Conservapedia - User contributions [en]

User talk:Treadd

2014-06-16T17:10:38Z

Treadd: Created page with "Hi, everyone."

Hi, everyone.

User:Treadd

2014-06-16T17:10:17Z

Treadd: Created page with "==Hello== My name is Tread (pronounced as "trade," because my parents are horrible people). I'm 28 years old, currently living in Georgia, USA. Beyond what's there, I really don..."

==Hello==

My name is Tread (pronounced as "trade," because my parents are horrible people). I'm 28 years old, currently living in Georgia, USA. Beyond what's there, I really don't have anything to say.

Debate:Is Rap music torture?

2014-06-16T16:06:00Z

Treadd:

According to ''ABC News'', suspected terrorists undergoing [[coercive interrogation]] have been " forced to listen to rap artist Eminem's 'Slim Shady' album. The music was so foreign to them it made them frantic" [http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/print?id=1322866] Is this dehumanizing treatment banned by the Geneva Convention, and if not, should it be?

:I suspect the detail about the kind of music was mentioned to make the treatment sound more ludicrous and less cruel. If you can encourage people to joke about whether rap music is torture, you're deflecting attention from the general character of the treatment itself.

:I suspect that the significance of the music's being "foreign" is that the patterns to it are unfamiliar, and it would be preceived as unpredictable noise rather than as music.

:What volume level was it played at? Was the real point to induce sleep deprivation?

:If you played "music" to me at 110 db, continuously, it wouldn't really matter whether it was rap, Balinese Gamelan music, or Khachaturian's ''Sabre Dance,'' it would deprive me of sleep.

:But if you say "they were subjected to intense noise" it sounds like it could be torture, whereas if you say "they were subjected to rap music," it sounds like a joke. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 21:23, 23 April 2007 (EDT)

::What [[User:Dpbsmith|he]] said. I was too lazy to type it myself. As far as "torture" or banning under the GC (as if ''we'd'' pay attention to such "outdated concepts"), once you reach a certain volume level, which is easy to do in small cinder block rooms, it's not only not "music", it's simply a physical assault - it causes permanent damage, for instance. [[User:Human|Human]] 00:21, 24 April 2007 (EDT)

:::Well at what point it causes permanent brain damage is debatable... [[User:RobS|RobS]] 00:37, 24 April 2007 (EDT)

::::Who said anything about ''brain'' damage? The effect of prolonged exposure to high sound pressure levels (for varying times and SPLs) is well documented - ''on the ears''.

:::::Point taken. I amend my statement. [[User:RobS|RobS]] 10:04, 24 April 2007 (EDT)

People can be very creative when it comes to finding new ways to harm others. - Suricou

During the invasion of Panama, when Noriega was hiding in the Vatican embasy the US blasted rap until he came out. [[User:Czolgolz|Czolgolz]] 12:01, 24 April 2007 (EDT)

If it is, why do people listen to it? {{unsigned|JessicaS}}

:Songs by [[Barney the Dinosaur]] were also used in this capacity. While cultural barriers rendered this technique mainly ineffective at [[Guantanamo Bay]], if this were to be used against Americans I would expect it to be a powerful coercive weapon. --[[User:Jeremiah4-22|Jeremiah4-22]] 14:21, 2 May 2007 (EDT)

West Coast rap or East Coast rap? [[User:Sterile|Sterile]]

I kind of think that Country music can be tourture. [[User:Jason|Jason]] 22:37, 10 October 2007 (EDT)

== Yes ==
It makes my ears bleed. --[[User:Capercorn]] [[User Talk:Capercorn|Talk]] [[Special:Contributions/Capercorn|contribs]] 10:56, 27 November 2007 (EST)

It's annoying. All of the songs are about the same thing.--[[User:Rocky|Rocky]]

Of course, when it is used to facilitate long term sleep deprivation. It's terrible. [[User:Nrupert|Nrupert]] 13:50, 11 December 2008 (EST)

==No==
Hiphop is a culture, valued by many in our society. Many find the abstract lyricisms and the diverse beats confusing, but its a tool for freedom of speech, and an outlet for many writers.
--[[User:Codyblizzard|Codyblizzard]] 12:42, 28 November 2011 (EST)

