[ July 13, 2002, 19:00: Message edited by: Ed BWC ]
Posted by Mucus (Member # 24) on :
Whats so sick about teaching what has to be taught?
Posted by Ed BWC (Member # 818) on :
Well, its on Sesame Street...
Posted by DeadCujo (Member # 13) on :
I don't think introducing a monster that is HIV positive teaches much. If anything, kids with HIV will think they themselves are monsters. :-\
Posted by Snay (Member # 411) on :
Just as any kids who eat cookies and watch Sesame Street must think that they are monsters. After all, Cookie Monster is a monster, and he eats cookies. Posted by DeadCujo (Member # 13) on :
Kids generally ARE monsters. Posted by Ed BWC (Member # 818) on :
That's the truth.
Posted by Thoughtchopper (Member # 480) on :
I already have a joke about this, but it is politically incorrect, and since I am above such things, I shall not share it here.
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
This thread is why the rolling eyes smiley was invented, I think, by some...clever? person.
So I use it with extreme prejudice!
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
So, if the character is five years old, how did she get HIV? Was she born w/ it? Do children who are born HIV-positive usually live to age five? If not, how are they going to explain it? And, after a couple of years, will the character catch a cold and die?
Posted by Spike (Member # 322) on :
quote:If not, how are they going to explain it?
Maybe a transfusion with contaminated blood?
Posted by Snay (Member # 411) on :
And it strikes me that if muppets don't age ... why would they die?!
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
Well, it would be a pretty poor lesson if it didn't. All the little kids would think "Oh, hey, it's not so bad living w/ AIDS. It's not like it'll kill you, or anything.".
Posted by The_Tom (Member # 38) on :
I'd expect a little less ignorance from Tim, of all people.
South Africa. Five year-olds.
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
I posted the argument-slaying small green face with oversized moving eyes! How thus can a thread continue in the wake of the argument-slaying small green face with oversized moving eyes? It is to wonder.
Posted by Snay (Member # 411) on :
Green face? Looks yellow to me.
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
Its bastard child Big Grin confused me!
Posted by The_Tom (Member # 38) on :
How about some consensus-building? I say greenish-yellow.
In further "Look! Ma! Neandertals!" News:
quote: HIV-Positive TV Muppet Worries U.S. Lawmakers
LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - Republican lawmakers are worried about plans to introduce an HIV-positive Muppet to the "Sesame Street" gang, Hollywood trade paper Daily Variety reported in its Monday edition.
A day after show executives announced they would develop the as-yet-unnamed character for audiences in AIDS-ravaged South Africa, five members of the House committee on energy and commerce said the Muppet would be unwelcome on American TV.
In a letter sent Friday to the president of the government-funded Public Broadcasting System, which airs "Sesame Street," the lawmakers noted the average age of U.S. viewers of "Sesame Street" in the U.S. is 2- to 4-years old.
"As such, while it is important to teach children in an age-appropriate manner about compassion for those who contract certain diseases, we would like to inquire as to whether there is other PBS programming, aimed at an older age group, which may be more suitable for such sensitive messages," Daily Variety reported the letter as saying.
The letter to PBS president Pat Mitchell was sent by committee chairman W.J. "Billy" Tauzin, a Louisiana Republican; as well as by Joe Barton of Texas; Richard Burr of North Carolina, Charles "Chip" Pickering of Mississippi, Cliff Stearns of Florida and Fred Upton of Michigan, the paper said.
"We look forward to working with you to ensure that only age and culturally appropriate programs air on PBS, which is a mainstay that millions of parents have come to rely upon over the past 35 years," the letter also read.
Joel Schneider, vice president and senior adviser to the Sesame Street Workshop, announced the new female Muppet at the 14th International AIDS conference in Barcelona.
It is scheduled for a Sept. 30 bow in South Africa, where one in nine people have the virus that can lead to AIDS. The local version of the show is called "Takalani Sesame." Schneider told Reuters last week that there would be no explicit mention of sex.
Daily Variety said Tauzin's letter gave Mitchell until Friday to answer such questions as the amount of money PBS dedicates to "Sesame Street," how much is being earmarked for the new Muppet, whether she will be introduced to the United States and whether corporate underwriters might participate in the decision-making process.
[ July 14, 2002, 22:42: Message edited by: The_Tom ]
Posted by CaptainMike (Member # 709) on :
here's how to do it, Sol
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
Sure, it's sort of a greenish-yellow. Though, personally, I'd describe it as more of a #CEFF63...
