Slashdot Mirror
Dirty Dozen- The Most Dangerous Toys of 2001
An anonymous reader pointed us to The Dirty Dozen
which lists the most dangerous toys for children. #1 on the list is Metal Gear Solid 2 (which I finished this weekend and highly recommend)
Also making the cut are Gundam and Dragonball Zaction figures (nothing scarier then Bulma on a bad hair day I guess), Super Street Fighter II and Doom. Of course the specific version of doom they classify as one of the most dangerous toys of 2001 is the Game Boy Advanced port, and I gotta agree with them on the GBA thing, those things are dangerous. Play for more then 30 minutes, and you go blind.
I spent a lot of my time playing FPS style games, but I was 17 years old + (today I'm 29) and I was mature enough to realize that it's a game, and that there's nothing fun about violence except when it's in a movie or in a video game.
I would NOT let a 10 year-old play Quake 3 or Half-Life. Just like I wouldn't let the same kid watch a porno movie or a gory horror film.
I feel it desensitizes a child too much. So I have to say I agree.
Lawn darts... they were my favorite. We used to make the neighbor kid catch 'em.
Here are some other dangerous toys that didn't make that list.
Heh.. People are amusing these days.. My son loves DBZ, I love it, my mom loves it. It's not as realistically violent as Looney Tunes. I mean, so Goku shoots out some sort of flaming orb. Tom and Jerry chase each other with knives (something children have seen with their own eyes) yet Tom and Jerry is acceptable because it's a "classic" ? It's bullshit. Years ago people played with GI Joes. DBZ action figures are harmless. If my son wants to pretend to shoot some spirit bomb on me, that's fine. It's better than him chasing me down with a steak knife.
It's the same bullshit we're more accustomed to reading from Jamie and Michael -- whenever a government or organization takes action, they piously declare that aprents should take responsibility for their children. And then it's a fundamental assault on freedom when parents decide to parent instead of following the prescribed "Your Rights Online" way of life.
I've managed to learn not to flame most of the hypocrisy here ("A new patch for a Windows bug -- the closed source development model is so buggy! A new Linux kernel patch -- look how quickly the open-source model finds and fixes bugs!") but I find this one so offensive it pushes my buttons every time.
What I'm listening to now on Pandora...
They're arguable trying. Here's a link to their testimony to Congress. They're apparently trying to get Congressional support so that action figure tie-ins from M-rated video games don't get marketed to children.
They've gone from "inform" to "lobby", in my opinion.
But, as a parent, I think I can tell which toys are too explicitly (or even suggestively) violent for my child. And even if I didn't know anything about software and video games, they now have a ratings system that tells me which age group for which they are most appropriate.
I think the thing that disturbs me most about this is not that some people would compile a list like this - people are free to state their opinions about toys and games all they want - it's that parents would rely so heavily on these types of lists to make their decisions for them. To me, it's just further evidence of a parent's wish to simply not be bothered or involved.
If you really want to have some influence on what your kids are getting into, then for the love of all things good, GET INVOLVED. Use some common sense! Do you want your kids considering guns as toys? No? Then don't buy them gun-wielding toys. It's a pretty simple concept. Don't want your kids to get the idea in their head that head-to-head combat is Good Thing[tm]? Then don't buy them fighting games. It's all very, very common-sensical. There are lots of toys from which to choose. Pick the ones with which you feel most comfortable.
My sigs always suck.
Dumb Slashdot editors:
./--they post stuff that they have no CLUE about.
./ pile on began, completely tearing this guy apart. Turns out the guy is in charge of basically the physical plant security there--he has nothing to do with software. I email Chris Dibona about this, he even replied that he knew that, but decided to leave it out of the article.
1 - The MGS2 thing is about the action figures, not the game.
2 - They don't rank the toys, so saying "#1 on the list..." doesn't mean what it's the worst.
3 - Nowhere on the page does it say "Most Dangerous Toys"
In fact, if you go to the front page of the web site, it states:
The mission of The Lion & Lamb Project is to stop the marketing of violence to children. We do this by helping parents, industry and government officials recognize that violence is not child?s play ? and by galvanizing concerned adults to take action
I don't think that is too bad of a thing. They are complaining that the MGS2 toy is marketed to children 5 and up, while the game is definitely a more mature title. Just another example of the complete morons who run
As another example, there was an article a week back or so about a security guy from MS being hired by the White House. Of course, the
Okay, I'm done ranting.
Where are we going and why am I in this handbasket?
The site says these are "Toys to Avoid" and says nothing about "Dangerous Toys". The PRIVATE ORGANIZTION'S agenda is to stop promoting violence to children, and this list is in line with that aim.
I didn't see "Most Dangerous Toys" anywhere.
This story sucks.
Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
Jeez --- a private site, simply listing toys that concerned parents might want to avoid this Christmas. That's all, folks!
Even worse is the crap quality of the negative responses. "If your children are jerks it's your fault, not the toys", "You should spend more time parenting and less time on this website." Unbelievable. Has it occurred to any of you that taking the time to choose toys for your children --- instead of buying whatever crap is marketed to them --- is actually evidence of being a good parent?
But, of course, /. hypocrites know no reason. It's techno-libertarian free internet for me, but get your site off my internet for thou. I'm sure if the story had been "Open Source Community Develops User-Driven Database of Toy Ratings" you'd all be creaming yourselves about the power of Open Source.
It's not the games. It's not the action figures. It's not the toys with "super-duper killer-missle launching action". It's parents who don't know how to teach a kid what's right, what's wrong, and how to tell the difference. Reminds me of a recent Penny Arcade strip
And whether or not you think shielding kids from violence is right or wrong, it's NOT your decision. It's the parent's decision. This web site simply lets parents share their finds. If I was Jane Clueless I might not know that Shadow Cat wasn't just another K'nex toy, but I might want to know that it fires missiles.
Something else for you breeding types to consider is that kids do take notice of their parents approvals and disapprovals. If Mom & Dad consistently say "No" to violent games, Junior does pick up on that. He may rebel and go seek those violent games out on his own, but that's part of growing up too. Deep down, though, he does learn that mom considers violence wrong. What he chooses to do with that knowledge makes him his own individual.
All in all, it's just another "Move along, nothing to see here" kind of story, (other than a kind of cool shopping list.)
John
John
The article is misleading; these are not dangerous toys, only toys that someone considers politically incorrect. Nothing is mentioned about any specific dangers that the toys present, only that the toys have links to violent videogames and television shows.
;)
Some of them shoot foam missiles; big deal! I think that a foot high robot that fires at room intruders is rather endearing.
Dangerous toys are things with parts that small children can choke on, stuff up their nose, or otherwise injure themselves with: sharp corners, fast-moving, massive projectiles, etc. Also, things containing dangerous substances, such as lead-based jewelry for children.
There is little connection between these properties and violence. Even in the category of fast moving things that can injure: this area is probably dominated by sporting equipment. Better not be getting your kid that hockey stick!