Should e-Books be Rated (like movies and video games)?

[griffonwing]

Originally Posted by Moejoe

Ridiculous. Our age is far more 'decent' than any that has come before, and especially in the western world. Slavery abolished, women's rights, civil rights, excellent advances in science and medicine.




What you believe and what actually happens in the real world are seperate entities.

Biblical quotes mean very little to me, as do the religions they are attached to. Racist, homophobic, sexist tomes that advocate all kinds of nonsense, very little of which should be taken seriously by any modern person.

Being physically ready isn't enough, you're correct, the mental capacity to deal with sex comes with practice, with experience, with knowledge, and none of that comes from a book. It comes from experience. A hell of a lot of it.

Very silly, and not at all the reality of the world. Once a child reaches puberty and wants to have sex, there's very little you can do, bar physical restraint, to stop them. It's a natural biological urge. Your consent means nothing to that teenager, they are their own person and will make decisions accordingly, with, or without you. No, you don't have to 'let go' completely, but you have to also understand that holding them too close might cause exactly the opposite of the reaction you desire. Sheltering a child from 'sex' is as pointless as telling them there are no oceans. Soon enough they're going to discover that ocean for themselves.

This is why the world is in the shape it is in.

The fact that America and the world has turned their back on God and living life by their terms, and not according to what He has planned.

There is no argument I can make, now that I know where you are coming from.

My arguments are based on hundreds of years of faith, tenants, beliefs, love, and respect.

Your arguments are based on non-belief and self-reliance.

My arguments demand faith, and without faith they are nothing.

I know where I stand in my faith and my beliefs. They are different from yours, so my words go nowhere.

There is nothing more to say.

[Elfwreck]

Originally Posted by griffonwing

Again, i never stipulated any sort of ratings from any ratings board. I do apologize if it came across that way. I was only interested in a small box on the back of the book.

A "rating" doesn't necessarily mean a scaled number. A label of "this book contains lots of sex" is a rating.

One the back of the book, where you read a small blurb of what the book is about, at the bottom, perhaps there is a box stating whether or not sex, drug use, or language is included.

Who gets to decide those are the only warn-able content?

I don't want my kids reading books with overt monotheism in them, at least not without my discussing it with them first. Are you thinking they should warn for that?

You don't mention violence. I want to know if there are violent deaths on every other page. I *really* want to know if there's torture and mutilations, which are much more likely to cause long-term problems for my kids than sex scenes, which they won't understand and get lumped under "weird grownup stuff" in their minds.

How about racism? I don't want my kids reading The Turner Diaries anytime soon.

Instruction kits for bomb-making, religious propaganda, kooky diets designed to prey on the fears of the young, hate-filled rhetoric, How To Cheat guidebooks, suicide methods... I can think of plenty of things I want to steer my kids away from that aren't sex-and-drugs books.

As for drug use, I mean LSD, pot, cocaine, heroin, etc. not cigarettes, pipes, beer or wine or any alcohol. I know those are still drugs, but it should have been apparent.

Why should it have been apparent? I worry a lot more about my kids getting interested in alcohol than in pot. And I don't know what you include under "etc."

What about sci-fi books... should drugs that don't exist today be exempt from a drug warning? Is it the particular *drugs* that get a warning, or particular *types of use*?

By gratuitious sex, I mean very prolific in the book. Not just a one or two time occurrence.

That's not gratuitous; it's just prevalent. Gratuitous means unnecessary or excessive. If it's intrinsic to the plot, it's not gratuitous--but there can still be an awful lot of it.

I'd like to know if there is sex, and if so, is it prolific, does it encompass the story? What about the drug use? Cocaine, Heroin? If any of these feature heavy in the book, then frankly, it should not be directed at children.

What age "children" should not be exposed to these topics... and why don't you include violence in your list? At what age are they ready to read about decapitations but not copulations?

What do you think of books like Go Ask Alice? Should they not be available to children?

As for other books, such as Grapes of Wrath, for example, which was mentioned earlier. Yes, this is read in many english lit classes, however, the book itself is not geared as a novel for young adults. They can read it, sure, but it's not marketed towards the YA sect.

I think you lost me. You're only talking about tagging books that are specifically tagged Young Adult by their publishers? So, any books not so labeled, would be exempt?

I suspect it wouldn't matter much to me, then; my 10-year-old still reads some books marketed to YA, but my 13-year-old has discovered fantasy novels and is off & running.

I'm having trouble thinking of any marketed-as-YA books that you'd think would need these warnings. And I'm confused at the idea that any parent would expect their children to refrain from reading anything that wasn't tagged YA to start with.

[Danny Fekete]

Originally Posted by griffonwing

This is why the world is in the shape it is in.

The fact that America and the world has turned their back on God and living life by their terms, and not according to what He has planned.

There is no argument I can make, now that I know where you are coming from.

My arguments are based on hundreds of years of faith, tenants, beliefs, love, and respect.

Your arguments are based on non-belief and self-reliance.

My arguments demand faith, and without faith they are nothing.

I know where I stand in my faith and my beliefs. They are different from yours, so my words go nowhere.

There is nothing more to say.

It's too bad that finding accord with secular individuals is impossible for you. Imagine our dismay when people who feel the same way as you dictate policy that affects us, and the debate can be closed on similar grounds.

[Elfwreck]

Originally Posted by griffonwing

The fact that America and the world has turned their back on God and living life by their terms, and not according to what He has planned.

One of things that I like best about America, is that I don't have to live my life on your God's terms. I can live, and raise my children, by the terms of the Gods of my faith.

My arguments are based on hundreds of years of faith, tenants, beliefs, love, and respect.

So are mine. And they are different from yours.

I don't want your preferred warnings on books for my kids, implying to them that there's something wrong with sex. And I'm sure you don't want my preferred warnings on books for your kids, implying that monotheism is something they shouldn't be exposed to until they're better educated.

[tompe]

Originally Posted by Danny Fekete

So long as these prospective ethical boards don't exert any pressure beyond providing you with information that you can choose to act on or not, is there any reason to be prescriptive about their existence?

But they will provide other pressure. The will provide pressure to authors to make their books confirm to what is perceived to be allowed content for a specific marketing label.

[griffonwing]

Originally Posted by Elfwreck

A "rating" doesn't necessarily mean a scaled number. A label of "this book contains lots of sex" is a rating.

I simply disagree

I don't want my kids reading books with overt monotheism in them, at least not without my discussing it with them first. Are you thinking they should warn for that?

I referred to the same fundamental blurbs in movie ratings. This is not one of them.

You don't mention violence. I want to know if there are violent
deaths on every other page. I *really* want to know if there's torture and mutilations, which are much more likely to cause long-term problems for my kids than sex scenes, which they won't understand and get lumped under "weird grownup stuff" in their minds.

Violence, yes. Unfortunately, I am partially preoccupied with personal family matters, so some things slipped. This is one of the mentions in movies, so yes.

How about racism? I don't want my kids reading The Turner Diaries anytime soon.

Instruction kits for bomb-making, religious propaganda, kooky diets designed to prey on the fears of the young, hate-filled rhetoric, How To Cheat guidebooks, suicide methods... I can think of plenty of things I want to steer my kids away from that aren't sex-and-drugs books.

Why should it have been apparent? I worry a lot more about my kids getting interested in alcohol than in pot. And I don't know what you include under "etc."

What about sci-fi books... should drugs that don't exist today be exempt from a drug warning? Is it the particular *drugs* that get a warning, or particular *types of use*?

That's not gratuitous; it's just prevalent. Gratuitous means unnecessary or excessive. If it's intrinsic to the plot, it's not gratuitous--but there can still be an awful lot of it.

What age "children" should not be exposed to these topics... and why don't you include violence in your list? At what age are they ready to read about decapitations but not copulations?

What do you think of books like Go Ask Alice? Should they not be available to children?

I think you lost me. You're only talking about tagging books that are specifically tagged Young Adult by their publishers? So, any books not so labeled, would be exempt?

I suspect it wouldn't matter much to me, then; my 10-year-old still reads some books marketed to YA, but my 13-year-old has discovered fantasy novels and is off & running.

I'm having trouble thinking of any marketed-as-YA books that you'd think would need these warnings. And I'm confused at the idea that any parent would expect their children to refrain from reading anything that wasn't tagged YA to start with.

Those Alice books? Never heard of them. And yes, for the repeated time, I was referring to those aimed at kids, specifically the YA sect.

This leaves out a majority of the books you listed above, bomb-making, racism, theologies, etc...

A majority of these are assumed in either the book name or the info on the back. Again these are not geared towards children, so these are excluded from an infobox.

And by Infobox, I refer you to this.

http://www.monsterlibrarian.com/vampiresya.htm

Here is a list of Vampire Young Adult Fiction. I, myself, loved the sword and sorcery books growing up, but never got into this style.. However, You can see at the end of each "about' paragraph, they have a "This Book Contains:" area.

This is all I request to be on the back of the books. Just an informative box, nothing more.

[griffonwing]

Originally Posted by Elfwreck

One of things that I like best about America, is that I don't have to live my life on your God's terms. I can live, and raise my children, by the terms of the Gods of my faith.

So are mine. And they are different from yours.

I don't want your preferred warnings on books for my kids, implying to them that there's something wrong with sex. And I'm sure you don't want my preferred warnings on books for your kids, implying that monotheism is something they shouldn't be exposed to until they're better educated.

Oh, for the love of Pete. I do not think there is anything 'wrong' with sex. Not in the least. I 'do' however think that children should not be overly exposed at too young of an age.

My idea of too young, and your idea of too young, I am certain they are vastly different. I would just like the opportunity to raise my child then I see fit, the same way you desire to do the same.

[Danny Fekete]

Originally Posted by tompe

But they will provide other pressure. The will provide pressure to authors to make their books confirm to what is perceived to be allowed content for a specific marketing label.

I feel like I agreed with this already in 2008 but I can't find my post, so I might not have gotten around to writing it. So, I agree. I'm against any sort of systematic and mandatory rating or tagging system that's imposed by a sanctioned organization rather than built up by the community. A wikipedia-style catalogue of book tags, with all the internal struggling and sensitivity to consensus would be interesting; an MPAA for books with associated enforcement against potential readers would be horrible.

[Elfwreck]

Originally Posted by griffonwing

Oh, for the love of Pete. I do not think there is anything 'wrong' with sex. Not in the least. I 'do' however think that children should not be overly exposed at too young of an age.

I don't think there's anything wrong with cars and driving. I do think that young children should not be driving, and they should be greatly informed about the dangers when they are old enough to try it. I don't think that the existence of driving should be hidden from them, or that very young children aren't able to enjoy books about cars and driving, although I think that overly-technical books about the mechanics involved won't be interesting or useful to them. I also think books that glorify racing might not be good for them, because they're often too focused on the action and don't mention the risks, which adult readers don't need to be reminded of. But I don't think that car-focused books need a warning, although it'd be nice if something in the cover art or back cover info said that cars were involved, so those who aren't interested could skip that book.

Is that what you mean when you say you don't think there's anything wrong with sex? Because that's what I mean.

I will note that children tend to be a lot more interested in stories about cars than stories about sex--unless the adults in their lives have convinced them that sex is a Very Important Topic that the mere awareness of makes them more adult.

My idea of too young, and your idea of too young, I am certain they are vastly different. I would just like the opportunity to raise my child then I see fit, the same way you desire to do the same.

That's what I'd like.

And raising my kids the way I think is right, involves not putting up with "warnings" for content I don't find objectionable.

[tompe]

Originally Posted by Danny Fekete

A wikipedia-style catalogue of book tags, with all the internal struggling and sensitivity to consensus would be interesting;.

It might work OK. But if publishers start to relate sales figures with this rating I suppose there is a risk at least for implicit pressure put on authors writing for example YA.

Actually I seem to remember a recent debate about whether a YA label was bad or not. Some authors writing books that was sold as YA did not like to have this label at all.

[Elfwreck]

Originally Posted by Danny Fekete

I'm against any sort of systematic and mandatory rating or tagging system that's imposed by a sanctioned organization rather than built up by the community. A wikipedia-style catalogue of book tags, with all the internal struggling and sensitivity to consensus would be interesting; an MPAA for books with associated enforcement against potential readers would be horrible.

I agree.

The problem isn't in making a warnings collection; a group of interested parents & other people could open a Delicious account now and start making book lists with warnings. With a bit of coding skill, they could make a way to print them out; they could take them to their local libraries and request to have all the YA books tagged with whatever labels they like.

And at the small, community level, I'd be in favor of that. A community can decide where its standards for "extreme violence in text" are, without having to push its standards on others.

The problems start when people don't want to have to reference a parent-created website, when they want to foist the content decisions and the labeling issue on to publishers.

I don't mind if other people want labels on their YA books, but I don't want to pay extra for those labels, and I don't want to read them. (Mostly because I suspect they won't warn for the content I try to steer my kids away from.)

[griffonwing]

Originally Posted by Danny Fekete

I feel like I agreed with this already in 2008 but I can't find my post, so I might not have gotten around to writing it. So, I agree. I'm against any sort of systematic and mandatory rating or tagging system that's imposed by a sanctioned organization rather than built up by the community. 1-A wikipedia-style catalogue of book tags, with all the internal struggling and sensitivity to consensus would be interesting; 2-an MPAA for books with associated enforcement against potential readers would be horrible.

1- Totally agree. That would be very good. I would support this kind of endeavor. However, the only doenside I see to this is that you would have no access for this at any bookstore, currently. Unless these could be accessed at kiosks in some stores.

2- I do not thing the MPAA should be involved. I think either the publisher or the author should have the responsibility to say "Hey, this book does contain some mild violence, a bit of language, and some situations of sexuality" or "Contains violence and scenes of rape".

And this has nothing to do with religious beliefs or dogma, or lach thereof. Basic respect from the author to their reader.

I have actually taken a book back to the store because there were scenes that I found disgusting and they were never even hinted at on the back. It was a gratuitous act solely there for shock value, and gave nothing to the story.

[Moejoe]

Originally Posted by tompe

It might work OK. But if publishers start to relate sales figures with this rating I suppose there is a risk at least for implicit pressure put on authors writing for example YA.

Actually I seem to remember a recent debate about whether a YA label was bad or not. Some authors writing books that was sold as YA did not like to have this label at all.

I can't stand the label, it's demeaning to those who it intends to target and I fear its only there to help marketers, not readers or writers.

[Danny Fekete]

Originally Posted by griffonwing

1- Totally agree. That would be very good. I would support this kind of endeavor. However, the only doenside I see to this is that you would have no access for this at any bookstore, currently. Unless these could be accessed at kiosks in some stores.

Cool, fair enough. Also, take heart: the current audience of this discussion probably buys a lot of books within close proximity to an Internet connection.

Originally Posted by griffonwing

2- I do not thing the MPAA should be involved. I think either the publisher or the author should have the responsibility to say "Hey, this book does contain some mild violence, a bit of language, and some situations of sexuality" or "Contains violence and scenes of rape".

And this has nothing to do with religious beliefs or dogma, or lach thereof. Basic respect from the author to their reader.

I have actually taken a book back to the store because there were scenes that I found disgusting and they were never even hinted at on the back. It was a gratuitous act solely there for shock value, and gave nothing to the story.

(I meant the equivalent of the MPAA, maybe a "Publisher and Guardian Association of America," or whatever. The point is something with the sort of clout that the MPAA has, but for books, like.)

I hope it wasn't an independent bookseller from whom you demanded your refund. What's the basis of your entitlement not to be shocked, offended, saddened, infuriated, or inspired by a product without explicit prior warning on the packaging? Why is the bookseller (and eventually, the publisher) liable? You could have researched the book in all sorts of exciting, efficient, instantaneous, and free ways before you bought it.

[djgreedo]

Labeling books in these ways is good in theory but impossible in practice.

In a world where people are offended by things that don't have anything to do with them (e.g. gay marriage) or where sex is considered worse than violence (the American movie ratings system), how can anybody come up with a system that notifies parents of material that may be unsuitable for their children?

Perhaps people should rely on their own judgement or that of peer groups. If you belong to a religious group with set beliefs, the group can decide what they feel is suitable for children. If you are a parent, discuss it with other parents you trust and see eye-to-eye with.

The book industry or government cannot decide beyond a very superficial level what is suitable for children.

As for adults, we all should be mature enough to make informed decisions about what to read, and if you accidentally read something you don't like, then too bad.

It's trickier with books than movies. Movies show very explicit images. It makes sense to say 'this movie is very violent and should not be seen by children'. The way it is implemented is ridiculously stupid and money-driven, however. I wouldn't want a form of 'passive censorship' whereby a publisher won't put a book on the shelves unless the author weakens the content to fit a standard. Books are rare in that they are usually the work of a single person with a singular vision. If the author believes it is important for some sex or violence in their book, then I trust them.

I read a book once called "God's Concubine". The American release of the same book was renamed (subtly) to "Gods' Concubine" to appease the more Christian American culture. I find it sad that people can be so offended by fiction that the author has to change their vision.