The Instigator
EdgeOfTheInfinite
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
DNehlsen
Con (against)
Winning
3 Points

Homosexual characters should be on Children's TV shows

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
DNehlsen
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/4/2017 Category: Education
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 624 times Debate No: 99607
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (3)
Votes (1)

 

EdgeOfTheInfinite

Pro

Rules
No new arguments in final round.
Please keep this civil, no slurs or swearing unless essential for arguments

I'm defining children's TV shows as any show targeted at children 0-12.

Positive examples
For any children who might discover that they're gay at a later age it would be very beneficial for them to have some sort of person that they look up to or at least know that went through their situation. Television has a strong influence on children[1]. Having a role model that went through the same things they're going through and knowing what they are and that they're is nothing wrong with them can aid in the depression that many gay teens youths[2]. With confusion about their feeling and the added stigma that comes with being gay plus the consequences: their parents possibly throwing them out, bullying at school. One less problem could be the difference between life and death.

Breaking the stigma against gay youth
74% of gay youth are verbally harassed in school[2]. Even at young ages ,children are using gay as a way to express their distaste for something. Some of these people grow up to be homophobes. The fact is when young children are growing up, before their in school their only exposure to the outside world is their parents, brief interactions at the park and outside in general, and television. Meaning that if these small children happen to be raised by homophobic or intolerant parents that's how they'll see the world. The only way for them to see the world differently is through television. With characters like two dads or moms getting 8 apples at the grocery store or Billy having two moms. Eventually as they get older and TV characters start dating so would Billy and Jacob. It would be exactly the same as always except with the incorporation of homosexual characters. With this constant exposure kids would see sexual orientation the same way as they see interracial couples, as two people that so happen to be dating or married[3].

Citation
[1]http://www2.lewisu.edu...
[2]http://www.healthline.com...
[3]https://www.youtube.com...
DNehlsen

Con

Right away I’d like to say I’m exceedingly excited to be having this conversation. I sincerely look forward to a productive discussion and debate.

For the sake of this discussion, I will be assuming that the information and numbers you have presented to me are factual and at least mostly accurate. I totally agree that what we see happening to these people is awful, and is something that needs to be worked out. However, I do not think that the indoctrination of children, nor the use of television ‘role-models’ is the way in which to achieve this goal.

It is observable that most children do not hit puberty until the age of 10-16. (girls being 10-14, boys being 12-16) Since the gap is so late in their life, I find it pointless to incorporate homosexual couples into the whole equation, when it is already complicated enough to those too young to understand. (Those being aged 0-10) To have a child both a male and a female are required, and throwing curveballs like two men at children will simply confuse them.

The article you have cited explained how help can be delivered to these people, and research also shows that it’s working. Shouldn’t this be the big picture – getting these kids help where it really matters? Growing up I didn’t need a role model to tell me being gay was okay. Even if I did, fictional characters should not be the place to turn. We see many examples of real people, real homosexuals, doing great and wonderful things like Ellen DeGeneres, Anderson Cooper, and Peter Thiel. Shouldn’t that be what these kids look up to?

I’d also like to look briefly at the numbers cited about social and more rarely physical abuse on homosexuals. Isn’t that a good thing given the right circumstances? Don’t take that the wrong way, but that’s what’s going to grow you. When people make comments about me, that does two things. That one, grows me and makes me stronger and two, more importantly, shows me who I don’t need to waste my time with. Having something about you that stands out helps you weed out the people that you don’t want to be friends with anyways. So in light of this, I don’t think we should be normalizing homosexuality. I think we should celebrate the uniqueness of it. We should understand the differences of homosexuals, and highlight those differences that make them who they are – not hide them.

Sources:
http://www.medicinenet.com...;
Debate Round No. 1
EdgeOfTheInfinite

Pro

Okay so this has nothing to do with the debate, but I'm curious. How did you get that font? I saw someone else with a font like that and I don't see any options to change your font. I am legitimately curious.

Rebuttals:
"children do not hit puberty until the age of 10-16. (girls being 10-14, boys being 12-16) Since the gap is so late in their life, I find it pointless to incorporate homosexual couples"
But it's not. In middle childhood at the ages of 6-8 is when children are quickly devoloping their social sills and cognitive skills and are quickly learning about the world[1]. This is when they start thinking about the future. They see an astronaut on television and think it's cool so they want to be an astronaut. The see a ballerina and wish to be one. They are already forming role models and they are not just in real life. As my first citation from round one stated, television is the most influential force on children's development. Even if they don't realize their gay until they're a teenager they already don't have a stigma against themselves or others because of how normal it has become.