==No==
As JessicaS above said, people wouldn't listen to it if it was torture. Although, I do find it rather funny that it has been used as a weapon against hostage-takers etc. [[User:SavedByGod|SavedByGod]] 12:39, 13 January 2008 (EST)

== No ==
It truly matters.--[[User:Aquacadet|Aquacadet]] 17:35, 21 April 2008 (EDT)

It is horrible in most cases. >:( [[User:BethanyS|~BCS]][[User talk:BethanyS|Talk2'''ME''']] 18:42, 21 April 2008 (EDT)

== Depends, really ==
"rap" is a very broad term, with TONS of subgenres and such. Theres some good rap out there, like NWA and some of the other old-school rap (which I like.). Just...don't bash an entire genre based on a single song.

But I agree that most hip-hop, or crunk music that's '''popular''' is crap. Most people who really do like rap agree.
[[Category:Conservapedia Debates]]

Calling it "torture" is a bit much. However I will say that Rap music, and most popular music tributaries have been leading the front of an effort to curb instrumental effort in music.
-JBall

==No==

Rap music is not torture. No music is torture. Regardless of how you may view it, or listen to it, music is the expression of the writer/singer. It is a person opening a piece of their soul to the world and saying "Look. Look at the world from my perspective for the next three minutes, and see that you are not alone in the world." It is one of the most beautiful things man creates.

That said, the way it was used was torture. For everyone involved, from the victim to the torturer to the artist whose perspective was abused to force compliance. [[User:Treadd|Treadd]] 12:06, 16 June 2014 (EDT)

Debate:Propaganda in childrens' television

2014-06-16T15:54:44Z

Treadd:

I was editing the article on the Wombles a while ago, and it occured to me that the program is in some ways liberal propaganda. I didn't want to sound paranoid so I didn't give much further thought to it, until it occured to me that a lot of childrens' programs seem to be suspicious in that regard. There is the very blatent Captain Planet, for a start. Then while reading the article on starfish here I noticed some have concerns regarding Spongebob Squarepants - though I cannot verify this myself as I refuse to watch such trash. Even the classic Sesame Street has that couple who appear worryingly like cohabiting homosexuals, and it's famous episode on death had a distinct lack of Christian worldview. Perhaps Conservapedia members should investigate for other examples? Parents rarely pay great attention to childrens' entertainment, so it's quite possible we are missing this hidden way in which values counter to our own culture are being slipped under the radar. I'm not suggesting that there is a great conspiricy here (Maybe a tiny one) - only that program producers tend to include their own values in the programs, and most people working in childrens' TV production seem to be leftists and lukewarm christians at best. - [[User:NewCrusader|NewCrusader]]

Yes!!!!
Ugh! Soon they are gonna talk about how bad and evil war is, I'm allmost about to throw up! --[[User:Nabroon|Nabroon]] 19:18, 16 August 2008 (EDT)
::That's probably attributable more to wanting to avoid contriversy. Show realistic war in a childrens' program, and get accused of traumatising them - thus programs are forced to take either the 'world peace' route of having all the characters oppose the war, or the 'toy soldiers' route where there is plenty of fighting, glory and patriotism but it's all really dumbed down and sanitised so much even the enemy doesn't die, and the good guys have a brilliently fun time playing with the guns and saving the country. Could you find some examples for me? [[User:NewCrusader|NewCrusader]] 20:08, 2 September 2008 (EDT)

Captain Planet has been off the air for 15 years, Bert and Ernie are NOT gay, and what's your concern with old SpongeBob? As a parent and teacher, I'm more concerned that kids TV are nothing but commercials for toys. [[User:CraigC|CraigC]] 10:02, 7 September 2008 (EDT)

