[RJ1]

Yeah, in the end, the Ed's are punished one way or another. This should teach a listen to kids.

[H.M. Murdock]

Parents: Buy some Three Stooges and Little Rascal DVDs/videos. Get them into old-school stuff. When they're older, then you can let them watch other stuff. But while they're young, get 'em hooked on wholesome fun.

I agree that Ed, Edd 'n' Eddy is absolutely hilarious. Yu-Gi-Oh!, while a little dorky, is a fun show, and the new Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles is mind-blowing for an American-animated show. But I'm 16. Everyone else who has approved of the Ed-boys and of Yu-Gi-Oh! is older. We understand the themes, and we comprehend that what you see on TV doesn't always level out to what you should do as a person. Little children do not.

And so, I say this; get them hooked on wholesome stuff when they're young. About the only modern cartoon I would allow my children to watch at such a young age in this day and age is Teen Titans, and maybe Trigun.

[Jeffrey]

We understand the themes, and we comprehend that what you see on TV doesn't always level out to what you should do as a person. Little children do not.

Hm, I disagree a bit here. I consider myself fairly apt for judging the quality of cartoons. I'm a huge cartoon fan, and my biggest beef with most Cartoon Network Cartoons is that I feel they're aimed more at college kids than regular kids. I think "Code Name: Kid's Next Door" is a show I would never allow my kids to watch as the whole point is glorification of kids and villification of authority figures. I think the same for "Cow and Chicken." "Dexter's Lab" I think has always been quality for kids. I think "Ed, Edd, and Eddy" likewise is decent entertainment. Maybe not for kids under eight years old, but we haven't clarified ages.

How old are the kids of all parents here?

Additionally, I was a kid once with opinions. When I was seven years old I hated most of the cereal commercials at the time because I remember them all depicting parents and adults as oafs. I've never been one to absorb material without discretion. Much of that was the parenting I received.

A just as important thing I think is limiting the amount of consumption. My mother and father only let my brother and I watch a couple hours of tv a day, and one hour had to be "3-2-1 Contact" (or later "Square One") and "Where in the World is Carmen Sandiego." Then we'd watch Batman. When we were younger, we'd watch the hour of sixties Batman reruns that FX had in the early afternoons, then watch PBS before dinner. As we got older, they would let us watch MST3k or the Simpsons. First time I saw Simpsons was with my parents, on a vacation, where they specifically said "We're going to watch this as a family and see what it's like." I'm sure they had seen it on their own before, but wanted to involve us in evaluating media. Additionally, my parents required that I read 500 pages a week. If I didn't, I wasn't allowed to play Super Nintendo on the weekends. So I grew up reading and grew to love reading. They also bought me a bike and had me ride it daily. I grew to love biking.

I think Teen Titans is a good show for kids over the age of eight or nine. I love the Lilo and Stitch cartoon show and think it's appropiate for most kids. Justice League is a bit too heavy for kids under ten, I think. But a lot of it depends on your specific kid and how you guage his or her maturity.

[Role Modlin]

Geoffry is eight and Christopher is three and there a lot of things that I will not let them watch due to their ages. But, there are other things that we sit down and watch together. There isn't a show on television that Geoffry watches which hasn't already been seen by me first. I think that's the only way a parent can guage things. I have to be willing to sit there and watch it with them.

[loriborealis]

So, to bring up a highly controversial one, what about Harry Potter? I as an adult love Harry Potter, but it can even scare me sometimes. I don't know if I'd let a child watch it because, while it fights against evil forces, it glorifies the "good" witches. Witchcraft is portrayed as "good" when its helping people and bad when its hurting people. What kind of message does that give to kids?

(and if I were a kid, I imagine i would TOTALLY want to go to Hogwarts. I want to go to Hogwarts now!)

[slap_j]

Originally Posted by loriborealis

So, to bring up a highly controversial one, what about Harry Potter? I as an adult love Harry Potter, but it can even scare me sometimes. I don't know if I'd let a child watch it because, while it fights against evil forces, it glorifies the "good" witches. Witchcraft is portrayed as "good" when its helping people and bad when its hurting people. What kind of message does that give to kids?

(and if I were a kid, I imagine i would TOTALLY want to go to Hogwarts. I want to go to Hogwarts now!)

LOTR glorifies good wizards too. Like Gandalf. It was originally considered a children's book IIRC.

[Jeffrey]

Originally Posted by slap_j

LOTR glorifies good wizards too. Like Gandalf. It was originally considered a children's book IIRC.

The Hobbit was, and Tolkien devised Middle-earth while entertaining his offspring. But the full triology was not intended to be a children's book.

Additionally, if one reads the annotations and other books in the Middle-Earth "canon," it is quite clear that Gandalf and his ilk were actually angelic, not Potter-esque "good wizards."

[Emi-chan]

Originally Posted by H.M. Murdock

Parents: Buy some Three Stooges and Little Rascal DVDs/videos. .

