The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
OK. Just as I suspected you are reading this probably just like you listen to the likes of Eminem, Dr. Dre and other rappers and singers that use explicit lyrics in their songs. But why? After all like the albums with these lyrics I put a parental advisory sticker on my post!!
My point is what is the point in them. I can go into a shop and buy an album with the sticker parental advisory on it without any hassle. Got Eminems latest album the Marshall Mathers LP no problem. At the age of 11 I even grabbed a copy of Calafornia Love which apparently had explicit lyrics, and some Coolio songs at about 10. So what's the point if I can listen to a certain four letter word beginning with "f" in a song at the age of 11 but couldnt hear it in a 15 certificate film.
If those people in the age restrictions office are heavily monitoring the things we are watch on television and in the cinema making sure we are "protected" from offensive material why aren't they doing the same thing for the music industry instead of turning a blind eye to it.
Yes I do listen to parental advisory lyrics. I can handle them. They don't make me evil, make me do crazy things, effect me mentally but for some people I'm sure it can affect them deeply.
Many people can handle the odd four letter offensive word as it is part of our everyday language and for most of us it doesn't offend us. Yet people are being restricted from hearing these words in films. Yet far worse are some of the lyrics in music. Kim for example by Eminem even I was shocked by. It was a very disturbing song about Eminem violently killing his wife in front of his daughter. If this was happening in a film it would certainly gain a 15 certificate or even an 18.
Just because we can't see these violent things in music doesn't mean they can still effect people. If we are going to protect certain individuals from being offended in the film industry we certainly need to reassess the protection of the music industry. Children are growing up idolising rap stars and other singers and are being exposed to their minds and feelings and some are growing up in the same way. Certainly the form of age certificates used in the film industry does also need to be applied to the music industry??
My point is what is the point in them. I can go into a shop and buy an album with the sticker parental advisory on it without any hassle. Got Eminems latest album the Marshall Mathers LP no problem. At the age of 11 I even grabbed a copy of Calafornia Love which apparently had explicit lyrics, and some Coolio songs at about 10. So what's the point if I can listen to a certain four letter word beginning with "f" in a song at the age of 11 but couldnt hear it in a 15 certificate film.
If those people in the age restrictions office are heavily monitoring the things we are watch on television and in the cinema making sure we are "protected" from offensive material why aren't they doing the same thing for the music industry instead of turning a blind eye to it.
Yes I do listen to parental advisory lyrics. I can handle them. They don't make me evil, make me do crazy things, effect me mentally but for some people I'm sure it can affect them deeply.
Many people can handle the odd four letter offensive word as it is part of our everyday language and for most of us it doesn't offend us. Yet people are being restricted from hearing these words in films. Yet far worse are some of the lyrics in music. Kim for example by Eminem even I was shocked by. It was a very disturbing song about Eminem violently killing his wife in front of his daughter. If this was happening in a film it would certainly gain a 15 certificate or even an 18.
Just because we can't see these violent things in music doesn't mean they can still effect people. If we are going to protect certain individuals from being offended in the film industry we certainly need to reassess the protection of the music industry. Children are growing up idolising rap stars and other singers and are being exposed to their minds and feelings and some are growing up in the same way. Certainly the form of age certificates used in the film industry does also need to be applied to the music industry??
Page:
> Your Honour wrote:
> If a CD has the "Parental
> Advisory" sticker thingy on it,
> you're not supposed to be
> able to buy it if you are under 16.
>I
> couldn't buy one of
> the OutHere Brothers singles as it had the
> sticker on adn i
> was only 15.
This is exactly the problem....the under 16 thing is not legally binding and cannot be enforced by a shop. It is not illegal to sell a parentla guidance cd to an under 16 year old. I know of no shop that actually will not sell parental guidance cds to minors. This morning when I was talking to someone at work about the new releases today she commented that most of the people buying purple pills were kids !
> If a CD has the "Parental
> Advisory" sticker thingy on it,
> you're not supposed to be
> able to buy it if you are under 16.
>I
> couldn't buy one of
> the OutHere Brothers singles as it had the
> sticker on adn i
> was only 15.