:I still see it on reruns sometimes, but 'niche' is insufficient to describe how rarely. My concern is that we really don't ''know'' what is on the TV.
:I grew up on the Wombles and later watched Captain Planet every morning. It served as a timer: mid-way through the episode was time to finish breakfast and get ready for school. I still don't know how most of them ended. Looking back, I can see that the two programs influenced what I thought at the time - I did the recycling fad, and the energy-saving fad where I annoyed my parents by turning the lights off every time a room was empty for ten seconds.
:The programs I grew up with are no longer shown often, but what are children today growing up on? I don't watch childrens' TV, I really have not the faintest idea what programs today teach, and I expect many parents to have a similar lack of knowledge. This ignorance is a concern. If liberalism could get into TV fifteen years ago, why couldn't it get in today? Is there any way to be sure, short of spending weeks watching children's TV to see what values they teach?
:Bert and Ernie... while not gay, are still two adult men who live together, which looks very suspicious and at the very least will create the impression that this is a normal arrangement. As for spongebob, no idea - someone else made that accusation on another page, I just repeated it here. I would never watch such rubbish. Also, you are right about them being over-commercial - but that's a completly separate concern. [[User:NewCrusader|NewCrusader]] 13:04, 7 September 2008 (EDT)
::I'm an elementary teacher with a small child so I'm exposed to much more children's TV than I could care for. PBS has really good stuff, concentrating mostly on education and character development. I must disagree with you about Bert and Ernie. They are not adults, they play with toys and do other childish things. According to the PBS website, they're just friends. Besides, by the time a kid is old enough to know what a gay couple is, they wouldn't be watching Sesame Street anymore. Commercial TV runs the guantlet from educational to absolutely moronic. Some people don't like Sponge Bob because they think he's effeminite, but I don't see it. Sure there's liberalism in many shows, but there's also conservatism. It's up to the PARENTS to monitor what their kids are watching. And if you ever want to see a hilarious take on Bert and Ernie's relationship, check out the broadway play 'Avenue Q.' Thanks. [[User:CraigC|CraigC]] 22:52, 8 September 2008 (EDT)

I've always seen Clifford the Big Red Dog as a symbol of communism.
:Paranoid as I might be, even I don't believe that one :) [[User:NewCrusader|NewCrusader]] 14:08, 27 September 2008 (EDT)
Lest we forget Tinky Winky and the Teletubbies. Be that as it may, I do miss wholesome shows like Mr. Rogers' Neighborhood, a show that I grew up with and helped shape who I am today. Most of today's children's entertainment is rubbish, and it serves as a babysitter most of the time. [[User:WesleyS|WesleyS]][[User Talk:WesleyS|Hello!]] 21:11, 10 November 2008 (EST)

First off, Spongebob is not so much a children's show as a teenage show. Like that of Cow and Chicken, or more previously Shrek, it teaches children lessons as many other shows do, and they understand. It is done in a certain way that many of the jokes in the show can only be understood by older kids, but the admirable characters and colourful animation get the message of basic morals across to young children.
Of course liberalism can be seen in kids' shows, we are living in a changing world and the mass media must adjust to suit the opinions of the majority of viewers, and thus must teach children that ethnic and religous differences etc are now accepted in society, which is true on the most part.
If you want "wholesome" TV for kids, sit them in front of the Disney Channel, in which life is impossibly happy and protganonists are always the popular, pretty kids. --[[User:LauraF|LauraF]] 08:44, 25 February 2009 (EST)
[[Category:Conservapedia Debates]]

This is a good subject for discussion,many children's programs are guilty of this, here is a short list of their 'crimes':
* Sponge bob: Promoting [[evolution]], [[pantheism]], theres an episode where he decides to become one with nature, so he spends the rest of his life in the woods, completely unclothed for the duration of the show. In another episode him and Patrick raise a clam being its parents.

*Transformers: [[Singularitarianism]] possibly even [[genocide]] since the decepticons are always being destroyed.

*Arthur: [[evolution]] public education]] [[progressivism]]

*Teletubbies: [[moral relativism]][[anarchy]] no solid proof of this though.

again children's programming is no less than a vast global conspiracy to brainwash youth into hopeless and heretical liberal nightmares.
Thats my spin on it anyway. [[Baronvonbob]]

My take is that, while there is indeed liberalism in children's programming, there is also conservativism. There are even shows with no real bent toward one or the other, a la ''Phineas and Ferb.'' Further, I greatly enjoyed ''Transformers'' and ''Arthur,'' I missed the window for enjoying ''Teletubbies,'' but watched it with my little sister. I never noticed the "crimes" that Baronvonbob referenced.

As for ''Captain Planet,'' what's wrong with teaching children to protect the environment and recycle? Regardless of whether global warming is real or not, smog certainly is, as is toxic runoff. [[User:Treadd|Treadd]] 11:54, 16 June 2014 (EDT)