Phantasy Star: Fringes of Algo

Holy " wash your mouth out with soap" !!!!!!!!

Just look what has happened to a new Batman comic book, and the panic it has caused:

http://www.nypost.com/seven/09122008/ne ... 128742.htm


So, would you buy a copy of this comic book if you could get it, or not?

And, Do you think this was indeed a true marketing mistake, or do you think this was a very strategic move to increase sales, etc. for the comic book?

[face=Times New Roman]I’m not sure I’d be too concerned about children seeing that material. Regardless of the efforts made to censor films, comics, and television shows, kids will hear this type of language in daily life – if not in the playground, then around street corners or from careless adults.

Remember the scene in “To Kill A Mockingbird” where Scout gets in trouble with her Uncle Jack for using profanity? No doubt the language she used back then was fairly tame compared to the expletives bandied around now. Nevertheless, it illustrates the point: she must have picked up the language without being exposed to any of the modern-day culprits such as television and rock videos.

Inevitably, kids will repeat the language they hear. It’s just a shame that so many authority figures respond with punitive measures. Washing children’s mouths out with soap does not teach them the multiple reasons why they should avoid gratuitous cussing. Rather, it encourages them to carry on swearing like sailors behind their parents’ backs.

Besides, IMHO, censors and raters place far too much emphasis on protecting kids from language and sexual content, while adopting a relatively blasé approach towards depictions of violence.
[/face]

I doubt it was intentional. I mean, they definitely intended to print the curse words, but I think they really meant to black them out completely. Still, the error has made that book an instant collector's item and got people talking about a book that has (from what I've heard) been dropping in sales regularly since the first issue.

Thoul wrote:I doubt it was intentional. I mean, they definitely intended to print the curse words, but I think they really meant to black them out completely.

Yeah, that's what I heard, that they were supposed to be blacked out, or something like that. That seems kinda silly to print a comic book and black parts of it out, doesn't it. I don't know, but I'm just not buying the whole "it was an accident" thing. In my own opinion, I think it was done entirely to boost sales of the comic book - which it seems to have done.

Srijita wrote:I’m not sure I’d be too concerned about children seeing that material. Regardless of the efforts made to censor films, comics, and television shows, kids will hear this type of language in daily life – if not in the playground, then around street corners or from careless adults.

I understand your point of kids hearing this type of language, etc., in their everday lives, etc., however, I beg to disagree on not being too concerned over it. The fact that people aren't too concerned over it in the first place, and therefore continue to practice or condone it, is one reason why it is still out there in the first place. If people were more concerned about their language and actions in front of kids (and others for that matter), then there may not be half as much profanity or other related stuff going on everywhere, and perhaps many people would not do it, or atleast think twice or so before they did. JMHO.

Srijita wrote:It’s just a shame that so many authority figures respond with punitive measures. Washing children’s mouths out with soap does not teach them the multiple reasons why they should avoid gratuitous cussing. Rather, it encourages them to carry on swearing like sailors behind their parents’ backs.

Sometimes the situation may call for "punitive measures". A nice little pat on the back, telling them not to do that anymore, probably won't work worth a plug nickel in most situations. Washing children's mouths out with soap may not teach them the multiple reasons why they should avoid cussing, etc., as you stated, however, it may certainly teach them atleast ONE (or more) reason not to. I'm guessing nobody likes the taste of soap. I don't just mean children either, as what's good for one is good for all - any age, if they have a bad behaviour problem. If they want to keep carrying on behind their parent's backs, then that's what they will do. I tend to think that the memory of their mouths being washed out with soap might just dampen the want or need to use any foul word when they feel like it in the future. And as much as they may resent their parents, or other authority figure, at the time, perhaps later they may be grateful that someone cared enough to teach them and show them the error of their ways.

Srijita wrote: IMHO, censors and raters place far too much emphasis on protecting kids from language and sexual content, while adopting a relatively blasé approach towards depictions of violence.

I quite agree. I think they need to place much more emphasis on protecting kids of all ages from all of these things

[face=Times New Roman]

Silver_Surfer1 wrote: I beg to disagree on not being too concerned over it. The fact that people aren't too concerned over it in the first place, and therefore continue to practice or condone it, is one reason why it is still out there in the first place.

