From: tony@ais.org (Tony Poole)
Subject: Re: Tipper Gore for Vice Lady! (Was: Clinton's VP list gets shorter
Organization: UMCC
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1992 00:34:56 GMT

adamsr@netcom.com (Rick Adams) writes:

>In article <tony.711569813@ais.org> tony@ais.org (Tony Poole) writes:
>>
>>Then maybe you otta check it out for yourself?  Hmmm.... that would mean
>>getting involved with your child, now wouldn't it?  Seems some people think
>>that's a sin or something.
>>
>>Too many parents worry about how their children will percieve lyrics after
>>the fact.  Rather than supporting a record labeling movement, maybe some
>>parents should spend that time evaluating their parenting abilities.
>>
>	There are two problems with this approach: It assumes that _all_
>parents will become so involved (a patent absurdity in our culture,
>unfortunately); and it assumes that music listened to by one child will not
>affect anyone else.

Well, I'm not sure what you mean by the last statement, so I'll let it go
without comment.  As far as assuming "that _all_ parents will become so
involved".....why should my child be penalized for poor parenting of another
child?  This to me is like banning driving because other people have
accidents even though I have a perfect driving record.  That's not a perfect
analogy, but it gets my point across.  


>	Following this thread is particularly interesting since it is so
>apparent that virtually no one who is participating in it has read Tipper
>Gore's book on the subject! Having done so, I tend to question my former
>opposition to her stand, and I suspect others here would do the same.

My comments have nothing to do with Tipper's view's or her book.  My
statements are directed toward those that want to stretch this censorship
bit to the extremes - people like the parents that sued Judas Priest because
they were piss poor parents, resulting in their son committing suicide.
Don't insult me by saying I can't have a view on the subject 'cause I
haven't read a book.


>	While it is certainly inappropriate to censor _any_ artform,
>regardless of content - it is equally inappropriate to make all materials
>available to children without at least providing the parents with specifics
>as to the content of those materials. One thing which has been overlooked
>here is the _nature_ of the materials Tipper Gore is citing in her stand -
>nearly all of which are Heavy Metal albums which emphasize such themes as
>brutality, sexual abuse and objectification of women, suicide, rape and
>violence. To argue that such materials are suitable for children to access
>without limit is to argue that six year olds should watch the Texas Chainsaw
>Massacre for entertainment!

I hope you are saying Heavy Metal albums that *contain* themes of
brutality, sexual abuse, etc - not that *all* Heavy Metal fall into this
category.

The other problem here is that while I might agree with you that Tipper says
should be labeled might indeed be justified - she's *not* the one that would
solely decide what does.  In the beginning this might be accomplished
appropriately, but after a while, it would deteriorate into a political
battle, with totally inappropriate material being labeled inacurately.  This
happens with movie ratings now, and would be ten times worse in music.




>	Given the extremes to which modern music _is_ going (i.e., music
>videos which glorify the whipping/rape/killing of women, etc.), little doubt
>remains that _something_ will be done to limit access by children in the

Oh bullshit.  Music has always contained objectionable material - at least
to some people.  Modern or otherwise, someone will be there to object.

>near future. Individuals such as Tipper Gore (who, for those who havent read
>her book does NOT come off as a fundamentalist, but as precisely what she is
>a  _clinical_psychologist_ [and member of the board of the National
>Institute of Mental Health] interested in the _emotional_ effects of the
>material on children) oppose censorship and are looking for solutions which
>will prevent it from occuring. If none of those solutions is implemented,
>however, individuals such as Donald Wildmon and his fundamentalist American
>Family Association are bound to ultimately have their way and that
>censorship WILL become reality.

Yes, but any in between step is bound to be a stepping stone for Wildmon and
the AFA.  You start the ball rolling.....


>	I don't support _all_ of Tipper Gore's arguments - my objections to
>modern lyrics have to do with the violence and the treatment of women, not
>to the sexual content - but I _do_ feel that her thoughts merit a more

So it would be OK for kids to listen to sexual content in your view?

>>Music is too often used as a scapegoat for poor parenting.
>>
>	Poor parenting is too often used as a justification for unlimited
>license to push garbage to children. Try explaining to a child - no matter
>HOW well raised - why it's okay to act out a rape or brutalization of a
>woman on a stage and have the audience cheer, yet at the same time s/he must

Nah.  Music is too often used as a scapegoat.  It doesn't work the other way
around.  Nobody's "pushing" the music at them.  Nobody pushed it at me.

I wouldn't compare a stage show to musical lyrics.

While I respect your views, I just seriously believe that any type of label
on music will just be an interim step to more harsh implementations of
censorship.  If government can stay *completely* out of it, I'd feel better
about it, but I doubt that'd happen.  Maybe I'm cynical, but...

-- 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tony Poole                       tony@umcc.ais.org * tony@irie.ais.org 
Traverse City, MI USA          tony@cherry1.trv.mi.us * tony@cherry1.UUCP
From: Tom.Cavender@iphase.UUCP (Tom Cavender)
Sender: FredGate@iphase.UUCP