Re: J.K. Rowling outs Hogwarts character

[Guest guest]

meeks wrote: " ... <snip> ... Unless I've misunderstood, you've chosen not to make your son aware of gay relationships because you fear that it would lead into discussion of sexual themes that are inappropriate for his age and would be likely to cause him undue distress ... <snip> ..."

Fear is not the correct term, meeks. There are many subjects that a young child need not know about until they are mature enough to handle the implications and realities attached to individual subjects.

This is why television programs during primetime sometimes carry the warning, "Subject material may not be appropriate for all ages." Additional information is provided when this announcement is made regarding violence, sexual situations, coarse language and mature themes.

In Canada, the content ratings systems provides the following information to help parents and guardians make appropriate viewing choices for children in their care:

C: Programming suitable for children under the age of 8 years. No profanity or sexual content of any level allowed. Minimal comedic violence. Similar to TV-Y in the US.

C8: Suitable for children ages 8 and over. Low intensity violence and fantasy horror allowed. No foul language but occasional "socially offensive and discriminatory" language allowed if in the context of the story. Little or no sex or nudity. Similar to TV-Y7 in the US.

G: General. Similar to the Canadian/American movie rating of the same name; programming suitable for the entire family with minimal violence, and no profanity or sexual content. Similar to TV-G in the US.

PG: Parental guidance. Again, similar to the movie rating of the same name. Moderate use of violence and mild profanity allowed, as is brief nudity and sexual references if important to a storyline. Similar to TV-PG in the US.

14+: Programming intended for children ages 14 and over. May contain intense scenes of violence, strong profanity, and depictions of sexual activity within the context of a story. Similar to TV-14 in the US.

18+: Programming intended for viewers ages 18 and over. May contain strong violence, language, and sexual activity. Similar to TV-MA and NR-Adult in the US.

G (General) appropriate for all ages with little or no violence and little to no sexual content.

In Quebec, the content ratings system is a little different but still used. Their ratings are as follows:

8+ appropriate for children 8 and up which may contain little violence, some foul language and/or little to no sexual content.

13+ appropriate for children 13 and up with moderate violence, language, and some sexual situations. Persons under 13 should be accompanied by an adult. 16+ appropriate for children 16 and up with strong violence, strong language, and strong sexual content.

18+ only to be viewed by adults and contains extreme violence and graphic sexual content/pornography

As you can see, the red bolded is appropriate programming for children the same age as those who were part of the 1,600 children who attended the event where J.K. Rowling announce that Dumbledore was homosexual. Out of respect for those children and out of respect for their guardians and parents and out of respect for the rule of thumb provided by the content ratings system, J.K. Rowling should not have divulged this information to these 10 and 11 year olds.

There are murderers in this world. I do not believe that just because there are murderers in this world, that I should allow my child to watch slasher movies or "made for TV" movies about serial killers. My son doesn't need to know about Jack the Ripper or Dahmer at this point in his life.

There are pedophiles in this world. I do not beleive that just because there are pedophiles in this world, that I should allow my child to watch a "made for TV" movie about recently arrested pedophile Neil.

It's not FEAR that wants me to keep certain themes out of my child's life at the moment; it is appropriate parenting that keeps certain themes out of my child's life. I do not lie to him; he gets appropriate answers to his questions. He is not placed at risk; I protect him.

Children are born innocent and they should remain innocent for a number of years before they have to see the world the way the world truly is. All adults should want this for the children of this world.

Raven

[Guest guest]

" People wonder why kids are having so much sex and being so violent.

The answer is simple: we don't let them BE kids. Our cultures,

primarily an extreme libertine handful, to force sex on the kids at

ever younger ages. I've seen interviews with " sex educators " from

schools that are opposed to ANY age of consent. These people are a

large part of the problem. "

I could not have said this better myself . Your opinion

coincides with my own. Thank you for posting it.

Tom

Administrator

[Guest guest]

" People wonder why kids are having so much sex and being so violent.

The answer is simple: we don't let them BE kids. Our cultures,

primarily an extreme libertine handful, to force sex on the kids at

ever younger ages. I've seen interviews with " sex educators " from

schools that are opposed to ANY age of consent. These people are a

large part of the problem. "

I could not have said this better myself . Your opinion

coincides with my own. Thank you for posting it.

Tom

Administrator

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 10/26/2007 2:58:25 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, no_reply writes:

I could not have said this better myself . Your opinion coincides with my own. Thank you for posting it. TomAdministrator

Thanks. A few typos in there, but I was in a hurry to answer before running some errands. But that is basically what we have going on. These sexual libertines control the entertainment industry, the teen magazines and so on. They are pushing the ages younger and younger. Now it looks like the so-called educators have bought into it too. I'll post an article shortly, if I can find it again.

