Mom demands for Sleeping Beauty to be banned from school

[MisterBlueStar4 1,004]

And of course someone is offended by something just like every other day.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5110415/Mother-demands-son-s-school-ban-Sleeping-Beauty.html

[Fantozzi 4,069]

The error lies here:

"fairytale promotes unacceptable behaviour"

If fiction had this influence world obviously had to be much better.

There were so many studies about pornography and violence in media showing no direct relationship to RL behavior. Most of the time fiction - sadly promotes nothing at all - nor good, nor bad. In some rare cases instead it may happen - but there must be mental problems present, a disorder, to get confused and to use fiction as some kind of template for problem-solving in RL. 

Childs learn language only on social contact. They don't learn language from media. If you buy a million childs book for your kids - they won't learn anything from it. It's obvious to adopt behaviour (strategies of interaction) it must be transferred by social interaction - which fiction simply can't offer. Almost all learing in the early years happens by observing and copying behavior. Children can't abstract language rules from grammar books and the same they can't abstract behavior from characters in books. This is a very complex task - to recognize a model, a template, a typology in a story and to transfer it into some kind of code of conduct.

How much effort it is to tech children a code of conduct. Again and again you have to do examples, again and again you have to show and explain - how to use the fork and the spoon. 

They really believe they learning the same ( or even much complex behavior) from a prince and a princess by reading some sentencess  in book? So why can't children learn to use fork and spoon at once the same way?

How it comes, they learn everything bad immediately from media but to learn some simple behavior takes half a year and more of regular training behavior?

Is there a single child in this world that learned how to use spoon and fork from a book? How they can have even the idear - it is working this way and they learn gender roles from books if they can't even learn the simplest things from books? Where did they put their mind?

This is so nonsense. They just show they don't understand nothing about their own childrens needs at all. As if a book could substitute a hug, as if books could substitute compliments: "you did this well, you did this good." The parential reward system. Books can't give any rewards to childs, saying: you did fine, you did a great job."

Parent's talking this way - to me showing they aren't able to give this environment to their children (as they are too busy to care for them) and therefore they have to be afraid of the influence from media.

How sad.

So ask - why this mother is in fear, why she is worried. Tell you, she has bad conscience. Otherwise she wouldn't have even to think a fairy tale could be a competitor in education. As media not stand a chance against parents. But those parents say: "I have to read my mails now. Why you don't go and watch TV?"

Those parents give over their job to media. Much to often. And so they must fear bad influence from media. But if they do their job - there is no need to be in worries about media.

One should assist children to have their own questions - to question Little Red Riding Hood and the wolf (gender roles) instead of washing their brains from all questionable stuff - so no question remains.

My five cents.

 

[MisterBlueStar4 1,004]

4 hours ago, Fantozzi said:

The error lies here:

"fairytale promotes unacceptable behaviour"

If fiction had this influence world obviously had to be much better.

There were so many studies about pornography and violence in media showing no direct relationship to RL behavior. Most of the time fiction - sadly promotes nothing at all - nor good, nor bad. In some rare cases instead it may happen - but there must be mental problems present, a disorder, to get confused and to use fiction as some kind of template for problem-solving in RL. 

Childs learn language only on social contact. They don't learn language from media. If you buy a million childs book for your kids - they won't learn anything from it. It's obvious to adopt behaviour (strategies of interaction) it must be transferred by social interaction - which fiction simply can't offer. Almost all learing in the early years happens by observing and copying behavior. Children can't abstract language rules from grammar books and the same they can't abstract behavior from characters in books. This is a very complex task - to recognize a model, a template, a typology in a story and to transfer it into some kind of code of conduct.

How much effort it is to tech children a code of conduct. Again and again you have to do examples, again and again you have to show and explain - how to use the fork and the spoon. 

They really believe they learning the same ( or even much complex behavior) from a prince and a princess by reading some sentencess  in book? So why can't children learn to use fork and spoon at once the same way?

How it comes, they learn everything bad immediately from media but to learn some simple behavior takes half a year and more of regular training behavior?

Is there a single child in this world that learned how to use spoon and fork from a book? How they can have even the idear - it is working this way and they learn gender roles from books if they can't even learn the simplest things from books? Where did they put their mind?

This is so nonsense. They just show they don't understand nothing about their own childrens needs at all. As if a book could substitute a hug, as if books could substitute compliments: "you did this well, you did this good." The parential reward system. Books can't give any rewards to childs, saying: you did fine, you did a great job."

Parent's talking this way - to me showing they aren't able to give this environment to their children (as they are too busy to care for them) and therefore they have to be afraid of the influence from media.

How sad.

So ask - why this mother is in fear, why she is worried. Tell you, she has bad conscience. Otherwise she wouldn't have even to think a fairy tale could be a competitor in education. As media not stand a chance against parents. But those parents say: "I have to read my mails now. Why you don't go and watch TV?"

Those parents give over their job to media. Much to often. And so they must fear bad influence from media. But if they do their job - there is no need to be in worries about media.

One should assist children to have their own questions - to question Little Red Riding Hood and the wolf (gender roles) instead of washing their brains from all questionable stuff - so no question remains.

My five cents.

 

This story did get me a little angry and kinda got me laughing because it's just so ridiculous.However,I see what point you're trying to make. 