This is exactly the problem....the under 16 thing is not legally binding and cannot be enforced by a shop. It is not illegal to sell a parentla guidance cd to an under 16 year old. I know of no shop that actually will not sell parental guidance cds to minors. This morning when I was talking to someone at work about the new releases today she commented that most of the people buying purple pills were kids !
Your Honour wrote:
> If a CD has the "Parental Advisory" sticker thingy on it,
> you're not supposed to be able to buy it if you are under 16.
I
> couldn't buy one of the OutHere Brothers singles as it had the
> sticker on adn i was only 15.
I didn't even know that so obviously the people who sell their products aren't very strict over it. They are not told they can't sell it and if they are making money I don't think they will care about someones age (Well as long as they weren't say 10 :D)
> If a CD has the "Parental Advisory" sticker thingy on it,
> you're not supposed to be able to buy it if you are under 16.
I
> couldn't buy one of the OutHere Brothers singles as it had the
> sticker on adn i was only 15.
I didn't even know that so obviously the people who sell their products aren't very strict over it. They are not told they can't sell it and if they are making money I don't think they will care about someones age (Well as long as they weren't say 10 :D)
Stranger In Paradise wrote:
With
> adults it doesn't matter, well it does but you missed my point here
> as well. I was referring to those below 16/18. When you're past
> those ages then it's up to you to decide what you want to do
> !
I know but some people above 18 want to protect their children from the likes of this material and blame it for the way some people act. This is what my point was
Which is why a legally binding ratings system need to be put
> in place. 14 years olds dont have the right to see 18 year old films
> because they aren't old enough ! being in a democracy doesn't mean
> you can do absolutely anything at any age.
Yes I know but you said we had the freedom to do anything :P
With
> adults it doesn't matter, well it does but you missed my point here
> as well. I was referring to those below 16/18. When you're past
> those ages then it's up to you to decide what you want to do
> !
I know but some people above 18 want to protect their children from the likes of this material and blame it for the way some people act. This is what my point was
Which is why a legally binding ratings system need to be put
> in place. 14 years olds dont have the right to see 18 year old films
> because they aren't old enough ! being in a democracy doesn't mean
> you can do absolutely anything at any age.
Yes I know but you said we had the freedom to do anything :P
I haven't really heard much of his really early stuff, so i can't compare.
All i know is that i enjoy both of his albums, but for different reasons.
All i know is that i enjoy both of his albums, but for different reasons.
Your Honour wrote:
> Ö=ResŒvilfan=Ö wrote:
>but the
> marshall mathers LP
> is a bit too much like the first one.
>How can you say
> that!?!?
>There are nothing like each other. His first album is
> amusing, the songs are not meant to be taken seriously, >they make
> people laugh.
>His second his much darker, more threatening and
> serious. You can't compare the two at all!
I don;' know about the slim shay LP made for a laugh, maybe role model and bad meets evil but the rest i don't think so.
They're pretty similar in style i mean drug ballard is like C*m on everybody and Kim is meant to be before 97'bonnie and clyde and some other things, i mean don't get me wrong there both good but i still think he should release some of his other stuff like locked up tonite,infinte and loads others that i have round somewhere.
> Ö=ResŒvilfan=Ö wrote:
>but the
> marshall mathers LP
> is a bit too much like the first one.
>How can you say
> that!?!?
>There are nothing like each other. His first album is
> amusing, the songs are not meant to be taken seriously, >they make
> people laugh.
>His second his much darker, more threatening and
> serious. You can't compare the two at all!
I don;' know about the slim shay LP made for a laugh, maybe role model and bad meets evil but the rest i don't think so.
They're pretty similar in style i mean drug ballard is like C*m on everybody and Kim is meant to be before 97'bonnie and clyde and some other things, i mean don't get me wrong there both good but i still think he should release some of his other stuff like locked up tonite,infinte and loads others that i have round somewhere.
Ö=ResŒvilfan=Ö wrote:
but the
> marshall mathers LP is a bit too much like the first one.
How can you say that!?!?
There are nothing like each other. His first album is amusing, the songs are not meant to be taken seriously, they make people laugh.
His second his much darker, more threatening and serious. You can't compare the two at all!
but the
> marshall mathers LP is a bit too much like the first one.
