If you're implying that I'd share your opinion if I was a parent, I'm sorry you're wrong.
> I don't ever swear around my 4 1/2 year old. I don't think that I will, until
> he's of an adult age.
But you swear, nonetheless. It's something people do. If you grow up your child teching him respect for others, and you keep not swearing with him, he'll probably never swear with you. But he'll still swear with his friends, as you do with yours. Which doesn't necessarily make you or him bad people.
> So I should probably start telling him tomorrow about the horrors of war? Maybe
> show him some rape video? How about we review why, exactly, Scott Peterson is
> going to die? It'll be fun to review how he killed his wife and mommy of his
> unborn baby! Then I could show him some cheery pictures of the halocaust. Then
> later we could fall asleep to some ass porn intermixed with snuff films. I mean,
> he's going to learn it all anyway, so I might as well expose the shit out of him
> now, right? As long as I educate all about it, it should be fine.
You're bullshitting here. I said none of this, we were talking of a 13 years old hearing the word "fuck" in a song, I think he can cope with it without having his life ruined, or even just being shocked. It's not a different "fuck" than the one he hears with buddies, a song won't expose a kid more than seeing a friend. Which is not a good reason to prevent a kid from seeing swearing friends, or sue their parents.
Your kid's world at the moment is Bambi, and it's more than ok that you teach him the bambi things, because at 4.5 a child can't really think like an adult. But at 13 he'll have started to think with his head. And sooner or later he'll face all the stuff that you mentioned, because it's there. What can one do? Sue the world? Or maybe roll up sleeves and explaining the "why's", before some rednex tells him that God made negroes black because they are beasts and that the holocaust never happened?
> Given the state of our world, you are absolutely right - kids are exposed to
> this stuff everyday. Why would I voluntarily expose him to more?
And hearing the word "fuck" is being exposed? Because then you should start considering not letting him out at all, and feeding him through a hole. Shutting down irony for a minute, since he'll have to walk through all the bad stuff anyway, what's wrong with being by his side? Of course when it's the right time, but at 13 it's almost the right time for a lot of stuff, simply because at that age kids wake up and start living a true social life.
> You're correct
> in thinking understanding is the cornerstone of bringing up kids properly, but
> that doesn't mean I need to expose him to shitty music around the house.
It's shitty because it's Evanescence :P Or do you mean that every song with bad words is shitty? 'Cause I love my NIN albums, you know.
> Maybe if he was around 15 I wouldn't care as much about the occasional fuck in
> his bad album, but that's not the point.
The sue was about a kid of 13 listening to fuck. Pretty close.
> The point is - someone is at fault for
> allowing parents to think they were buying a clean album when they were not.
> Whether you or I think it's okay to expose kids to it is irrelevant.
Ok, but parents that are SO concerned about this kind of stuff should listen to the music before feeding it to the kids. Because let's face it, you can sue whoever you want, but as long as the kid listened to it ONCE, he's been exposed already, and the horrible damage is done!
Point 2: sueing for such shit is ridiculous. The whole sueing thing is ridiculous, actually. You (I mean your people) are a bit trigger-happy with sues, probably for greed? These parents that were "shocked" to hear "fuck" in a song are either silly puritans, or just want to make the big buck. Was it so difficult to disapprove the album, take it back and complain with the director? No, let's sue. We'll become rich.