Forum - View topicObjectionable Content
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Author | Message | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Dan42
Chief Encyclopedist
Posts: 3794 Location: Montreal |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
It's been about a week since I renamed "Age rating" to "Objectionable content" as per this post. Please tell us what you think about the change.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Thunderbird-
Posts: 60 |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
One thing that would be nice is a separate page for each show specifying exactly what's objectionable. A good example of why that would be useful is episode twelve of The Galaxy Railways (a show that is rated mild/older children) when Manabu is taking a bath. Obviously that would be fine for any male child but not something you'd probably want to show a ten year old girl.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
yuna49
Posts: 3804 |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
I wondered what could possibly be so "bad" about a bath scene, so I watched the episode in question on Funi's site. I'm still wondering what exactly is even "objectionable" about this scene. The fact that he's nude, like most any human who takes a bath? The fact that he's having his back washed by a old lady? Unless I missed something, the only even vaguely "objectionable" scene occurs when we see his butt crack once in a scene. I'd remind you that girls have those, too.
Many ten-year-old girls have brothers, and many of those girls have seen a lot more of their brothers' anatomy than is shown in the episode you cite. I'm sixty, and I have a daughter who's now eighteen. I wouldn't have considered this episode "objectionable" in any way even when she was ten. It's not like I wasn't concerned about what my daughter saw at that age, but graphic violence, explicit sexual behavior, and the abuse of women bothered me a lot more than a boy taking a bath. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
hiucanimoka777
Posts: 1 |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
I think it's a bit strange that Naruto would be considered to have significant "objectionable content" along with something such as Darker than Black. Yes, there's some blood and bit of cursing in Naruto, but DTB is a lot more graphic and perhaps has a bit worse cursing. Previously, you'd say Naruto was Teen while DTB was Mature, so the new rating kind of blurs the line between the two. Also, there's a big difference between using a swear word or two and then having nudity....but with the new ratings they're lumped together.
ex: Objectionable content: Significant (bloody violence and/or swearing and/or nudity) You can have either of the first two and it would be not near the objectionable degree of nudity. Usually when I think of nudity its explicit, full blown imagery. Perhaps, instead, change it to partial nudity? Of course men without shirts on would not really fall into that category. I personally don't find any objection to simply leaving it at age rating because I don't feel ashamed if the rating says its for children and having the difference between mature and teen ratings is more informative. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Aoi_Sakaraba
Posts: 312 Location: Des Moines, Iowa |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
The different naming schemes seem to sound to adult for younger shows.
Such as "Significant". Some may get the wrong idea with these ratings. I honestly think it should be done based on actual age rating. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
dormcat
Encyclopedia Editor
Posts: 9902 Location: New Taipei City, Taiwan, ROC |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Both the manga and anime editions of Natuto were rated "teen" before and "significant" now, which I personally think is debatable. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
All times are GMT - 5 Hours |
||
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group