Won't Three Stooges make them want to poke each other in the eye and hit each other on the head and such? Haha, I guess not, but I remember my dad watching Three Stooges when I was younger, and I hated those shows so much (and still do, heh). But maybe guys like it. Marx Brothers are funnier, I think.

When I was younger, I watched Sesame Street and Nick at Nite/TV Land kind of things (because you know, Gilligan's Island contains no slapstick and is realistic ). And old-school cartoons. And Saved by the Bell, haha, but that's not always quite young-kid appropriate.

I haven't seen much Yu-Gi-Oh! but what I saw seemed OK to me. I mean, its only violence is between imaginary monster things, and I think most of the good guy characters are pretty honorable and all that. But I guess it does contain some magic-y elements, in a way. And it could make you have to spend tons of money on those silly cards, haha.

[Emi-chan]

Oh, yeah, I forgot, on the subject of cartoons:

I really didn't like Cartoon Network shows (and still don't except for occasionally the anime they play, which isn't for young kids), but I liked Hey Arnold a lot. That might have some slight anarchist themes, haha, but it really is such a good cartoon, I still watch it if it's on now (I'm 17). Disney Channel stuff is good, too, with a few exceptions that are witch oriented/really dumb.

[Chris]

Back on Harry Potter, I'd probably make my kids, when they come around, wait until they were at least eight to ten to watch Harry Potter. Same for LOTR probably.

I personally wish they still had cartoons like animaniacs and tiny-toons going regularly. That's something we definitely could watch together. I'm definitely going to look for some of the older movies and stuff (Little Rascals, Abbot & Costello, Marx Brothers, Three Stooges, etc.) for them to watch as well. I was raised on that stuff and Sci-fi (mainly Star Wars and Star Trek). But even Sci-fi I'd wait till they were a little older. six - eight at the earliest and only the "more appropriate" stuff then too.

As for games, (video games I take it) that one is fairly easy, nothing rated T (teen) or M (mature) until that point in life. While they're still kids it'll only be E (everyone) and Ec (early childhood) until they're teenagers and even then I'm gonna have to look it over first.

AS for the time spent on each that's an entirely different matter.

[Jeffrey]

Originally Posted by Chris

I personally wish they still had cartoons like animaniacs and tiny-toons going regularly. That's something we definitely could watch together.

Animaniacs I think is inappropiate for developing kids. The protagonists basically torment people for no reason, and at times make crude-leaning jokes.

[m1at1]

i remember some of the pokemon cards had curses on the bottom in small print like "anyone who reads this card will be cursed for 1000 years" and so on

[Chris]

Originally Posted by Starboard Wake

Animaniacs I think is inappropiate for developing kids. The protagonists basically torment people for no reason, and at times make crude-leaning jokes.

Animaniacs was essentially a different type of Looney Tunes. (which by the way I also will allow my kids to watch) The way the warners tormented people was in no way that a kid could mimic. I don't know of any kids who could grasp Yakko's pure, dry wit. Wakko and his wacky sack and eating everything. And Dot's main thing was she was cute. I fail to see how that one was dangerous. I personally see no problem with it. It was just a silly show, meant to entertain kids.

Originally Posted by m1at1

i remember some of the pokemon cards had curses on the bottom in small print like "anyone who reads this card will be cursed for 1000 years" and so on

what are you talking about? Have you actually even seen this or did you hear it from someone else. I own the better part of 1000 different official pokemon cards and I've never seen anything like that. at the bottom of the cards it tells you who did the artwork and the copyright info for Nintendo and Gamefreak.

[Jeffrey]

Originally Posted by Chris

Animaniacs was essentially a different type of Looney Tunes. (which by the way I also will allow my kids to watch) The way the warners tormented people was in no way that a kid could mimic. I don't know of any kids who could grasp Yakko's pure, dry wit. Wakko and his wacky sack and eating everything. And Dot's main thing was she was cute. I fail to see how that one was dangerous. I personally see no problem with it. It was just a silly show, meant to entertain kids.

"Hello Nurse" and some of the comments they made were dirtier than anything on Looney Tunes.

Additionally, Bugs and Daffy and their ilk were usually the ones being tormented (by the Chicken Hawk, Yosemite Sam, Marvin the Martian, etc.) and thus reacted to it. The Animaniacs were dropped into situations with thinly-veiled parodies of celebrities in which they did unwarranted harassment. Same reason I find Woody Woodpecker a poor cartoon.

[Chris]

I guess we're just going to disagree like mad on this one. I personally loved the show. And things like hello nurse (which I didn't even fully get the first time I watched it. I thought they were just enthusiastically greeting the Nurse who by the way was officially known as hello nurse) is why I want to watch it together with my kids. So I can explain to them the things in it which they shouldn't be imitating which there is any of that in almost anything out there.