Let's talk sex

[QUOTE="inoperativeRS"]

Simply put, parents should discuss these things with their children once they get old enough to start showing interest for them. In our digital age there's no way to stop a child from finding porn or violent material if he wants to.

Black_Knight_00

True, and you know why? Because laws on age restrictions exist but are not applied, so stores can illegally sell violent and erotic material to kiddies without fear of being sanctioned. As for the internet, I've been assured that filters work wonders.

The "kids will see it anyway, so it's ok" thing is an excuse: there are things that kids should not see. If parents keep on allowing them to, we will all pay the price seeing our favorite hobby under constant attack by the media.

you do realize that your kids will undo any filtering you have on a computer dont you? you do realize they can throw in a thumb drive with linux and drop a keylogger on the computer, grab the password to the router and unlock the whole network dont you? when i was young i completely removed all of the security on my school's lab computer and the current generation of kids is even more savvy than i was. you cant stop it. it is better to have them well equipped to deal with situations so they know how to respond.

the real problems arise when a child is sheltered their whole life and then experiences something (much worse than *gasp* images or videos of sex) they are not prepared for and make terrible or naive choices.

It's quite naive to assume things like that. There simply are too many ways for children (who can be surprisingly creative) to obtain violent and pornographic content to be able to restrict them completely without having them under 24/7 surveillance.

I find it much more pedagogic to talk to the child and explain these things face to face than try to hide them behind lies and restrictions. Of course a 10 year old shouldn't play GTA in an ideal world, but if you explain why the stuff that happens in the game is bad at least he won't get confused when he plays the game after his friend had an older brother buy it for him.

inoperativeRS

Well, statistically, only a very small percentage of parents does what you say (which would be the most reasonable thing to do). Many children/kids learn about sex either by schoolmates or watching porn and neither source has a minimal educational value.

About violence: you can't tell a child: 'hey, killing bystanders in GTA is fun, but in real life is bad'. Children don't make the same distinction we adults make between real life and fiction: everything they see is real to them. Plus they store in their brains a hell more informations than we do.

A friend of mine has a 4 years old nephew and I swear we pause gears of war any time he comes around the 360.

you do realize that your kids will undo any filtering you have on a computer dont you? you do realize they can throw in a thumb drive with linux and drop a keylogger on the computer, grab the password to the router and unlock the whole network dont you? when i was young i completely removed all of the security on my school's lab computer and the current generation of kids is even more savvy than i was. you cant stop it. it is better to have them well equipped to deal with situations so they know how to respond.

the real problems arise when a child is sheltered their whole life and then experiences something (much worse than *gasp* images or videos of sex) they are not prepared for and make terrible or naive choices.

OneWingedAngeI

Maybe it's like you say and they're all geniuses. I don't know that many baby-hackers though.

About sheltering: I hate when parents do that. Children must be told the fundamentals: sex, birth, death, good & evil. Here lies the core problem: less and less parents explain those things to their kids and let television, friends and (God help me) the internet teach them their distorted versions.

[QUOTE="inoperativeRS"]

It's quite naive to assume things like that. There simply are too many ways for children (who can be surprisingly creative) to obtain violent and pornographic content to be able to restrict them completely without having them under 24/7 surveillance.

I find it much more pedagogic to talk to the child and explain these things face to face than try to hide them behind lies and restrictions. Of course a 10 year old shouldn't play GTA in an ideal world, but if you explain why the stuff that happens in the game is bad at least he won't get confused when he plays the game after his friend had an older brother buy it for him.

Black_Knight_00

Well, statistically, only a very small percentage of parents does what you say (which would be the most reasonable thing to do). Many children/kids learn about sex either by schoolmates or watching porn and neither source has a minimal educational value.

About violence: you can't tell a child: 'hey, killing bystanders in GTA is fun, but in real life is bad'. Children don't make the same distinction we adults make between real life and fiction: everything they see is real to them. Plus they store in their brains a hell more informations than we do.

A friend of mine has a 4 years old nephew and I swear we pause gears of war any time he comes around the 360.

that i understand. the topic was about sex though, i have a personal difference of opinion, reversed to the rest of the country. if my son saw a naked body part or something i dont want them to give them the impression that it is shameful. he needs to know when it is appropriate, and hopefully i dont have to explain it in detail until he is older, but if he finds out early then i will react accordingly.

in terms of violence, i respectfully disagree. i was killing pixels when i was a wee lad in the early 80's and i knew full well the difference. i saw cartoon people killing each other. its a cartoon. i knew it then, kids are not as naive as you think. they merely need the right information to understand.

I answered in my previous post ^^^

I make one more edit and my computer will stab me to death.

that is a good point. i do understand it partially though. i am a young parent and we both work, and i spend time teaching my son but sometimes? im just so worn out. there is too much demand to constantly work in this country. if you look at the average businessperson more is expected of them now than ever. they are available at all times via cell phone. they can work at home. they are pretty much expected to put in overtime. its a product of society's tie of human worth to money.

the biggest thing i can do is constantly encourage questions. question everything i say.

that i understand. the topic was about sex though, i have a personal difference of opinion, reversed to the rest of the country. if my son saw a naked body part or something i dont want them to give them the impression that it is shameful. he needs to know when it is appropriate, and hopefully i dont have to explain it in detail until he is older, but if he finds out early then i will react accordingly.

in terms of violence, i respectfully disagree. i was killing pixels when i was a wee lad in the early 80's and i knew full well the difference. i saw cartoon people killing each other. its a cartoon. i knew it then, kids are not as naive as you think. they merely need the right information to understand.