How can you say that!?!?
There are nothing like each other. His first album is amusing, the songs are not meant to be taken seriously, they make people laugh.
His second his much darker, more threatening and serious. You can't compare the two at all!
Rakuga wrote:
>Can you honestly tell me you have never seen/
> watched something you are too young to watch? The answers >yes. There you go.
I'm not naive enough to believe an age rating system would stop kids under a certain age from listening to music, my point was that there should be a ratings system.
>If you have ever read a book
> you will know that it is your imagination that makes it. >The words
> paint a picture in your mind. Without an imagination you >cannot read
> books and fully enjoy them/understand them. The same >applies for
> music. People might hear lyrics and get images (Some >which may be
> disturbing in their heads). When I listen to Eminems "Kim"
> (I have only done twice - I find it offensive to even my >standards)
> I see the picture of someone being murdered very vivid.
Yes but music more than often has a video to go with it ! Music has a far more wider appeal than most books do. A book will often contain violent parts in places but only in places. Most songs with parental guidance are 2-4 minutes of just swearing etc I know its not every word but have you ever read a book that fast ?
>Exactly they
> have. "EMINEM TOLD ME TO DO IT!" The same applies for
> adults. People in the past have applied the likes of >Marilyn Manson
> for the Columbine School killings where some students >killed several
> classmates. Manson uses lyrics with imperatives telling >people to
> kill others etc..
With adults it doesn't matter, well it does but you missed my point here as well. I was referring to those below 16/18. When you're past those ages then it's up to you to decide what you want to do !
>But we are not totally free to watch the films that we >want. A
> 14 year old cannot get into an 18 certificate film at the >cinema. So
> we don't have that right. Yet we can listen to what we >want. ?!!?
> That doesn't sound right :D
Which is why a legally binding ratings system need to be put in place. 14 years olds dont have the right to see 18 year old films because they aren't old enough ! being in a democracy doesn't mean you can do absolutely anything at any age.
>Can you honestly tell me you have never seen/
> watched something you are too young to watch? The answers >yes. There you go.
I'm not naive enough to believe an age rating system would stop kids under a certain age from listening to music, my point was that there should be a ratings system.
>If you have ever read a book
> you will know that it is your imagination that makes it. >The words
> paint a picture in your mind. Without an imagination you >cannot read
> books and fully enjoy them/understand them. The same >applies for
> music. People might hear lyrics and get images (Some >which may be
> disturbing in their heads). When I listen to Eminems "Kim"
> (I have only done twice - I find it offensive to even my >standards)
> I see the picture of someone being murdered very vivid.
Yes but music more than often has a video to go with it ! Music has a far more wider appeal than most books do. A book will often contain violent parts in places but only in places. Most songs with parental guidance are 2-4 minutes of just swearing etc I know its not every word but have you ever read a book that fast ?
>Exactly they
> have. "EMINEM TOLD ME TO DO IT!" The same applies for
> adults. People in the past have applied the likes of >Marilyn Manson
> for the Columbine School killings where some students >killed several
> classmates. Manson uses lyrics with imperatives telling >people to
> kill others etc..
With adults it doesn't matter, well it does but you missed my point here as well. I was referring to those below 16/18. When you're past those ages then it's up to you to decide what you want to do !
>But we are not totally free to watch the films that we >want. A
> 14 year old cannot get into an 18 certificate film at the >cinema. So
> we don't have that right. Yet we can listen to what we >want. ?!!?
> That doesn't sound right :D
Which is why a legally binding ratings system need to be put in place. 14 years olds dont have the right to see 18 year old films because they aren't old enough ! being in a democracy doesn't mean you can do absolutely anything at any age.
ah the jolly 4 letter swear word,It can be used as anything a noun,adjective or of course a verb.I wish people wouldn't take this so seriously we just use it as a laugh.
As for Eminem i think his time's past i mean his slim shady LP was absolutly wicked but the marshall mathers LP is a bit too much like the first one.
i reckon he should re-release his infinite cus it has some top songs on it like never 2 far and that.Has anyone heard hellbound i have that on vinyl if anyone wants to buy it.
