Video games & TV - Desenstizing? (Page 5)

I guess that was where I was going with "what does it all mean". I can understand if there are "at risk" kids. No parental support. Violent home, anger issues. The kid immerses himself in violent reinforcements, video games, movies, music... kid acts out in violent ways... Then we put him under a microscope and obviously it was the games, movies, music. But there is a lot more to the picture and you are not denying that. So there is a whole host of things going wrong in that kids life... including media... because that kid with those problems could probably doing much constructive things with his time to help himself instead of sinking further down.

But as usual... there are a few bad cases, then the majority. Most kids don't have problems. If you ask the very broad question.... "are games/movies/shows desensitizing kids" and you say the answer is yes.... then what is the problem? Are we seeing more violent behavior, a breakdown in grades after playing games, a rebellion to authority, antisocial behavior. It's one thing to just say an answer, but then what do we do with it, what doe sit mean, and what actions need to be taken to solve what ever problems are popping up?

The answer isn't necessarily to just do away with those things. Because plenty of other kids don't have a problem. Then if we find fault with media... then what is the percentage of blame we assign it when we know full well there are other contributing factors and just not the media itself.

I really am asking sincere questions. If the answer is "yes" then where do we go from there?

This whole conversation suddenly reminded me of the mid/late 80's when heavy metal was the "in" thing to blame for kids behaviour.

Remember all the "back masking" propoganda that was the rage?  Hell, even my HS music teacher played stuff backwards to "prove" to us the subliminal messages that Queen, Ozzie, etc were putting in there music!  It's been 25 years since that and the world is still in once piece, thank goodness.

There will ALWAYS be something to point at and blame other than ourselves and poor parenting.

You know maybe if you stopped being defensive and actually read what has been said you might learn something.

It has been repeatedly stated by multiple people that there are many factors and no one thing makes kids "bad"

Whoa, where did that come from?  I'm not being defensive.  I was just remembering how everyone was up in arms about music.  What's wrong about that?  It was a completely independent statement...  I thought it was even something people in this thread could remember and chuckle at.  Trying to make it light...

So nice of you to be so accusing...  I appreciate that.

It came from your last snarky remark about how all the smart people blah blah blah and we are all going to die blah blah blah.  So I took it as another snarky remark and gave you an answer.  You have made it abundently clear that you don't think video games have any effect and that you have no interest in any of the science that says they do except to be derisive.

Sigh,

I never said they don't have ANY effect.  I said repeatedly, you can't point to them as a sole cause.  It's more about parenting than games/music/media.

I never discounted the science or even mentioned it OR said I wasn't interested in it.  I don't know enough TO comment on - if I get more informed then I can talk about it.

I TRY to keep this stuff from being personal and accusing people of "being" something or make assumptions of who they are what they are thinking outside what they say, or what interests them or not...  I try to avoid the "you are this" and "you did that". 

But apparently, this is a hot topic. 

In a passive agressive manner this is exactly what you have been doing.

Sorry then...

My fault.  In most of these threads, it starts as a request for opinion.  I gave it.  But then get beat down by the people that know the science to the point I give up or resort to being snarky in retaliation.  It's like bringing a knife to a gun fight.

BUT, at the same time, it's unfair to expect to me to just back down on my OPINION just becuase I'm getting beat down by people that know more or read some reports.  Give me a chance to research.  But getting steamrolled gets people defensive too.

It's like talking relifion/faith and belief with someone who knows the bible by heart.  They can beat you down with verse after verse - knife to a gun fight.

As soon as peopel started bringing up studies and reports, I should have just left because I'm not equiped to participate at that point.  But again, don't like being steamrolled.  If only the people that read reports and studies could talk about a subject, it would leave it to a pretty limited group.

As a side note, I never quoted YOU, or called YOU out, or accused YOU of anything directly.  Not sure I would do that to a friend in a public forum.  I guess that need reavaluation.

OK, well, here is another answer to the "what does it mean" - or as I might reframe it (correct me if I am going in a different direction) - "Does it matter?"

There is a legitimate debate going on about the use of drones in warfare. On one side, they keep our military personnel safe by keeping them at more of a distance. OTOH, it makes warfare even more like a videogame. The people you see from the drone look like the avatars on whatever game you play. And you feel no qualms about killing them, whether or not they are clearly combatants. I think his lack of combat experience and his various daddy issues are part of why George W. made such brash saber-rattling statements, while his father (who had combat experience in WWII) made much more measured responses, and deliberately stopped the first Gulf war from escalating into a chase to get Saddam.

As Robert E. Lee said, "It is well that war is so terrible lest we grow too fond of it".

I never expected you to back down from your opinion but to listen to the other opinions as well.  It has been pointed out by those who have been posting the research time and again that there are many factors that go into behaviors, that it is not an x causes y situation and yet you continually acted as though we had, that is where my problem lies.  Do not misrepresent my argument just so you can make a snarky remark about it.

Just because you did not quote me does not mean you were not making derisive comments and misrepresenting my "side" of the argument.  You do not get out of making snarky remarks by implying but not saying you.  And I don't know about you but I can have disagreements with my friends, including some pretty heated ones which I don't consider this to be, and still consider them my friend.

 And it seems to me GB and PM are haveing a pretty good discussion witout the drama or the snarky remarks so it is possible to have a discussion about the studies and what they mean in a rational fashion.

Yet you can clearly say the exact same thing about Air Force pilots that have no video game connection. Pilots rarely look into the eyes of those they kill. Nor do they tour the battle field to see the devastation. They too are isolated so to speak as the drone operators are. I will agree though that the example is interesting although I think it is not really applicable to the OP. Regardless of it being drones, manned planes, tanks, or the guy on the ground plunging a knife into the side of a some guys neck... war is death, and soldiers carrying out the leader of his country's orders to engage in war is not the same as a mal-adjusted teen seeing too much violence.

As far as Bush Jr., while not a fan of him or his war... that is a pretty gross misrepresentation of what actually happened. Bush Sr. only got the rest of the world to pitch in after promising them all he was not going after Saddam, but liberating Kuwait. I'm sure he most assuredly would have loved to take him out... but no support, then it's just the U.S. against Iraq, and the entire dynamic would have been vastly different than the World liberating Kuwait. Schwartzkopf had been in war and he was more than thirsty for Saddam's blood.

Accepted and I apologize for getting snarky with you Jim.  I do think you are a smart guy and I do value much of what you have to say.

Ya but I love them because that's how you got 99 lives!