"To have a child both a male and a female are required, and throwing curveballs like two men at children will simply confuse them."
That has been disproven many times[2][3]. Children aren't as dull as you think. They can understand the concept just like any other.

"Shouldn"t this be the big picture " getting these kids help where it really matters?"
Except they wouldn't need help if they hadn't been bullied in the first place. The way to help the future generations is just to treat homosexuality as anything else, normal. Even if one or two people have a problem with that everyone else in the class would tell them not to be rude. That would be what actually helps these kids.

"Ellen DeGeneres, Anderson Cooper, and Peter Thiel. Shouldn"t that be what these kids look up to?" Most five year olds don't even know they're gay. Most five year olds wouldn't be watching an Anderson Copper movie. I'm 15 and I don't even know who Peter Thiel is.

"I"d also like to look briefly at the numbers cited about social and more rarely physical abuse on homosexuals. Isn"t that a good thing given the right circumstances? "
No, no. no. There are no circumstances that make any person except an occasional few stronger for getting beat up or treated like trash.

New Arguments:
Representation matters. Here's a quote from Whoopi Goldberg ""Well, when I was nine years old, Star Trek came on, I looked at it and I went screaming through the house, "Come here, mum, everybody, come quick, come quick, there"s a black lady on television and she ain"t no maid!" I knew right then and there I could be anything I wanted to be." Even if personally you aren't affected by it, so many gay youths are greatly influences by gay characters and couples on television[4]. Currently these shows are targeted to an older audience i.e. Supergirl, The 100, Shadowhunters. If this same representations could be implemented in children shows (Girl Meets World, Lazy Town) these children who don't even know their sexuality yet will benefit greatly in the subconscious in this child's mind that what they are is not a bad think.

My opponent seems to using his own personal experiences as facts. I would greatly appreciate it if he could bring up some sources or polls to support his claims.

Citation
[1]https://www.cdc.gov...
[2]https://www.youtube.com...
[3]https://www.youtube.com...
[4]http://andreashettle.tumblr.com...
DNehlsen

Con

In regard to your question, the font style can be found in the basic editing manager of your text.


Outline:


1) Response to my Opponents Rebuttals


2) Rebuttal to my Opponents Points


3) The Effects of Television on Children


4) Sources



Response to my Opponents Rebuttal(s)


“That has been disproven many times[2][3]. Children aren't as dull as you think. They can understand the concept just like any other.”


As evidence for this point, you’ve linked two youtube videos. In the first one several kids were questioned about homosexuality. Only three out of the eight children could properly define what it meant to be gay. This is a 37.5% success rate, or an F. In the second video from FBE, 13 children were interviewed. Eight of the children interviewed were ten or older, and of these eight the three children below the age of twelve were female. Therefore, eight out of the thirteen children interviewed had reached the statistical point of puberty. Of the five children under the age of ten, only one (Dash) seemed to have a somewhat accurate view of sexuality, evidenced by the Q&A section of the video. One out of five children is 20%, or an F. It is observable that children do not begin to grasp their sexuality until the age of 10-12. (1.5)



“Except they wouldn't need help if they hadn't been bullied in the first place. The way to help the future generations is just to treat homosexuality as anything else, normal. Even if one or two people have a problem with that everyone else in the class would tell them not to be rude. That would be what actually helps these kids.”


The problem with this statement is the suggestion that incorporating homosexual couples into television, and treating something as normal will convince the world. This is simply untrue. Research suggests that there are 1.6 billion Muslims in the world. (23.4% of the world) (1.1) This number is expected to be increased to 2.76 billion by 2050. (30% of the world) (1.3) The Muslim opposition to homosexuality it blatant. Muslims are one of the few groups of people who are willing to punish homosexuality by death. Most of the Muslim population believes homosexuality should indeed be illegal. (1.4) This is but one example of many that could be provided of organizations who have a direct opposition to homosexuality.



“Most five-year olds don't even know they're gay. Most five-year olds wouldn't be watching an Anderson Copper movie. I'm 15 and I don't even know who Peter Thiel is.”


