InsaneJournal

Tweak says, "No one takes my frock."

Claudia Donovan (clauds) wrote in makebelievecomm,
@ 2012-12-01 22:42:00

Entry tags:

claudia donovan, elena gilbert, h.g. wells, myka bering, steve jinks

[Text to Myka]
>> Hello. Anything new going on with you?
[/text]

[Texts to Steve]
>> Steve.
>> Steven.
>> Steve.
>> What are you getting Myka for her birthday?
>> What are you getting me for Christmas?
>> Steve.
[/text]

[Text to H.G.]
>> Any suggestions on birthday gifts for Myka? Or maybe desire for a shopping day?
[/text]

[Text to Elena]
>> Do you have a Christmas list or do I get to randomly guess? Or is it coal this year?
[/text]

(Read comments) - (Post a new comment)

	Return Texts clauds 2012-12-02 06:13 am UTC (link)
	>> Okay! >> Violence, gore, language, sexual content, nudity, etc. That's why they had to make a ratings system. (Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

	Return Texts indelibleink 2012-12-02 06:21 am UTC (link)
	>> All in one movie? >> Though language is obviously just a given, really. But the others all within the same context? >> That seems a bit excessive... (Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

	Return Texts clauds 2012-12-02 06:23 am UTC (link)
	>> No, not always. Usually just bits and pieces of those. >> The occasional movie though. >> TV shows have ratings too. Sometimes TV shows. >> Maybe, more often, TV shows. (Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

	Return Texts indelibleink 2012-12-02 06:30 am UTC (link)
	>> Well, that is good then. >> Let me guess, most things these days have ratings attributed to them? (Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

	Return Texts clauds 2012-12-02 06:31 am UTC (link)
	>> Video games too, actually. >> And some CDs. (Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

	Return Texts indelibleink 2012-12-02 06:36 am UTC (link)
	>> I assume the reasoning behind these ratings is to keep children from inadvertently seeing things they should not? >> Is there anything where ratings are not applied? (Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

	Return Texts clauds 2012-12-02 06:38 am UTC (link)
	>> That's the theory. How often it works is debatable. >> Uhm. Like what? (Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

	Return Texts indelibleink 2012-12-02 06:52 am UTC (link)
	>> Books, or just literature in general. >> Magazines. >> Things of those sorts. (Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

	Return Texts clauds 2012-12-02 06:54 am UTC (link)
	>> Well, there's children's books, young adult books, and adult books. They're more category and generalized reading level than ratings? But they're divided that way. >> There are adult magazines of the nudity containing type. >> And a few with information on video games that would be of the adult target audience. (Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

	Return Texts indelibleink 2012-12-02 07:03 am UTC (link)
	>> Magazines with nudity? How positively scandalous! >> Though it is logical for how books are generally categorized. (Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

	Return Texts clauds 2012-12-02 07:05 am UTC (link)
	>> I'm curious, yet I really don't want to know what type of equivalent was around in Victorian days. >> Yeah. So it kind of depends. There's ratings and then there's categories and then there's blending of the two. (Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

	Return Texts indelibleink 2012-12-03 06:25 am UTC (link)
	>> You are correct there, I do not think you want to know the answer to that. >> I will need to remember this for future reference. (Reply to this) (Parent)

(Read comments) -