As for Eminem i think his time's past i mean his slim shady LP was absolutly wicked but the marshall mathers LP is a bit too much like the first one.
i reckon he should re-release his infinite cus it has some top songs on it like never 2 far and that.Has anyone heard hellbound i have that on vinyl if anyone wants to buy it.
If a CD has the "Parental Advisory" sticker thingy on it, you're not supposed to be able to buy it if you are under 16.
I couldn't buy one of the OutHere Brothers singles as it had the sticker on adn i was only 15.
I couldn't buy one of the OutHere Brothers singles as it had the sticker on adn i was only 15.
Stranger In Paradise wrote:
> Ah but you forget that if they put legally binding age ratings on
> music then the sales would die !
Look why do you think people put explicit lyrics in their songs? Because it sells. If less people are buying their songs most singers that are keen on making money will change their lyrics. Also people would still buy them through older people whether or not they are the right age. Can you honestly tell me you have never seen/ watched something you are too young to watch? The answers yes. There you go.
A common defensive
> argument as to why music should not be rated is that they are only
> songs, not visual material. but books are visual like a film are
If you have ever read a book you will know that it is your imagination that makes it. The words paint a picture in your mind. Without an imagination you cannot read books and fully enjoy them/understand them. The same applies for music. People might hear lyrics and get images (Some which may be disturbing in their heads). When I listen to Eminems "Kim" (I have only done twice - I find it offensive to even my standards) I see the picture of someone being murdered very vivid.
Over the past years a number of teenage killers have
> blamed artists like Korn and Eminem for how they acted/what they
Exactly they have. "EMINEM TOLD ME TO DO IT!" The same applies for adults. People in the past have applied the likes of Marilyn Manson for the Columbine School killings where some students killed several classmates. Manson uses lyrics with imperatives telling people to kill others etc..
We
> live in a democracy where we have the right to choose what we want
> to do, listen to, read e.t.c
But we are not totally free to watch the films that we want. A 14 year old cannot get into an 18 certificate film at the cinema. So we don't have that right. Yet we can listen to what we want. ?!!? That doesn't sound right :D
So with a society where people are being exposed to lyrics and some people are acting on them we are not actually protecting youths to the extent we should be. The likes of Terminator 2 being stopped from being seen by youths may stop them from killing people and being disturbed mentally but music will continue to do this for a long time. It needs to be rated just as films if we want to protect the youth. Absolutely ridiculous...
> Ah but you forget that if they put legally binding age ratings on
> music then the sales would die !
Look why do you think people put explicit lyrics in their songs? Because it sells. If less people are buying their songs most singers that are keen on making money will change their lyrics. Also people would still buy them through older people whether or not they are the right age. Can you honestly tell me you have never seen/ watched something you are too young to watch? The answers yes. There you go.
A common defensive
> argument as to why music should not be rated is that they are only
> songs, not visual material. but books are visual like a film are
If you have ever read a book you will know that it is your imagination that makes it. The words paint a picture in your mind. Without an imagination you cannot read books and fully enjoy them/understand them. The same applies for music. People might hear lyrics and get images (Some which may be disturbing in their heads). When I listen to Eminems "Kim" (I have only done twice - I find it offensive to even my standards) I see the picture of someone being murdered very vivid.
Over the past years a number of teenage killers have
> blamed artists like Korn and Eminem for how they acted/what they
Exactly they have. "EMINEM TOLD ME TO DO IT!" The same applies for adults. People in the past have applied the likes of Marilyn Manson for the Columbine School killings where some students killed several classmates. Manson uses lyrics with imperatives telling people to kill others etc..
We
> live in a democracy where we have the right to choose what we want
> to do, listen to, read e.t.c
But we are not totally free to watch the films that we want. A 14 year old cannot get into an 18 certificate film at the cinema. So we don't have that right. Yet we can listen to what we want. ?!!? That doesn't sound right :D
So with a society where people are being exposed to lyrics and some people are acting on them we are not actually protecting youths to the extent we should be. The likes of Terminator 2 being stopped from being seen by youths may stop them from killing people and being disturbed mentally but music will continue to do this for a long time. It needs to be rated just as films if we want to protect the youth. Absolutely ridiculous...
Page: