HIV-positive muppet frightens Republicans

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by UberKruX


what if a massive quantity of a HIV+ persons "bodily fluids" ends up on the toliet seat, and i have a huge gaping bleeding cut on my arse?

That's completely disgusting.

[NY Hoya]

Originally posted by Frogger
Even though PBS is publically funded, I don't see why anybody would object to a message of tolerance towards HIV-infected children. Most kids that age didn't get it by being junkies or having unprotected sex.

no, but there isn't a sizable enough population of little kids here with HIV to warrant subjecting our kids to it. Of course there are some kids that may have it, but there are also some kids who have abusive parents. Some issues are better left to those at an age who can deal with them. In the U.S., teaching kids about HIV at the ages 2-4 really won't do anything other than to trouble them.

Originally posted by Frogger
Besides which, it's ridiculous for the government to have such direct editorial control over even PBS. It isn't supposed to be the US equivalent of Pravda...

I think it's the government's job to ensure that the content that goes against the vast majority's wishes stays out of publicly funded broadcasts. This isn't about which party to vote for or what kind of lifestyles to accept. It's about the kind of content to which we want to subject our youngest kids.

[Gibsie]

Originally posted by NY Hoya
I'd suspect it's higher than the HIV infection rate of children 2-4. It's also much easier to hide an HIV infection from other kids in a class. Physical debilitations are nigh impossible to hide from other classmates.

Perhaps a show like this could teach kids that it's not someting they should be hiding or ashamed of.

[SpencerH]

I think that many people who dont have young children are unaware of the amount of information they have been exposed to by age 4 including the term "AIDS". In my experience with my own young children I was surprised when they were curious (but not scared) about what AIDS was. I'm not sure that this character will do any good, but I dont believe it will do any harm.

[Loif]

Well, I've read through this entire post. That in itself deserves a pat on the back.

I don't understand the thinking of people when they say "it's not a problem here so why worry about it?" To me, HIV and AIDS is a universal epidemic. It doesn't matter that the rate of infection may be lower in my country (Canada) than it is in other countries. That all goes out the window when innocent people are dying from this damn disease. I say show the program worldwide. Open the eyes of people who think they don't have a problem because AIDS isn't living next door to them. It is. You just aren't aware of it yet.

As for exposing HIV and AIDS to young children - hands up, how many people here actually have children? I do, although mine are older now. I did talk to them about HIV and AIDS when they were younger (yep in the age range being fought over), at about the age of four years. Kids are amazing creatures. They know more than you think they do. I say give them some background on the disease when they are younger and not only will it make them more aware of it but it may also promote love and care towards those who are unforunate enough to have contracted it.

Get a grip. AIDS is here and we need to educate our children about it any way we can be it through the home, the school or public television. The younger the better in my opinion.

[Dr Strangelove]

Sesame Street is produced by the "Children's Television Workshop", a non - profit corporation that produces versions of Sesme Street for a variety of countries. It has produced a number of other shows, such as "the Electric Company", and "3-2-1", funds research on how media can be used to improve how children learn, and even owns an amusement park. It is not owned by PBS or any other government agency. Reading some of their mission staements it is apparent that when they produce shows to be bought by various countries they generally work with officials of the country in order to custom make the show to meet that country's needs.

My understanding is that the version being produced for South Africa will provide some information about how HIV is spread and how it can be avoided. The epidemic in South Africa has reached critical proportions. The only effective means of combatting this disease there is behavioral modification. Perhaps teaching good sexual hygenie at an early age has some hopes of effecting sufficient change among the population to stem the spread of the disease.

[Saint Marcus]

Sesame Street is produced by the "Children's Television Workshop", a non - profit corporation that produces versions of Sesme Street for a variety of countries. It has produced a number of other shows, such as "the Electric Company", and "3-2-1", funds research on how media can be used to improve how children learn, and even owns an amusement park.

So what's the link with Jim Henson?

[Loif]

As far as I know, he was the creator of the Muppets. He died back in 1989 or 1990. Then his son took over, didn't he? That's about all I know about the guy.

[Q Classic]

see, i think this entire argument is kinda funny, and ridiculous. so is sean hannity, but he's funny sometimes.

it's not coming to the us; it's staying in safrica. doesn't concern us, so, why get your knickers in a twist?

by the same token, however, how exactly is this going to teach the little kids? forget about the innocence argument here. i mean, will three to six year olds truly understand the ramifications of an hiv-positive muppet? i don't think so. mainly because few people remember much from those time periods. and besides, even older kids, from seven to ten, who don't watch sesame street so much, will they get the message? trying to teach them tolerance, i dunno if it'll work. i think it's a flawed idea to begin with.

[MrFun]

Originally posted by Frogger
What's the difference between putting on crippled characters to promote acceptance of the physically disabled and HIV+ characters to promote acceptance of the infected?

Because -- Republicans like to think that sexuality is still a tabboo in our society.

Even though unsafe sex is not the only way HIV/AIDS get transmitted.


So there you have it -- HIV programs that educate children is not acceptable to conservatives, because it is partially linked to sexuality, whereas other disabilities and diseases are not.

But that is the Republicans' strange way of looking at today's world.

[Dr Strangelove]

Originally posted by Saint Marcus


So what's the link with Jim Henson?

Henson and his group designed Bert, Ernie, Cokkie Monster and the other original muppet characters on Sesame Street, but the show is produced by CTW. Henson's company is known as "The Muppet Factory". His company also designed "Rigel" on Farscape, but they don't produce that show either.

[Sikander]

It seems like a lot of people are arguing that the HIV positive muppet is needed in order to somehow slow the spread of AIDS. How is this going to work? Children at the age appropriate to the show have no control over whether they will become infected. They aren't sexually active, are too young to be injecting themselves and all of their medical care (like transfusions) is determined by others. This argument is a non-sequitor.

I've lost one close friend to AIDS, and a cousin. I'm all for education in order to stop the spread of this very preventable and terrible disease. I just don't see the point of this particular muppet here in the USA. I'd rather see age appropriate information disseminated which helps children deal with much more common problems like abuse and neglect which effects many more children more deeply than one of their friends being HIV positive. Sure the character could be written in such a way that it would be harmless to the psyches of the young viewers. What's the harm in that?

Opportunity cost. By kowtowing to the obviously emotional group of people who seem to think that even ineffectual efforts are worthwhile, we will be wasting a resource that is currently doing a great job addressing a host of more important educational and social issues. I think that there should be a debate about what sorts of issues we need to address on this program, I just think that this particular idea should be set aside and the resources under discussion utilized for something more relevent. The status quo is a better use of the screen time.

[SpencerH]

Theres a point