blat blat blat

[deathboy]

This advert by Barnados (and accompanying article), about the demonisation of children leaves me conflicted.

On the one hand, I accept that the scum kids must be a minority and think it's a little rich to be lectured by the media. Who do we think is to blame for the demonisation of children? Could it be a lowest-common denominator media industry in the business of peddling fear? HOODIES! SUPER-PREDATORS! STABBINGS! DRUGS! Who was it who made adults afraid to discipline children for fear of being accused of abuse? Who enouraged little Timmy Councilhouse to idolise warped, imported ghetto icons of brutality and self-interest? And who now makes us believe the little scamps are a dire threat? Thanks.

On the other hand, I find myself regularly agreeing with the stereotype, being very wary of the little criminals-in-waiting and particularly enjoying their excellent taste in tinny RnB, as is now ubiquitously broadcast from every rat-fingered, pretend-gangsta-talking, bling-encrusted, mewling, spitting, Nike-clad walking abortion's stolen £500 Nokia Knifecrime 4000(tm).

And, on the gripping hand, I want to see that advert made into either a full-on chavpocalypse survival-horror movie OR a computer game, so that adults have something they can fantasise about while the locust-creatures tear the stereos from our cars in the flickering light of a warmly burning rottweiler.

Comments

[sarah-mum.livejournal.com]

When children really are being shot on the streets - by other children, there's no way they'll get that past the ASA for general use. Barnados it seems love to shock, anyone remember 'shooting up baby'?
Anyway, there's another factor in this, the fact that perfectly decent, normal non-parents¹ have been made to fear any contact with children, lest it be misconstrued as *grooming*.
So I can't chat to the neighbourhood kids on the corner when I go down to the shops, meaning that they think of me as 'that daft old goth from No35' and instead they see 'the enemy' and bar the shop doorway to illicit a confrontation.

"Stranger Danger" has a fuck of alot to answer for.



¹Of course, some people would find that term oxymoronic, but I'll have a fight with them later.

[deathboy.livejournal.com]

i do love corben, but i still retain my empathy with the CF lot and feel uncomfortable being grouped with parents in general.

we're a selfish, irrational lot whose behaviour is clearly skewed by our protective drives and frankly, shouldn't be trusted. pretty much your classic cause of social dysfunction: special interest groups that want the world THEIR way :/

(i'm not dead-panning).

[selectnone.livejournal.com]

As a father, you do get to add weight to your hysterical opinions by prefixing them with "AS A FATHER," - I reckon you could extend that to any conversation. "As a father, I believe it's your round", etc.

It probably doesn't trump "AS A MOTHER," though.

.

[(Anonymous)]

You just know that he's going to extend that to "as a father - get 'em out!" don't you? :0)

[cunabula.livejournal.com]

A survey of 2000 adults is hardly representative and checking comments from newspaper websites is just looking for retards.

Adding more sensationalism to the usual medja see-saw doesn't really help.

And as for those fucking phones [old man voice]I remember the day of walkmans when we aspired to the best sound quality we could get (playing metal tape and whatnot) with headphones!![/old man voice]

Can't talk to them, can't help and can't despise the minority of the little buggers who are a pain.

Whatever happened to aspirations and for that matter inspiration?

[deathboy.livejournal.com]

I'd like to see the questions. I bet they weren't leading or easily interpreted to give the perspective that Barnardo's wanted to portray or anything

[cunabula.livejournal.com]

Quite.

The bit about the examining newspaper website comments reminded me of Russell Brand tearing the Sun letters page to pieces at the Secret Policeman's Ball a few years back. Priceless.

[emarkienna.livejournal.com]

ISTR that 2000 is pretty representative, so long as the sample is random(?) The problems are how random the sample is, and how the questions are worded.

From http://www.barnardos.org.uk/news_and_events/media_centre/press_releases.htm?ref=42088 , I see it says "45% of people disagreed with the statement 'People refer to children as feral but I don’t think they behave this way.'" They then interpret that as "45% of public agree that people refer to children as feral because they behave this way".

Now, maybe I'm being pedantic, but surely one might disagree with the statement also because they disagree that people refer to children as feral? (And even if this is being pedantic, it's nonetheless possible that some people interpreted it that way.) It also doesn't allow for people who disagreed because they weren't sure what they thought, or they had mixed views, and generally didn't want to commit themselves to complete disagreement.

The BBC article also seems to be incorrect when it says "More than half the population believe UK children are "feral"" - the "more than half" is the statement "with more than half the population (54%) thinking that British children are beginning to behave like animals", but the "feral" statement only seems to be connected to that 45% statistic.

[emarkienna.livejournal.com]

43% said something had to be done to protect adults

OMG Please Won't Somebody Think Of The Adults! Something Must Be Done!

I find it curious that on the one hand, children are viewed as being most precious, and all sorts of things may be justified in the name of protecting children, along with the attitudes that sarah_mum describes about demonising "strangers" who might come into contact with children - yet on the other hand, attitudes that children are violent criminals, and we need to beat small children, bring back corporal punishment of children and so on, seem to be common too.

I'd be interested to see the survey itself to know what the actual questions were. I can't help thinking if some people weren't being serious - I mean, if you've got questions like "Do you think children behave like animals", I can imagine some people being tempted to answer Yes even if it's not something they would generally think...

[oholiab.livejournal.com]

I think you can put it down to the catch-all "most people are shit" because that encompasses demonic children as well... Because let's not forget their chav scum parents who seem so adament that they should reproduce.

[hirez.livejournal.com]

Lamping for children? I laughed.

It's what the Speak You're Brains mob want, after all. The ability to be scarier than gyppo burglars, yout' in hoodies, foreigners, bogus asylum seekers, merchant bankers, the BBC, homosexuals, footy fans, gothics, emos, drug-crazed ravers, Max Moseley, people who have non-missionary sex, Channel-4, Russell Brand, tourists, tradespersons, staff who won't speak English...

... Better idea: open season on the Tabloids and allied trades. Bring me the head of Paul Dacre and a handful of paps.

[danblood.livejournal.com]

but you you idolise warped, imported ghetto icons of brutality and self-interest?