Swearing in general (as opposed to verbally abusing another individual) has no intrinsic interpersonal consequences; it does not violate the welfare of another person. Therefore, it is a matter of social convention rather than a moral issue. It is a bad habit, like biting one’s nails, but I don’t see that it is any worse than that.

In a world of malice, cruelty, unscrupulousness, and apathy, there surely are graver concerns than people swearing to express frustration.

Sometimes the situation may call for "punitive measures". A nice little pat on the back, telling them not to do that anymore, probably won't work worth a plug nickel in most situations.

I wasn’t recommending a pat on the back for cussing. What I am advocating is the use of reason, verbal discipline, and respectful setting of limits.

Washing children's mouths out with soap may not teach them the multiple reasons why they should avoid cussing, etc., as you stated, however, it may certainly teach them atleast ONE (or more) reason not to.

…that reason being fear of reprisals. So if there is no one around to pull them up for it, they can do just as they please.

Instead, how about explaining the following to children:

(1) There is a difference between swearing out of frustration and verbally abusing another individual.
(2) There is also a difference between gratuitous cussing and the occasional use of profanity when seriously provoked. On the rare occasions that President Eisenhower turned red and swore, people sat up and took notice, because he was generally courteous to a fault.
(3) Before using any word, it’s best that you understand its original meaning. If you do know what it means, you may well discover that it is nonsensical in the context you’re using it.
(4) The social setting makes a difference. Swearing in the locker room after losing a game may be socially acceptable; using the same language in front of your grandmother is inappropriate and liable to cause offense.
(5) The language you use projects a clear image to others. How do you wish to portray yourself?

I could go on. However, instead of talking to children, many authority figures reach first for the soap (or even hotsauce!). Perhaps it’s simpler for them to punish rather than take the time to explain.

I don't just mean children either, as what's good for one is good for all - any age, if they have a bad behaviour problem.

You’ll have to clarify your argument here.

Are you:
(A) Advocating soapy washings for the rest of us, not just kids? That puts a comical image in my mind.
(B) Suggesting the introduction of legislation and penalties for adults using bad language?
Or (C) Making a general case for behavioural modification through punishment?

And as much as they may resent their parents, or other authority figure, at the time, perhaps later they may be grateful that someone cared enough to teach them and show them the error of their ways.

They might be more grateful if someone cared enough to explain why they were in “error”. Reasoning, if employed from early childhood in an age-appropriate way, fosters development of an internal conscience. Punishment, on the other hand, promotes obedience out of fear of authority. Remove the authority, and the behaviour may return in full force. That’s one reason why looting may be commonplace after a battle or natural disaster; the authorities have better things to do than everyday policing, and some people take advantage of it -- because they’ve never developed a conscience.

I’d rather kids learnt logical and moral reasoning, so that they can eventually make the right choices when no one is around to guide them.

JMHO.

My opinion should be equally humble: I’m a cardiologist, not a child psychologist. In any case, people’s views on child rearing tend to be highly subjective. But it’s interesting that we’re on opposite sides of the table again. Variety is the spice of life. [/face]

Silver_Surfer1 wrote:That seems kinda silly to print a comic book and black parts of it out, doesn't it.

It is unusual. I've read that the writer wanted it done this way. I don't know why, but I imagine the publisher went along with it because he's a "big name" in the industry these days. This whole book seems to be a train wreck, though - people watch just to find out how bad it can get.

Swearing in general (as opposed to verbally abusing another individual) has no intrinsic interpersonal consequences; it does not violate the welfare of another person. Therefore, it is a matter of social convention rather than a moral issue. It is a bad habit, like biting one’s nails, but I don’t see that it is any worse than that.

I've seen scans of this book online that display the swearing used in it. It's used both in general and in the form of verbally attacking others. I just wanted to clear that up - it's not one or the other in this specific case, it's both.

I think it was ridiculous for the comic publishers to publish the profanities, and then put black ink over it. Even if the black ink was there, most kids could infer what those black boxes meant anyway. If they're going to censor kid's stuff, censor it. Don't imply profanity in the first place.

For censorship in general, I'm not sure whether swears should altogether be kept out of kid's things. Like Srijita mentioned, kids mainly learn swearing from people around them, especially from their parents. I remember someone I knew once had a roommate who had a two year old daughter. I would often hear that roommate tell her daughter to, "Shut the F--- up." Literally. But I also remember a "South Park" ban that my school had-- because my classmates actually started talking like the South Park characters. So if we don't ban swears in media, kids will learn profanity and if we do ban swears from the media--kids will swear anyway. It's a tough call.

