Reply
  • Feb 20, 2023
    kiddash3r

    The changes are so stupid man.
    Just put a disclaimer, we cannot desensitize and whitewash history, especially not books.

    These thing happened and were said at some point, and actually having the evidence and pointing out the mistakes is much more helpful and educational towards children then just removing it.

    Awful awful stuff

    childrens books have been getting revised in new editions for a long time tho, since the invention of the genre

    any classic childrens book was probably abridged and revised at one point because of its content being considered inappropriate

  • Feb 20, 2023

    should just have disclaimers, best way to be transparent

  • Emu 🇮🇱
    Feb 21, 2023
    ·
    1 reply

    People change, so do narratives, nothing is fixed in stone. I think it's good that they are making them more inclusive to appeal to a wider audience, I don't see where the issue is here since there will be a right wing market for original copies probably. I'm sure some Neo Nazi website will sell original copies for those who insist on reading the original to their children.

  • Feb 21, 2023
    ·
    1 reply

    im usually against this but are people serious about putting "a disclaimer" as if your 3-4 year old is gonna understand the historical context i wouldnt really wanna be reciting poems about fattys to my kid either because you know how they will run with it at that age

  • Feb 21, 2023
    Smacked Voodoo

    Apparently they're removing the word fat from everything and I'm just confused now...since when was fat a slur?

    When obestity became the norm

  • rvi
    Feb 21, 2023
    ·
    1 reply
    Emu

    People change, so do narratives, nothing is fixed in stone. I think it's good that they are making them more inclusive to appeal to a wider audience, I don't see where the issue is here since there will be a right wing market for original copies probably. I'm sure some Neo Nazi website will sell original copies for those who insist on reading the original to their children.

    so many of the changes are just totally ridiculous and useless though like changing "Beating their tiny drums" to "Beating their drums" and "Like all extremely old people, he was delicate and weak" to "Like most extremely old people, he was delicate and weak". i dont see how that helps anything

  • Feb 21, 2023

    I'll never support censorship really

    But as a parent you can consciously buy and read to your child the work of Judy Blume if you want to give them a taste of reality

    I'll be reading An Angel At My Table to my kids. Wish them luck

  • Feb 21, 2023
    Smacked Voodoo

    Apparently they're removing the word fat from everything and I'm just confused now...since when was fat a slur?

    Just a bit insulting innit

    Got these likkle ones running round calling their mates fatty fatty boom boom. It must stop

  • Feb 21, 2023

    I have started working on a children's series

  • Emu 🇮🇱
    Feb 21, 2023
    ·
    2 replies
    rvi

    so many of the changes are just totally ridiculous and useless though like changing "Beating their tiny drums" to "Beating their drums" and "Like all extremely old people, he was delicate and weak" to "Like most extremely old people, he was delicate and weak". i dont see how that helps anything

    This is how it always starts. Someone arguing that it's not necessary because they don't see it primarily because they're not the ones affected by it. "I don't see how this is offensive" or "I don't see how that helps" are not good arguments and have never been. Just going by your example, changing "all" to "some" is a significant way to reduce sweeping overgeneralizations and negative stereotypes about older people and while they are all tiny changes, they add up in making this body of work more inclusive. None of the changes make the books worse, all of the changes are either neutral or positive. The selective outrage here is stupid but that seems to be this site's bread and butter.

  • Feb 21, 2023

    The original books still exist, they're not changing history they just want to change it going forward so kids aren't encouraged to call other kids fat and ugly as descriptors. I think it's fine, cancel culture outrage sees anything trying to make society kinder as a big problem and I get it to an extent but this isn't a big deal imo

  • This is a good move. Children can be mean sometimes and I don't want them calling my child names and s***, since it is against the law for me to Swanton Bomb lil kids.

  • Feb 21, 2023
    Emu

    This is how it always starts. Someone arguing that it's not necessary because they don't see it primarily because they're not the ones affected by it. "I don't see how this is offensive" or "I don't see how that helps" are not good arguments and have never been. Just going by your example, changing "all" to "some" is a significant way to reduce sweeping overgeneralizations and negative stereotypes about older people and while they are all tiny changes, they add up in making this body of work more inclusive. None of the changes make the books worse, all of the changes are either neutral or positive. The selective outrage here is stupid but that seems to be this site's bread and butter.

    Careful now, hottie, I agree with you but this is a precarious line to walk on for kindness

    You could just write the new books you want to see in the world

    Hypothetically you wouldn't oppose actively making all bodies of work more inclusive?