See what's new at AOL.com and Make AOL Your Homepage.

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 10/26/2007 2:58:25 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, no_reply writes:

I could not have said this better myself . Your opinion coincides with my own. Thank you for posting it. TomAdministrator

Thanks. A few typos in there, but I was in a hurry to answer before running some errands. But that is basically what we have going on. These sexual libertines control the entertainment industry, the teen magazines and so on. They are pushing the ages younger and younger. Now it looks like the so-called educators have bought into it too. I'll post an article shortly, if I can find it again.

See what's new at AOL.com and Make AOL Your Homepage.

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 10/26/2007 7:25:57 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, meeks@... writes:

Indeed. I'd be interested to know if they'd feel the same way about letting a young son take lessons alone with a woman. What cultural assumptions are at work here?Meeks

Good point. I find it interesting that the female teachers that have had sex with male students got light sentences whereas male teachers who had sex with female students got much heavier sentences.

See what's new at AOL.com and Make AOL Your Homepage.

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 10/26/2007 7:25:57 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, meeks@... writes:

Indeed. I'd be interested to know if they'd feel the same way about letting a young son take lessons alone with a woman. What cultural assumptions are at work here?Meeks

Good point. I find it interesting that the female teachers that have had sex with male students got light sentences whereas male teachers who had sex with female students got much heavier sentences.

See what's new at AOL.com and Make AOL Your Homepage.

[Guest guest]

> Having trained to be a teacher, I can tell you that children on the

> elementary school level feel very uncomfortable when they see or hear

> of something that is of a homosexal nature and express this in their

> own terms by saying that it feels " unnatural " , " unusual " and

> even " scary " to them.

That's understandable, but I have to wonder how much of their reaction stems

from the

assumptions they have been given, and the fact that to most of them it is

something

completely unfamiliar that conflicts with those assumptions.

>

> Additionally, when they see things like gay pride parades on TV where

> men are dancing around in skimpy clothing and kissing each other, or

> where transexuals with breasts and mustaches are running feathers over

> their shoulder and acting silly, horror and shock are the emotions

> children most express.

>

> I believe it is for this reason that Raven intuitively would want to

> prevent her child's exposure to this sort of thing.

>

And I completely agree with her. I don't think that's the sort of behaviour

children should

be watching. That said, I'd be more concerned about a child seeing a skimpily

clad girl

making out with her boyfriend than a gay boy discreetly holding hands with his.

I guess

what I'm saying is that I'd be more worried about the 'sexuality' than the

'homo.'

Meeks

[Guest guest]

> Having trained to be a teacher, I can tell you that children on the

> elementary school level feel very uncomfortable when they see or hear

> of something that is of a homosexal nature and express this in their

> own terms by saying that it feels " unnatural " , " unusual " and

> even " scary " to them.

That's understandable, but I have to wonder how much of their reaction stems

from the

assumptions they have been given, and the fact that to most of them it is

something

completely unfamiliar that conflicts with those assumptions.

>

> Additionally, when they see things like gay pride parades on TV where

> men are dancing around in skimpy clothing and kissing each other, or

> where transexuals with breasts and mustaches are running feathers over

> their shoulder and acting silly, horror and shock are the emotions

> children most express.

>

> I believe it is for this reason that Raven intuitively would want to

> prevent her child's exposure to this sort of thing.

>

And I completely agree with her. I don't think that's the sort of behaviour

children should

be watching. That said, I'd be more concerned about a child seeing a skimpily

clad girl

making out with her boyfriend than a gay boy discreetly holding hands with his.

I guess

what I'm saying is that I'd be more worried about the 'sexuality' than the

'homo.'

Meeks

[Guest guest]

>

> There is another way to look at this too. Many of these people applauded.

> However, I would like to ask the following.

>

> If your son were away at a boarding school, would you let him take private

> lessons, with no outside supervision, from a man?

>

> If yes, then:

>

> Would you let your daughter take lessons alone with a man?

>

> I think their reaction would be very telling.

>

Indeed. I'd be interested to know if they'd feel the same way about letting a

young son take

lessons alone with a woman. What cultural assumptions are at work here?

Meeks

[Guest guest]

>

> There is another way to look at this too. Many of these people applauded.

> However, I would like to ask the following.

>

> If your son were away at a boarding school, would you let him take private

> lessons, with no outside supervision, from a man?

>

> If yes, then:

>

> Would you let your daughter take lessons alone with a man?

>

> I think their reaction would be very telling.

>

Indeed. I'd be interested to know if they'd feel the same way about letting a

young son take

lessons alone with a woman. What cultural assumptions are at work here?

Meeks