Lemina wrote:I think it was ridiculous for the comic publishers to publish the profanities, and then put black ink over it. Even if the black ink was there, most kids could infer what those black boxes meant anyway. If they're going to censor kid's stuff, censor it. Don't imply profanity in the first place.

Not to defend them here, but the majority of comics aren't intended for kids these days. This particular series definitely isn't. Children are actually the smallest demographic when it comes to comic purchasers now. Most comics are aimed at teens or adults who were buying when they were children, but are now older and expect more "mature" books. Sadly, "mature" here usually means excessive violence and pointless nudity.

To give everyone a constant idea of the quality (or lack thereof) in this series, let me show you a semi-famous scene from issue #2. In this scene, the parents of Dick Grayson (the soon-to-be Robin) were just killed. Grayson is on the left, Batman on the right. This is the point where a lot of long time comic readers began considering the whole thing as a bad joke:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v213/ ... batman.jpg
In a later issue, Batman left Grayson alone in a cave and told him that if he got hungry, he should catch a rat.

[face=Times New Roman]

Thoul wrote:This is the point where a lot of long time comic readers began considering the whole thing as a bad joke:

After viewing that scene, I can’t believe anyone, child or adult, would pay to read this particular series. I’ve never picked up a comic book in my life, but I presume there must be better stuff out there than that.[/face]

Srijita wrote:[face=Times New Roman]
Swearing in general (as opposed to verbally abusing another individual) has no intrinsic interpersonal consequences; it does not violate the welfare of another person. Therefore, it is a matter of social convention rather than a moral issue.

I have to agree to disagree with you there on all points, especially the bit about violating the welfare of another person, and I along with many others, tend to think it is a moral issue as well.

Srijita wrote:It is a bad habit, like biting one’s nails, but I don’t see that it is any worse than that.

In a world of malice, cruelty, unscrupulousness, and apathy, there surely are graver concerns than people swearing to express frustration.

I agree, it is a bad habit, and as with all bad habits, they should not be done and can be stopped, if people so desire. It's a little sad that many people do not see it as anything other than or worse than just a bad habit alone though.

Yes, of course there are graver problems in the world than people swearing, and those should be addressed. However, the "malice, cruelty, unscrupulousness, apathy", etc., you spoke of are also tremendously impacted or influenced with and, even in sometimes perhaps due to, swearing and people's actions when doing so, and such circumstances at times. The decision not to swear or use profanity, etc., could have a radical impact or change on many situations.

Srijita wrote:
I wasn’t recommending a pat on the back for cussing. What I am advocating is the use of reason, verbal discipline, and respectful setting of limits.

Okay, what do you recommend when those options fail?

Srijita wrote:…that reason being fear of reprisals. So if there is no one around to pull them up for it, they can do just as they please.

Not fear, but the lesson or fact that someone cared enough to show them the error of their ways and the correct and proper way of acting and treating people with respect and honor, as they would probably wish to be treated themselves. And, they will learn that their actions were wrong and will not be accepted or tolerated by many, especially if they want to be a productive member of today's society.

Srijita wrote:However, instead of talking to children, many authority figures reach first for the soap (or even hotsauce!). Perhaps it’s simpler for them to punish rather than take the time to explain.

Maybe the authority figures tried talking and explaining first, but it did no good, so other methods were then needed.

Srijita wrote:

I don't just mean children either, as what's good for one is good for all - any age, if they have a bad behaviour problem.

You’ll have to clarify your argument here.

Why clarify, It sounds like a pretty clear statement to me.

Srijita wrote:I’d rather kids learnt logical and moral reasoning, so that they can eventually make the right choices when no one is around to guide them.

[b]Kids learning Logical and moral reasoning is all well and good, but there is still no guarantee they will make the right choices. Many times people who swear or use profanity may have learned and do know that it may be wrong, but they just don't care or they do it especially because it is wrong and they want to stand out from the crowd or some other nonsense, not caring how foolish it actually makes them look or sound, or whom they may hurt with their actions.

Srijita wrote:In any case, people’s views on child rearing tend to be highly subjective. But it’s interesting that we’re on opposite sides of the table again. Variety is the spice of life. [/face]

I quite agree.