Posted by Jernau Morat Gurgeh (Member # 318) on :
quote:Do children who are born HIV-positive usually live to age five? If not, how are they going to explain it?
Sometimes men in these countries, under the illusion that having sex with a virgin will cure their aids, rape young children, sometimes even babies. I don't think it's a bad idea to have a character with AIDS in the show if it prevents even one occurance of that.
Posted by Aban Rune (Member # 226) on :
"It will have, in a childlike manner, open discussions about sexuality, ...."
How is a five year old going to understand a frank discussion about sexuality? I've always gathered that the muppets are supposed to be young adults (Bert and Ernie have their own place, Oscar has that way cool garbage can pad...) but how is a preschooler going to understand discussions about sexuality? I'm 26, and I still don't understand it half the time...
Posted by Edipissed Wrecks (Member # 510) on :
its my understanding that children born with HIV live for 5-10 years. a pretty high percentage of children born to HIV infected mothers are HIV infected themselves. i know that there are a lot of HIV infected kids in a lot of places in the world...
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
It does make sense for South Africa, but not for the US, since I doubt that the number of young children dying from AIDS is especially high. If they did want to have a similar character in America, trying to get rid of preconceptions about illness, something like Leuikemia (or just cancer in general) would probably be better.
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
The character, who will be a regular character in South Africa, is also going to act as a sort of goodwill ambassador to other, er, Streets.
Posted by First of Two (Member # 16) on :
I should like to know whether it is common for newspaper reporters to refer to members of Congress by nickname.
Posted by The_Tom (Member # 38) on :
That one does.
Then again, when one looks at where these Congressmen are from and what kind of views they hold, it strikes me as likely that everyone calls them by said nicknames.
Posted by Cartman (Member # 256) on :
What bugs me greatly is that, in a way, kids aren't permitted to be kids anymore. They are denied the most fundamental right any child should have: the right to an enjoyable, untroubled childhood.
In my opinion, the reality of this situation is far too grim for five-year-olds to handle or comprehend. But mainly we must ask ourselves: do we really want to force the issue, and are we even justified to do so, by introducing one of the world's deadliest diseases to a children's television programme?!
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
4.7 million people in South Africa have it. It has the largest population infected by HIV. It's not a tiny problem that you can shield from the kids.
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
Liam didn't phrase that frighteningly enough.
South Africa is only years away from a breakdown of biblical proportions. As the story notes, in some parts of the country, 40% of potential mothers are infected. Can you imagine the results of walking through downtown Omaha and killing 4 out of every 10 young women you see? In South Africa (and neighboring southern African nations) you either have AIDS or have a family member who does. It's just part of the social fabric.
Posted by Ed BWC (Member # 818) on :
quote:Originally posted by PsyLiam: 4.7 million people in South Africa have it.
I knew it was high, but not THAT high...
[ July 15, 2002, 18:30: Message edited by: Ed BWC ]
Posted by First of Two (Member # 16) on :
How not to get AIDS, a primer:
#1 DON'T HAVE SEX. It's better than DYING, and it's practically FOOLPROOF.
#2 If you MUST have sex, have it ONLY with your monogamous partner. It may be dull, but it's better than DYING.
#3 If you MUST have sex with someone who isn't your partner, use a goddamn plastic thingy. It's better than DYING.
#4 If you MUST have sex with someone who isn't your partner, without a goddamn plastic thingy, seek psychiatric care. You're MAD.
#5 If you aren't having sex, and someone tries to force you to, KILL THEM. Better they die quick than you die slow.
Posted by CaptainMike (Member # 709) on :
you cant hide the horrors of the world from children.. you can, however, teach them to deal with them.
and NOBODY has an untroubled childhood.. i think a cheesy, lecturung muppet isnt causing as much trouble in their lives as the trouble that is made for children by their own parents.
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
Yes, First's brilliantly helpful suggestions provide an instant solution to the problem of how to care for the upwards of 20 million orphans South Africa will have by 2010. I'm glad we've got that figured out, I was worried for a few minutes.
Posted by Vogon Poet (Member # 393) on :
I'm stumped. Rob's little AIDS Primer was so patently absurd, it's left nothing for me to work with.
Posted by First of Two (Member # 16) on :
quote:Yes, First's brilliantly helpful suggestions provide an instant solution to the problem of how to care for the upwards of 20 million orphans South Africa will have by 2010. I'm glad we've got that figured out, I was worried for a few minutes.
