|WikiProject Politics||(Rated Stub-class, Low-importance)|
_ _ There are about 165 articles on WP using "family-friendly", and all of the 1st five do so as if the term were NPoV: no quotes, no lk. In fact, only two articles lk to any form of it, one of them only for the last few hours. It is in fact fundamentally PoV, and it's hard to imagine a use where NPoV doesn't require at least
via the markup
_ _ My treatment of it is bound to be terrible, but hopefully i have raised some important aspects that others will handle better. I wrote w/o researching, and while i assume my assertions are verifiable, there should IMO be much research needed for aspects i've neglected, e.g. specific uses on right and left, probably direct quotes, and contradictory positions among the concept's whole-hearted advocates.
--Jerzy•t 08:24, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
- No offense, but this page reads more like an article about the issues and controversies surrounding the more politically charged term "family values" in the United States. I don't have the time to rewrite and source the claims made throughout the entire article right now, but I believe the most common usage of the term "family friendly" in popular media is more innocuous, as in: Disney is a "family friendly" movie studio; Chuck E. Cheese's is a "family friendly" restaurant; Circus Circus was one of the first "family friendly" hotel-casinos in Las Vegas, etc, etc.. To most people it just implies something or somewhere that is created for, or welcoming of, people of all ages. We get it - "family-friendly" can mean different things to different people; The Harry Potter film franchise might be considered "family friendly" by some parents, but may be considered by other parents to be too scary for younger children. And yes, a rather small portion of the population may use it as a sort of "code phrase" to exclude innocent depictions of, or exposure to, diversity of sexuality, or diversity of religions, etc, but I think most people would agree the Toy Story film franchise is "family friendly" and the Saw film franchise is not. I honestly don't see the need for a big, long political thesis about the use of the term on this page. A couple of sentences about the incongruities of the usage of the term would be plenty.
This section should be reworded for clarity. All necessary information is present, it is just rather hard to understand. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.108.40.206 (talk) 01:34, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
In regards to misbehaving children
I was wondering, when a restaurant or business considers itself family friendly, does that allow for more misbehavior for children? See, I've run into parents who feel if a restaurant or business is family friendly, anyone suggesting they should control their child or see that their child doesn't misbehave shouldn't be there. Maybe there should be a section clarifying this issue, as I'm rather tired of parents throwing out that a place is family friendly, so it means their kids can run around like it's a Chuck E Cheese arcade. Violet yoshi (talk) 13:58, 4 April 2010 (UTC)