[T Wrecks 10,210]

I see much truth in that. If this were actually what children grow up with, then we might have a problem, yes. However, it isn't. There are parents, there are teachers, there are other kids, there are other media as well.

Any child with a halfways functioning brain would never think that sexually harassing sleeping people is fine just because the teacher once said "Today we are going to read the fairytale about the Sleeping Beauty". They know it's a fairytale, they know it's a story, they know it's not real, and they know that people do generally not tend to sleep for decades, only to be kissed back to life. Even if they couldn't mould this knowledge into words yet, they possess it - by pure observation.

So yes, this mother probably either has a bad conscience, or she is on some kind of personal crusade and jumps at shadows to feel self-righteous and important: "I found something, I am fighting, I am relevant, I am courageous! People contradict me and refuse - that merely shows how relevant I am! I make them feel uncomfortable, I put my finger where it hurts!" So maybe the yearning for purpose, for importance, for meaning, is also a factor here.

[Jasoncw 12,060]

@T WrecksIf a witch puts me to sleep, I, Jasoncw, give you full consent to kiss me to life the curse. 

 

I understand what this person is saying, and she isn't completely unreasonable. She's saying to push Sleeping Beauty back to a later grade so that the kids will be old enough to talk about it. It's possible to enjoy something and also understand that it's problematic. And it's true that stories where guys kiss random sleeping hot girls that they stumble across is problematic. But I also agree that children's behavior is modeled after their parents and other people in their lives, and not so much books. In fact I wouldn't be surprised of most of that was already ingrained into a person before they even get to school. Either way, I'm not worried about the effects of Sleeping Beauty on society.  

[Ocram's Razr 964]

Besides, it’s true love’s kiss. In derivative works, a kiss on the forehead by a mother or sister can break a curse. The sleeping curse is distinct from regular sleep because you don’t wake up from the curse until it’s broken (though I saw an interesting derivative work where lovers sharing the same heart had to take turns being asleep) so it’s like waking a loved one from a coma.

[T Wrecks 10,210]

16 hours ago, Jasoncw said:

@T WrecksIf a witch puts me to sleep, I, Jasoncw, give you full consent to kiss me to life the curse. 

D'awww... this is the most (b)romantic thing I've read here in a while.

On a more serious note, yes - I agree that covering that story and thinking a bit about its implications is definitely better than censoring it to suit today's standards, as happened with a few children's books already. Better to confront any problems, not least because it also teaches a valuable lesson about changing perceptions of appropriateness and any kind of problem that may exist in society without people noticing it for a long time... which might lead to some thought about whether there are ideas that are universally sensible and do not change with time, and how to tell those apart from ideas and concepts that everybody just takes for granted even though they might be considered wrong, harmful, and discriminating by following generations.

[Fantozzi 4,069]

On 30.11.2017 at 7:44 PM, Jasoncw said:

I'm not worried about the effects of Sleeping Beauty on society.  

 

Well it's a story about parents can't surpress that at a certain age children get interest in sexuality. The spell some day your daughter will be bleeding - put on sleeping beauty by a granny fairy while all other fairies are lovely and young) represents the fathers subconscious wish - no other man should ever touch her, she never should become adult, my love always should be the only love to protect her. He can't stand the old fairy -> being afraid of being old.

 

To ban all spinning wheels means - to forbid women to discover this pleasurees (think of a merry go round, the dance of life, the turn of times, the wheel of life - fertility).

 

Being hurt by the spindle - so first time bleeding at the age of 15 (won't explain here what this metaphor means but think off it's related to the nature of females) makes her fall asleep for 100 years -> not growing older and getting her own life but always remaing the child of her father - the natural progression of life stops - the whole land falls asleep - as the father tries to surpress the natures circles, he's getting old while her daughter herself get's married, becomes children and grow old herself. So this the refuse of natural changes instead everthing has to stay the same.

But the father can't take away the spell, it must be a young man - a concurrent to the father's love, a, well, lover - who can kiss her awake - means: to make her an adult woman. Helicopter parents, they also become unfree and too much dependend on their children, so they can't go on without them neither. So the prince doesn't simply kiss the daughter awake, he awakes the whole kindom, by breaking into the family relationship he breaks the spell on all, freed the whole family from being stuck. He took the spell also from the father, who tried to protect the daughter from life. Also he can go on now..

So the basic meaning is: there comes a day you must set your children free. You can't protect them from sexual experience and so making them dependend on your parential love being the only love permitted. Or maybe: fathers shouldn't be jealous on the lovers of their daughters. As to protect your children from growing up is like to stop the wheel of life from turning.

 

So that's the humor of it - this mother making the same mistake as the king. Maybe she understood the story pretty well and that's her worries. My daughter dreaming of a prince? Oh, no, never! Never ever she should get in contact with sexuality - better she sleeps for 100 years.

 

[Duke87 1,070]

This is ridiculous. Princess Aurora clearly didn't mind being woken up by Prince Charming kissing her. You'd have a legitimate beef about consent being an issue if she complained about it and he persisted but that's not what happened at all. She quite willingly rides off into the sunset with him with a huge smile on her face, for Pete's sake. There is no shortage of consent there.