Numbnuts, that wasn't the problem that I was addressing now, was it? The very title of the post says so.
I DON'T have a solution to the problem of the people who already have AIDS, or the children who will be affected because their parents die of AIDS. I don't think there is one, besides massive international (and that means not just the US footing the majority of the bill like it usually does) aid and care.
But I DO have a solution to stopping the SPREAD of AIDS. In fact, until a vaccine is developed, it's the ONLY solution. Teach people to follow the five points. Maybe if the 20 million orphans learn that, a few less of THEM will die.
Posted by Jay the Obscure (Member # 19) on :
Maybe peope should stop giving blood in China. That would help too.
People should stop sharing needles too. But providing clean needles causes people to use drugs...same with condoms and sex. Look it up.
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
I'm overusing the rolling eyes, so I'll just say wow, what a nice over-reaction.
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
quote:(and that means not just the US footing the majority of the bill like it usually does)
And this has nothing to do about anything, but the central clearinghouse for UK government stuff on the web is available in English and Welsh. But do more people actually speak Welsh than, say, Gaelic? Or are they just more vocal?
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
And to answer my own question: yes, over seven times as many.
Why didn't I say Scots, then, which is spoken by about twice as many people as Welsh? Because I wasn't aware it was a seperate language...curses!
Posted by First of Two (Member # 16) on :
Liam: To be exact, the US currently foots just under 1/4 of the entire bill, as can be seen here:
Of course, Bill Gates being a US citizen, and giving an additional $100,000,000 (A contribution equal to Canada's and greater than all but six other countries - and the European Commission, whatever that is) isn't factored in, as he's giving as a Corporation, but it could be considered US money as well.
I notice that Australia, All of Asia except Japan, The entire Middle East except for Kuwait, and All of South America are absent from the list.
Let's bring some of that righteous international pressure to bear on these countries, shall we?
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
Not to get into an argument here, but what do those figures look like if you take into account the number of people in the country? I'd assume that the US has far more than 2.5 times the number of people in Italy, or the UK. Plus the European Commission gets its money from Europe, so we are in effect giving twice.
[ July 17, 2002, 07:58: Message edited by: PsyLiam ]
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
Actually, because I'm now working, and because I have an office, and because it's now my sacred duty to bunk off, here's what I got...
US Contribution: $500,000,000 US Population: 287,000,000 Contirbution per person: $1.74
Japan Contribution: $200,000,000 Japan Population: 129,000,000 C.P.P.: $1.55
I'm not knocking the US's contribution, and I fully expect Rob to come up with some reason why these figures all all rubbish, but still, it is slighly less impressive to give 2.5 times as much as another country when you have 4.5 times the population. Even Canada gives more than you (if you ignore Bill Gates, obviously. And considering that he's really quite wealthy, I think we should. You don't see the Brits dragging in Branson or anyone, do you, and they aren't anywhere near as wealthly as Gates). I suppose you could compare the GDP figures, but I can't be bothered finding them now.
And for Simon: The language isn't "Scots". It is instead the rather more cunningly titles "Scottish". Still, your point is interesting. If you go to Wales, you will find street signs, directions, and most information signs in both English and Welsh. It seems to be mandatory. On the other hand, in Scotland and Ireland (both Northern and the Republic), all the signs are pretty much English only, with only the occasional "home" language for variety. In addition, children in Wales are taught Welsh, despite it being a "dead langauge" (all new words that have been added to it over recent years have been English). It's possibly the most pointless language in the world to learn, after French, and the fact that they've clung to it is a charming example of pointless patriotism.
Posted by First of Two (Member # 16) on :
I think the US can and should increase its donation.
However, I want to see more non-donor countries coerced into helping, as well.
Heck, if China put in 50 cents a head, you'd have another half-billion dollars for the fund. Then you could get the US and China in a prestige race, and clean up!
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
Hmm. I have to admit that I never knew that "Scots" and Gaelic were seperate languages. Or that there were even two languages in Scotland. I'm now curious to know which one is meant when someone says they speak "Scottish".
And Cornish is actually a more uselss langauge than Welsh. Amazing.
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
I'm amazed that you wrote that entire paragraph about the uselessness of Welsh w/o actually insulting (directly, or indirectly, really) the Welsh themselves. Normally, I would expect them to get insulted even if there weren't an obvious opportunity presenting itself.
As for "Scottish", I'm guessing that's the language Scotty spoke. English, but w/ a lot of "och!"s and "cannae"s thrown in.