Most five-year olds also are unaware of what sex even is. Research suggests that children at young ages are already confused by sexuality as it is, and it isn’t until the age of 10-12 that they begin to get a realistic grasp of appropriate conduct. (1.5) While some children may not know who these people are, some will. As a child, I was interested in journalism and politics, so I knew who certain politicians and journalists were, such as Anderson Cooper. Peter Thiel was a founder of PayPal, and as a child interested in business, he caught my eye. If you were someone interested in football you might instead know someone like Michael Sam, or if you were a child interested in art you might instead know Elton John. The point is that there are real models for the children to look up to already.



“No, no. no. There are no circumstances that make any person except an occasional few stronger for getting beat up or treated like trash.”


That wasn’t the point I was trying to get across, so I must apologize for that misinterpretation. I could’ve made it clearer. In my opening statement for this debate, I made the claim that I thought these numbers, assaults, etc. were disgusting and should be cared for – I still stand by that. The point I meant to make by this was that these kids, given the proper help, may channel these struggles into strength and growth. I’m not saying that this is grounds to damn them to these abuses, but simply that it can be used to improve them. How eye opening is it to be in the shoes of a victim, and have a firsthand view of how twisted the world is? Most people don’t know how twisted the world really is, and seeing this, with the assistance that can be provided, can prepare them for the worst the world can dish. (1.6)



Rebuttal to my Opponents Point(s)


“My opponent seems to using his own personal experiences as facts. I would greatly appreciate it if he could bring up some sources or polls to support his claims.”


I find this quote exceedingly hypocritical after my opponent, in her very last paragraph, used a testimony from Whoopi Goldberg as evidence for her case. She then proceeds to make a claim, citing a Tumblr post telling the story of a single woman as evidence of her case. There are scenarios where a testimony is appropriate, and I feel as though this discussion is one of them. My testimony is proof that what I’m describing is both possible, and beneficial provided the proper circumstances. These proper circumstances are what we should be trying to get to all kids. Not by the means of fictional characters, but by means of real, hands on, tangible, and observable assistance.



The Effects of Television on Children


Television, while it may have a strong influence on children, probably shouldn’t. Research shows that television use is linked strongly to Obesity, Poor Grades, and Behavior Problems among many other issues. Not only does television do damage to the children themselves, but it also takes away from social and family interaction, which is pivotal to the growth and development of everybody, especially children. Television can observably cause issues in learning, and overall health. Because of the aforementioned statistics, I again ask if we should indeed be focusing on making television more inclusive, rather than focusing on the children themselves. (2.1, 2.2, 2.3, 2.4)




Sources


Response to my Opponents Rebuttals


(1.1) http://www.pewforum.org...


(1.2) http://www.pewresearch.org...


(1.3) http://www.pewresearch.org...


(1.4) http://www.cnn.com...


(1.5) http://pediatrics.aappublications.org...


(1.6) https://www.livingwell.org.au...



The Effects of Television of Children


(2.1) http://www.med.umich.edu...


(2.2) http://kidshealth.org...


(2.3) http://theunboundedspirit.com...


(2.4) http://www.becomingminimalist.com...

Debate Round No. 2
EdgeOfTheInfinite

Pro

Thanks I found it.

Rebuttals
"This is a 37.5% success rate"
This is because they're children and haven't been exposed to it. Once you tell them they aren't exceedingly confused. They might be a bit agape because of the lack of exposure, but they understand for the most part. They say okay and move on.

"One out of five children is 20%, or an F. It is observable that children do not begin to grasp their sexuality until the age of 10-12. "
Your point from your original argument was that children would be confused by the very concept of gay couples not that they would truly grasp it. The younger kids were just hearing about this for the first time because they hadn't discussed it. With homosexuals on TV shows these kids would have known since they were three and that wouldn't be a discussion. Just as much of a fact as he sky being blue and bird's building nests.

"This is but one example of many that could be provided of organizations who have a direct opposition to homosexuality."
But just as any other religion there would be an increase in tolerance. I live in Brampton, Ontario which has a lot of Muslims in it. In my schools GSA which has not been shut down or greatly opposed. No one has a problem with it here. This is just one example. But if Muslims follow in christian foot steps then gradually they'll begin to accept gay people[1] just as everyone else did.

