting and generally unsettling to anyone else? think about it "more time watching television than any other activity..."

"According to Bernard Percy, television can have a positive effect on children: it can build vocabulary, stimulate interests and motivate actions. Parents should consider doing some of the following: support successful educational programming in their child's school; encourage their child to watch imaginative programming; help their child be an active television viewer."

"ACTIVE television viewer...." hmm....

"After watching a program, they should discuss with their child what they liked or disliked about the show. They should discuss issues and ideas related to the program. On the other hand, television viewing can be quite damaging to children. The American Academy of Pediatrics says that "protracted television viewing is one cause of violent or aggressive behavior." Parents can lmit the negative effects of television by setting a strong example for their children by choosing responsible programming. Also, parents should monitor programs viewed by their children and limit their children's viewing time."

In order to discuss with a child what they have been watching on television, the parent(s) must be aware that the child was watching and what they were watching. why would protracted television be a cause of violent or aggressive behavior (they don't say)? the images that are shown? the lack of physical activity? the lack of interpersonal interaction and communication?

i am not saying that there aren't people in this world that don't grow up perfectly okay watching television until their eyeballs bleed. i am willing to bet that those children communicate with their parents and other people about what they watch, and talk about what it means. otherwise, how do you learn what you are not supposed to watch? so now.. the V-chip. tv and violence. tv and sex. tv and censorship. there are so many problems involved in violence and children. i don't think taking away tv or trying to censor parts of it will change anything. parents need to talk to their kids. period.

governmental parentis in loci/us reaches a horrific degree of violation with the v-chip. so i have run out of time to write but i have more to say....



back to meredith's statement