Paw Patrol and Daniel Tiger are safe and inoffensive and inclusive and diverse and socially correct. Its suits some parents, I guess?
That’s why my 4 year old watches Bugs Bunny from the 40s-70s. People and shit blowing up. Guns and bombs and violence and LAUGHTER. Bugs saying, “what the heck!” And it’s ok.
yes, some kids are taught not to say “what the heck”, probably the same ones taught not to say “hate”? It’s NOT ok you hate beets, damn it. Well, you can hate them but don’t use THAT word.
I saw a couple of “Bluey” episodes yesterday (the ones Disney temporarily banned for discussing farts). I was impressed. Maybe because it’s Australian it does not have the same modern American values being taught to kids.
Bugs and Kermit are essentially 'adults' whereas newer kids characters are themselves kind of infantalized, obviously not children, but removed from all hints of potential conflict or ascerbic nature.
I really do feel there's something very creepy and ultimately very obvious happening right in front of us, that we just won't see until retrospect becuase it wasn't a purposeful characterization.
I have some dealings with Spin Master (aka Paw Patrol) and it's 100% 'just business'. It's just a product like anything else: eyeballs, distribution, attention, view count etc..
> Bugs and Kermit are essentially 'adults' whereas newer kids characters are themselves kind of infantalized, obviously not children, but removed from all hints of potential conflict or ascerbic nature.
Quite frequently, they are explicitly children (e.g., PJ Masks, where, AFAIK, the existence of adults is implied but never shown, Ada Twist, Scientist, where the focal characters are children, with adults in supporting roles, etc.)
But, no, generally there is plenty of conflict, and often more realistic conflict than in older kids programming. Murderous intent and lethal violence (both serious and played for laughs) are less common than in children’s programs when I waa growing up, but... I don't see thr problem with that. .
> I have some dealings with Spin Master (aka Paw Patrol) and it's 100% 'just business'. It's just a product like anything else: eyeballs, distribution, attention, view count etc..
As if that has ever not been the case with most kids programming (with the biggest counterexamples being some of the early leaders in inoffensive, conflict-minimizsd TV, like pre-HBO Sesame Street.)
> I really do feel there's something very creepy and ultimately very obvious happening right in front of us, that we just won't see until retrospect becuase it wasn't a purposeful characterization.
That seems, historically, to be a very common reaction people have to situations that don’t fit the subconscious expectations of their formative years.
Phineas and Ferb is a very well written children's show on Disney, that is somehow able to construct amusing characters with some substance, an A & a B plot in every episode, clever writing and on the whole completely inoffensive, “family friendly” and just generally nice.
My children (25, 22 and 17) have long outgrown it, but when they are all home together for the holidays, will sometimes put it on.
Paw Patrol and Daniel Tiger are safe and inoffensive and inclusive and diverse and socially correct. Its suits some parents, I guess?
That’s why my 4 year old watches Bugs Bunny from the 40s-70s. People and shit blowing up. Guns and bombs and violence and LAUGHTER. Bugs saying, “what the heck!” And it’s ok.
yes, some kids are taught not to say “what the heck”, probably the same ones taught not to say “hate”? It’s NOT ok you hate beets, damn it. Well, you can hate them but don’t use THAT word.
I saw a couple of “Bluey” episodes yesterday (the ones Disney temporarily banned for discussing farts). I was impressed. Maybe because it’s Australian it does not have the same modern American values being taught to kids.