Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

How Australia’s ‘Bluey’ conquered children’s entertainment

ft.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

381–390 of 461 posts

Re: How Australia’s ‘Bluey’ conquered children’s entertainment

#381

Post by skyyler »

theultdev wrote: post #380
skyyler wrote: post #379

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The characters shouldn't announce what they like to fuck. Has that happened in a kids show you've seen?

No. The shows I screen never say or portray anything sexual. They will find out that out on their own, without the help of kid shows. I have no idea what the character's sexual preferences are and I don't want to know. Curiously, how was it presented that they were lesbian, and who was lesbian? One of the ponies? lol.

Wait, why did you bring up characters on children's show announcing their sexual proclivities then?

Are you just getting angry about a hypothetical? Help me understand where you're coming from please

Re: How Australia’s ‘Bluey’ conquered children’s entertainment

#382

Post by lotsofpulp »

gambiting wrote: post #351
lotsofpulp wrote: post #315

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, but the content of Bluey is not going to understandable to a 2 year old. I would guess 3 is when some basic understanding starts, but 3.5 to be safe. In my experience, below 3.5 or so, more sing song-y and basic repetitious stuff is digestible. Bluey episodes have a plot and lots of dialogue that has to be followed.

>> I would guess 3 is when some basic understanding starts My son is 2.5 and he absolutely understands what's happening in cartoons. He will comment on action saying clear things like "daddy he hit him in the head!" And then you have to pause it and actually explain it's not nice and you shouldn't do that. I wish shows clearly aimed at small children didn't have those moments.

That is my point. Bluey’s stories may require showing a bad action, but a too young toddler will not have the capability to understand the broader context and resolution.

Re: How Australia’s ‘Bluey’ conquered children’s entertainment

#383

Post by theultdev »

skyyler wrote: post #381
theultdev wrote: post #380

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No. The shows I screen never say or portray anything sexual. They will find out that out on their own, without the help of kid shows. I have no idea what the character's sexual preferences are and I don't want to know. Curiously, how was it presented that they were lesbian, and who was lesbian? One of the ponies? lol.

Wait, why did you bring up characters on children's show announcing their sexual proclivities then? Are you just getting angry about a hypothetical? Help me understand where you're coming from please

I'm not angry? And I didn't bring it up, you brought up the lesbian in MLP.

How was it presented in the show?

Re: How Australia’s ‘Bluey’ conquered children’s entertainment

#384

Post by theultdev »

bcrosby95 wrote: post #372
theultdev wrote: post #366

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bluey prepares kids more for the real world more than the corporate HR messages the US shows have. It's not about checking diversity boxes, it's about handling your emotions. And yes, we're all tired of "woke" shit, that's not the real world, but it tries to parade as it is.

In my 8 year old's classroom there is: A kid in a wheelchair. Another with mild autism. Another whose being raised by the grandparents because her mother is a drug addict. Another with pretty severe alopecia (this being her "best friend"). One of her other friends has been very sad because her aunt was killed in Israel. This is all "real world". And it affects us despite it not happening to our family. At least not y…

You teach morals to handle all situations.

You don't have to directly have brokenness, sex, rape, drugs, and murder in kids shows even if those things exist in the real world.

Re: How Australia’s ‘Bluey’ conquered children’s entertainment

#385

Post by skyyler »

theultdev wrote: post #383
skyyler wrote: post #381

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wait, why did you bring up characters on children's show announcing their sexual proclivities then? Are you just getting angry about a hypothetical? Help me understand where you're coming from please

I'm not angry? And I didn't bring it up, you brought up the lesbian in MLP. How was it presented in the show?

Why did you bring up whether the characters want to fuck?

Re: How Australia’s ‘Bluey’ conquered children’s entertainment

#386

Post by sophacles »

theultdev wrote: post #384
bcrosby95 wrote: post #372

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In my 8 year old's classroom there is: A kid in a wheelchair. Another with mild autism. Another whose being raised by the grandparents because her mother is a drug addict. Another with pretty severe alopecia (this being her "best friend"). One of her other friends has been very sad because her aunt was killed in Israel. This is all "real world". And it affects us despite it not happening to our family. At least not y…

You teach morals to handle all situations. You don't have to directly have brokenness, sex, rape, drugs, and murder in kids shows even if those things exist in the real world.

I find it easier to learn abstract things like morals when there are also examples presented along-side them. More so when those examples are practical and applicable to my life. I find this to be a common sentiment.

Are you really trying to say that showing brown people and kids with a single parent is equivalent to showing rape and drug use?

Perhaps you should pause and reflect on your own morals if you think these are equivalent.

Re: How Australia’s ‘Bluey’ conquered children’s entertainment

#387

Post by evan_ »

geraldwhen wrote: post #285
afavour wrote: post #274

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The show unashamedly depicts an intact household with two loving, heterosexual parents. It's "stunning and brave" in the current culture. Eh? I'm trying to think of peer shows of Bluey... Peppa Pig and Daniel Tiger come to mind (Trash Truck anyone? Charming little show), heterosexual parents are by far and away the norm. The idea that it's "brave" to show them feels like a conservative talking point that's out of s…

[flagged]

[flagged]

Re: How Australia’s ‘Bluey’ conquered children’s entertainment

#388

Post by mech4bg »

I saw some people wondering if there will be more shows - my kids use the iView app and a VPN to watch Bluey (which has been handy to get access early to new episodes!) and they've been advertising they'll be doing a long-form 28 minute episode this year.

Re: How Australia’s ‘Bluey’ conquered children’s entertainment

#389

Post by theultdev »

skyyler wrote: post #385
theultdev wrote: post #383

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not angry? And I didn't bring it up, you brought up the lesbian in MLP. How was it presented in the show?

Why did you bring up whether the characters want to fuck?

Because that's what your sexual preference essentially is.

Why is it relevant in a kid's show?

Re: How Australia’s ‘Bluey’ conquered children’s entertainment

#390

Post by johnnyanmac »

berrel wrote: post #318
johnnyanmac wrote: post #308

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guess you think that bodybuilders, models, and actors (film and especially Theatre) are all misandric/misogynistic as well? They fit all the items above as well. I guess I see why the comment upstream was flagged.

Please explain your logic more clearly, I don't see the connection you're making between the occupations you mentioned and men dressing up to make an offensive mockery of women in the way they do for drag.

What's there to explain? You defined the terms:

>They wear costumes intended to represent [Person]

>adopt a persona under Fake name

>act out every demeaning, offensive stereotype for s/laughs/entertainment, boften leaning heavily on the physical experiences.

>Then they take off those costumes and get to go about their lives, without having to live under those same stereotypes they helped perpetuate for fun or money

How is RuPaul doing anything different that America's next top model, Hollywood, or any other competition based on looks doing? It's just personal interpretations if you view it as empowering, demeaning, or even bigoted. They all get the same accusations levied at them after all.

Post reply on HN