  • Feb 21, 2023

    This is stupid as f***

    You can’t repaint the Mona Lisa because the mild smile is now offensive

    Plus who’d rather be called enormous than fat anyway?

  • Feb 21, 2023

    Changing art is where I draw the line

  • Feb 21, 2023
    sco

    Roald Dahl v. McDonald's Corporation, 1979 WL 100368 (S.D.N.Y. 1979), was a court case in which Roald Dahl, the British author, was forced to change his name due to a lawsuit brought by McDonald's Corporation. The case garnered significant media attention at the time and is still referenced in discussions about trademark law today.

    Background[edit]

    Roald Dahl was born in 1916 in Llandaff, Wales, with the legal name of Ronald McDonald. He went on to become a successful writer, with works such as Charlie and the Chocolate Factory and Matilda. However, in the 1970s, Dahl received a letter from McDonald's Corporation, alleging that his use of the name "Ronald McDonald" in his writing and in a magazine column was infringing on the fast-food chain's trademark.

    McDonald initially ignored the letter, but McDonald's Corporation filed a lawsuit in the Southern District of New York in 1979. The corporation argued that the use of the name "Ronald McDonald" created a likelihood of confusion in consumers, causing them to believe that McDonald was associated with McDonald's Corporation. McDonald argued that the use of his legal name was protected under the First Amendment and that he had used the name long before McDonald's Corporation had established its own "Ronald McDonald" character.

    Ruling[edit]

    The court ultimately ruled in favor of McDonald's Corporation, holding that his use of the name "Ronald McDonald" was likely to cause confusion among consumers and dilute the strength of the McDonald's trademark. The court ordered McDonald to change his name and cease using the name in his writing.

    After the ruling, McDonald changed his name to Roald Dahl and continued to write under that name. The case has been cited in subsequent trademark and intellectual property cases as an example of the importance of protecting strong trademarks.

    Conclusion[edit]

    Roald Dahl v. McDonald's Corporation was a notable court case from 1979 that resulted in McDonald having to change his name due to a lawsuit brought by McDonald's Corporation. The case highlighted the importance of protecting strong trademarks and has continued to be referenced in discussions about trademark law in the years since.

    This is nuts

  • Feb 21, 2023

    kids gotta learn that fat people exist so they don't go out into the real world and get crushed by one

  • Feb 21, 2023

    Some of u acting like this is #woke cancelling and not the estate and rights holders tryna keep the roald dahl cashcow going lol

  • Feb 21, 2023
    Emu

    This is how it always starts. Someone arguing that it's not necessary because they don't see it primarily because they're not the ones affected by it. "I don't see how this is offensive" or "I don't see how that helps" are not good arguments and have never been. Just going by your example, changing "all" to "some" is a significant way to reduce sweeping overgeneralizations and negative stereotypes about older people and while they are all tiny changes, they add up in making this body of work more inclusive. None of the changes make the books worse, all of the changes are either neutral or positive. The selective outrage here is stupid but that seems to be this site's bread and butter.

    "tiny" changes?

  • Feb 21, 2023

    Very offensive word you used there

  • Feb 21, 2023

    Reported for using the T-slur

  • Feb 21, 2023
    ·
    1 reply
    Elric

    im usually against this but are people serious about putting "a disclaimer" as if your 3-4 year old is gonna understand the historical context i wouldnt really wanna be reciting poems about fattys to my kid either because you know how they will run with it at that age

    that’s where parenting comes in

  • Feb 21, 2023
    ·
    1 reply
    young majid

    that’s where parenting comes in

    There's still no way to know if your kid is gonna hear you or turn into a little a****** when you're not around

  • Feb 21, 2023
    ·
    1 reply
    Elric

    There's still no way to know if your kid is gonna hear you or turn into a little a****** when you're not around

    yup, but then let’s take violence out of video games/cartoons then. Kids love that but we can trust them to not act our violence in real life. That’s where parents step in

  • Feb 21, 2023
    ·
    1 reply
    young majid

    yup, but then let’s take violence out of video games/cartoons then. Kids love that but we can trust them to not act our violence in real life. That’s where parents step in

    Cartoon violence and Mario jumping on goombas is one thing but yeah I'm definitely not letting my kid become desensitized to shooting people all day with games like call of duty. Apparently there's no correlation but you can't convince me that's not why all these school shootings are happening now.