"confused by sexuality"
The thing about it is that though kids wouldn't know what sexuality was they would know that some families have mommies and daddies and others have two daddies. They're not thinking "oh look those two guys are gonna have sex" there just thinking "I like this show" and don't know that they're learning tolerance through it. That's why knowing Ellen is gay would make no difference for a 6 year old when it comes to role models, they just know that Ellen is a person who exists, but astronauts are cooler. A little boy on the other had who is gay even if he doesn't know it yet will much prefer Austin from a show he likes who is a gay character.

"given the proper help, may channel these struggles into strength and growth."
I feel like this argument is just making the best out of a bad situation. The kid might still get bullied, just for a different reason. I think that though some people might grow and strengthen from these experiences, I think it would be best to instead decrease the possibility for them to get severely harmed for something they can't control and instead if they're going to get bullied, let it be or something like being skinny or wearing glasses, something that can be altered though they can stand up for themselves and not let it get to them.

"I find this quote exceedingly hypocritical after my opponent, in her very last paragraph"
I'm sorry I couldn't find any studies on the matter, but in my defense I did have more than one from multiple different source. I'm going to post 23 and an article explaining why it matters[2][3].

"The Effects of Television on Children"
It is true that it shouldn't, but it does. That's all that matters in this case. Yes we maybe we should completely pull the plug on TV, but all things are good in moderation.

In conclusion, children benefit greatly from representation on television so we should include homosexuals on television shows for a more inclusive and safe future for all. I congratulate my opponent for such an excellent debate.

Citation
[1]http://wp.production.patheos.com...
[2]https://www.buzzfeed.com...
[3]http://www.wakemag.org...
DNehlsen

Con

"But just as any other religion there would be an increase in tolerance. I live in Brampton, Ontario which has a lot of Muslims in it....But if Muslims follow in christian foot steps then gradually they'll begin to accept gay people[1] just as everyone else did."

Please allow me to share some quotes from the Qur'an.

We also (sent) Lut: he said to his people: "Do ye commit lewdness such as no people in creation (ever) committed before you? (80) "For ye practise your lusts on men in preference to women: ye are indeed a people transgressing beyond bounds." (81) Whomever you find doing the actions of the people of Lut then kill the one doing it, and the one it is done to

This sin, the impact of which makes one’s skin crawl, which words cannot describe, is evidence of perverted instincts, total collapse of shame and honor, and extreme filthiness of character and soul… The heavens, the Earth and the mountains tremble from the impact of this sin. The angels shudder as they anticipate the punishment of Allah to descend upon the people who commit this indescribable sin.

Now before you compare this to the bible, it is important to understand that these are very different. In the Old Testament God himself was governing a nation of his chosen people. Christians today, in the age of grace - after the death and resurrection of christ, are not bound to the rules for God's nation, because we are not of his nation. Christianity is completely compatible with modern civilization and culture, given that it does not transgress their religious freedoms. Islam, however, is not. The Qur'an is speaking to the believers of today, and they are bound to its teachings. Allow me to read some more verses.

"It is not fitting for a Believer, man or woman, when a matter has been decided by Allah and His Messenger to have any option about their decision."

"Allah... makes none to share in His Decision and His Rule"

"...Allah and his messenger are free from obligation to the unbelievers..."

Muhammad used this to dissolve a standing treaty and chase non-Muslims from their homes if they wouldn't accept Islam. This practice would be completely and entirely incompatible with democratic rule, in which everyone is considered equal. I have read the Qur'an cover to cover, and I can say that without a doubt Islam is incompatible with democracy.

Aside from that, I'm out of sorts. It's important to know when to fold your cards. When I accepted this debate I was under the impression that it was on a slightly different subject. In heindsight I totally agree with many of the points you've presented here, and must applaud you for that.
Debate Round No. 3
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by EdgeOfTheInfinite 1 year ago
EdgeOfTheInfinite
I apologize. I seem to have missed a piece of the quote. This is the last part. "I knew right then and there I could be anything I wanted to be."
Posted by CosmoJarvis 1 year ago
CosmoJarvis
I do believe that it is great to introduce homosexuals in a good light to people at a young age so that these youths can grow more accepting of homosexuals and find homosexuality to be more natural.
Posted by HalfAnOnion 1 year ago
HalfAnOnion
Well obviously yes. They are no different then 2 straight people. They are just two people in love.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by AmericanDeist 1 year ago
AmericanDeist
EdgeOfTheInfiniteDNehlsenTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Both had good conduct and used sources. Both used good grammar. Con made the better argument that kids don't need more confusion prior to puberty.