Posted by Ultra Magnus Pym (Member # 239) on :
Why make fun?
"I swish it around in my cheeks!"
Posted by Red BWC (Member # 818) on :
the "fuck"?!?!
[ July 17, 2002, 21:19: Message edited by: Red BWC ]
Posted by The_Tom (Member # 38) on :
You're doing it wrong, you "fuck"ing idiot.
Posted by Red BWC (Member # 818) on :
Is that right, Tommy?
Posted by The_Tom (Member # 38) on :
Yes. Totally wrong. Have a closer look.
And who the "fuck" would have thought that some people here are so screwed-up that they feel the need to show up one evening and put on the whole "peer pressure terrifies me" act?
Posted by Ultra Magnus Pym (Member # 239) on :
Not I, certainly.
Posted by The_Tom (Member # 38) on :
Exactly!
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
quote:Originally posted by TSN: I'm amazed that you wrote that entire paragraph about the uselessness of Welsh w/o actually insulting (directly, or indirectly, really) the Welsh themselves. Normally, I would expect them to get insulted even if there weren't an obvious opportunity presenting itself.
Too easy a target. Besides, it's not like any of them could ever read it. Using the electric internet is a crime against the great sheep god Alan, and all who use it are butchered in a horrible and icky manner.
quote:As for "Scottish", I'm guessing that's the language Scotty spoke. English, but w/ a lot of "och!"s and "cannae"s thrown in.
Hmm. I know you are probably joking, but no. That's a dialect or accent certainly (in the same way that some northern types say "aye" instead of "yes"), but it's not a language, and usually when I've heard people say "Scottish", they seem to be talking about an other language.
quote: Heck, if China put in 50 cents a head, you'd have another half-billion dollars for the fund. Then you could get the US and China in a prestige race, and clean up!
Well, considering that you are putting in half as much per head as us and Canada, why would you be any different if China puts more in?
Posted by Wraith (Member # 779) on :
quote:Originally posted by PsyLiam: And Cornish is actually a more uselss langauge than Welsh. Amazing.
No it "fuck"ing well isn't. We can use it to insult stupid, arrogant English people. Posted by CaptainMike: Director's Edition (Member # 709) on :
Och, cap'n.. it's the thread! She's gone off course an' i cannae tell why! aye, its thot Flare board agin....
Posted by First of Two (Member # 16) on :
quote: Well, considering that you are putting in half as much per head as us and Canada, why would you be any different if China puts more in?
More? No, my friend. ANY.
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
"Too easy a target. Besides, it's not like any of them could ever read it. Using the electric internet is a crime against the great sheep god Alan, and all who use it are butchered in a horrible and icky manner."
There we go. That's more like what I was expecting...
"I know you are probably joking..."
Brilliant deduction, Holmes!
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
Well, it's hard to tell. You are very off and on with your humour these days Timmy.
I've also asked several (ie, two) Scottish people, and neither of them have heard of "Scots". There's Scottish (Gaelic), and, er, that's it.
Posted by First of Two (Member # 16) on :
I've heard it referred to as Scots Gaelic.
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
As oppossed to Irish gaelic. Hmm. I suppose it makes sense, but that page claimed that Scots and Gaelic were two different languages. And "Scottish Gaelic" still sounds better. "Scots" sound like one of those words said by people who aren't actually Scottish but are trying to be (like the horrible "Well, my greatgrandfather was Irish so that means I know everything about the emerald isle I like Guiness" crowd. It also shows up when people refer to the Scottish at "Scotch", which is just wrong on every imaginable level.
Posted by The_Tom (Member # 38) on :
My inclination has always been that in Scotland there's
"English, spoken with the oh-so-funny Scottish accent" which the overwhelming majority of those Scottish people speak.
"Scots," which is a dialect of English spoken primarily in the lowlands of Scotland during the murky times of warriors in kilts who looked like Mel Gibson, brought back to the forefront by that Burns fellow, and still spoken in the odd obscure lowland village where they screw sheep.
"Gaelic," also called "Scottish" or "Scottish Gaelic" which is a completely different Celtic language dating back to shortly after those Roman guys packed it in thanks to that woman with the impossible-to-spell name on the British penny. It, too, can be found in the odd sheep-screwing village, but in this case more commonly in the highlands. (Incidentally, silly people call the original Celtic language of Ireland "Gaelic" too, but pretty much everyone there calls it "Irish.")
[ July 19, 2002, 18:02: Message edited by: The_Tom ]
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)