OneWingedAngeI

We 100% agree on the 1st part: those who treat the human body like something inherently sinful should be reprogrammed. The problem is not if my kid sees a nude body, the problem lies in the context in which he will see it. What contructive info can a child possibly acquire from pornography?

On the 2nd part: you and I knew the difference because someone explained it to us. Otherwise our subconscious would have though it was real. Sadly, more and more kids today aren't as lucky as we were.

that is a good point. i do understand it partially though. i am a young parent and we both work, and i spend time teaching my son but sometimes? im just so worn out. there is too much demand to constantly work in this country. if you look at the average businessperson more is expected of them now than ever. they are available at all times via cell phone. they can work at home. they are pretty much expected to put in overtime. its a product of society's tie of human worth to money.

the biggest thing i can do is constantly encourage questions. question everything i say.

OneWingedAngeI

That's the truth behind it all. Behind all the moral decay we see today: parents can't spend enough time with their toddlers. They would, but they can't. Hell.

agreed. more to the original topic though isnt it easily solved? all they need to do is put a toggle in the game that works off the parental filter on the system that cuts out those parts of the game. i think its a great solution, everyone is happy, for the most part. i know it isnt foolproof by any means but it keeps the games uncensored and for many people it lets them play without content they object to. the only real problem i see is where do the devs draw the line on what is in or out?OneWingedAngeI

Makes sense. But how about those games that point all their marketing on sex?

Speaking of which I fear what the next DoAXXX will be. Or maybe not... ahem... :roll:

Back on topic, I see your point: devs would have to decide what to filter and what not, and some just can't be trusted.

[QUOTE="LoG-Sacrament"]no matter the rating, gaming is still considered a children's hobby.OneWingedAngeI

this is the unrealistic problem. the average gamer is in their late 20's.

actually the latest Game Informer mag did a survey, showing that gamer's 16-19 are the majority of the gaming pop. but it has 20-25 right behind that group.

[QUOTE="OneWingedAngeI"]agreed. more to the original topic though isnt it easily solved? all they need to do is put a toggle in the game that works off the parental filter on the system that cuts out those parts of the game. i think its a great solution, everyone is happy, for the most part. i know it isnt foolproof by any means but it keeps the games uncensored and for many people it lets them play without content they object to. the only real problem i see is where do the devs draw the line on what is in or out?Black_Knight_00

Makes sense. But how about those games that point all their marketing on sex?

Speaking of which I fear what the next DoAXXX will be. Or maybe not... ahem... :roll:

Back on topic, I see your point: devs would have to decide what to filter and what not, and some just can't be trusted.

Epic games is doing that with Gears 2, they are having the option to take out swearing and replacing blood with sparks for those parents who think their copy of gears is gonna be played by the youngins. there;s proof that there IS an effort to help censor stuff as an option instead of taking out the experience, to those appropriate for the content, completely.

On the 2nd part: you and I knew the difference because someone explained it to us. Otherwise our subconscious would have though it was real. Sadly, more and more kids today aren't as lucky as we were.

Black_Knight_00

I don't remember anyone explaining it to me (though someone probably did because they thought it was necessary). Come on, 8-bit Mario flattening walking mushroom creatures by jumping ontop of them... that seems completely normal. /sarcasm I really don't think my subconscious mind would have processed that as equivalent to real-world situations.

Some games these days might need parents to produce that explanation, but only if young kids are actually playing the kind of games that would make people worry.

[QUOTE="OneWingedAngeI"]

[QUOTE="LoG-Sacrament"]no matter the rating, gaming is still considered a children's hobby.KGB32

this is the unrealistic problem. the average gamer is in their late 20's.

actually the latest Game Informer mag did a survey, showing that gamer's 16-19 are the majority of the gaming pop. but it has 20-25 right behind that group.

id like to see how they did both surveys. there are so many things you can do to sway the results to one demographic or the other. if you include things java games old ladies play, then you are going to see the average age rise. but i could also see GI just polling their subscribers, and only getting a limited view of the gaming population. hell, maybe they started polling people at a chucky cheese or a retirement home. either way, im always skeptical of polls until i see the methods.

Lol yeah....Many gamerz are on their 20s...BUT....I still remember the first game that I finished was Pokemon Yellow when I was 4 (1998)...The surprising part is looking back to my file My pokedex was only 6 pokemons short xD....ahhh childhood memories...yes I'm now 14 -.-

[QUOTE="KGB32"][QUOTE="OneWingedAngeI"]

[QUOTE="LoG-Sacrament"]no matter the rating, gaming is still considered a children's hobby.OneWingedAngeI

this is the unrealistic problem. the average gamer is in their late 20's.

actually the latest Game Informer mag did a survey, showing that gamer's 16-19 are the majority of the gaming pop. but it has 20-25 right behind that group.

a survey of what? game informer readers? the Entertainment Software Association did a study that says the average age is 35, so even i was low. this was put out this july, and i trust them more than a gaming magazine poll.

"The average game player is 35 years old and has been playing games for13 years."

source:http://www.theesa.com/facts/index.asp

Summing up:

- Game Informer says 16-19

- ESA says 35

- Many age polls on Gamespot say 15

Result: ?!

I'm convinced we have a 40% 17 or less, a 40% 18-25 and a 20% of 'core gamer' 26+ people.