"unseen" movie/TV violence and the effect on our kids
Moms View Message Board: Parenting Discussion: Archive July-December 2003:
"unseen" movie/TV violence and the effect on our kids
I cannot help but notice a trend in children’s movies that, it seems to me, will have long-term negative consequences for our children and I find myself wondering how the many Moms’ out there view this. This trend, over the last 20 years or so, can probably be best illustrated by a recent experience that I had with my three children in the theater. I took my children to see Brother Bear (rated G) and in the preliminaries, saw the trailer for "Cheaper by the Dozen". The latter film is rated PG. I have only seen the trailer, since the movie has yet to be released, however what I saw appalled me. Since when is a dog ferociously attacking a young man's genitals a source of humor. How have we sunk so low, particularly in movies made for children and families?
If this were limited to one movie, one could view this as unrepresentative of social norms; however, lately it seems one cannot go to the movies without supposedly humorous scenes of men kicked, stabbed, shot or bitten in the groin. For example the new release of “Cat in the Hat” features a scene of the Cat in the Hat getting hit in the testicles with a baseball bat, along with the usual Mike Meyers castration humor. Similarly, “Daddy Day Care” features a scene where one of the care-providers is kicked hard in the testicles by a young girl, while “Bad Santa” has numerous groin kicking and punching scenes, and the list goes on and on. That this kind of sexual violence has become the norm is well attested by the fact that movie reviewers seem completely blind to these scenes and never mention them in their reviews. Even organizations such as the Parents Television Council (www.parentstv.org), an organization that is dedicated to “bringing America’s demand for positive, family-oriented television programming to the entertainment industry”, often neglect to mention this kind of violence in their movie or TV reviews, presumably because they do not notice it. As the degree of this type of violence has increased over the years, one wonders, what is next?
Fortunately viewers of G and PG-rated movies are spared similar scenes of sexual attacks against women as a source of humor; however, it seems that there is no limit to the sexual violence that can be shown directed against men. While the first amendment guarantees the movie-makers the right to make such films, surely they don't have to put this kind of material in "family" movies, meaning G and PG-rated movies? Do we really want to send the message to our children that it is not only OK to cause this kind of sexual injury to a boy or man, but it is "funny"? Do we really want to send the message to boys that an injury to their testicles is humorous? Doesn’t it occur to us that this will lead boys (and later men) to avoid telling medical personnel and/or loved ones about any sexual injuries or illness that they incur? Why would they when, if the movies are to be believed, people will laugh at them? Doesn’t it occur to us that this will lead to boys growing into men believing that their sexuality is not afforded the same sanctity and respect that the decent among us afford female sexuality? Doesn’t it occur to us that we are sowing the seeds of future conflicts between the sexes?
While I understand that I am fighting a losing battle for movies that target adult audiences, why is it so difficult to create movies for children that that treat the sexuality of both genders with respect? Is it too much to ask that sexual assault against either gender, and the associated humor, be excluded from movies that target an audience of children and families? Why don't the movie ratings account for this kind of material so that, for example, if this kind of sexual material is present, the movie gets a least an "R" rating? Why doesn't prime-time TV push such material to late-night? And why aren’t assaults against the male groin taken out of kid’s cartoons and TV commercials? Lastly, while “tolerance” is generally viewed as a virtue, isn’t it time that we showed some intolerance toward this kind of “humor”?
Best Regards----Doug Wells
WELCOME to Momsview, Doug!
I agree many movies are not appropriate for children due to violence, sex, nudity, language, etc.. We strictly monitor what our kids (5 & 7) view and have only taken them to the movie theater a handful of times. These sites have been helpful in determining what is appropriate for our family.
KidsInMind.com
MovieMom.com
ScreenIt.com
I agree, Mike, tolerating violence, particularly violence involving sexuality, is not a good idea.
I am a strong First Amendment person, believing it is probably one of the three essential parts of our system of protecting individual rights. But I think our "entertainment" sellers need to be more honest with us, and I truly wish they would not continue catering to the lowest common denominator (which appears, to the minds of the entertainment media, to be pubescent, adolescent and young adult males - in groups).
I am one who strictly censored my children's TV and movies until they were 16, and I censored on the basis of violence, my political/social philosophy, and what I called "inanity". Which meant, for example, that they didn't get to see shows that had smart-aleck kids and stupid parents, or Threes Company (which I know a lot of people loved, but I thought it was just silly), or programs which involved humiliating or embarassing other people (which would rule out all of reality TV today). And this included Saturday morning television too.
Which made it much easier to keep to the rule of one hour of television (of a program jointly agreed upon between the three of them) on school nights, Saturday morning from 8:00 to 12:00 (maybe, if there weren't chores and things that needed to be done), and an occasional special that was allowed outside of the normal schedule. As a result, they watch very little TV as adults, and mostly sports or PBS.
Let me get off my soapbox. But, I agree with you, Doug. They probably wouldn't do those scenes with the violence being, for example, punching a woman in the breast. But violence is violence.
oh, I agree with you all wholeheartedly! I am so careful with what my kids see & don't see!!
Probably most of the new movies out that target that younger audience, are NOT suitable for children!!!
PBS is a safe bet usually! LOL Any PBS character movies I can trust, but not Disney, Nick, or any major TV stations!
I know that they will see these things when they are old enough, but I can & will monitor what they see now. A lot of it is just unnecessary!!!
I watch funny movies that use curse words, but I am a grown woman now. I listen to music that may use curse words or that mock things that aren't funny, but I know the difference between a joke & reality, they don't & I never ever watch these things or listen to these things when the kids are around!!!
I absolutely agree. I've also noticed that when I check out the site "Kidsinmind" I find that movies that are rated G in Canada (where I live) are rated PG in the states. I wish we had more strict rules for rating.
We do not have several TV stations because even if I control the show they are watching I can't control the commericals. We do Knowledge network (similar to PBS I think...no commericals) and CBC.
very well written doug. I agree. NOt only about the sexual violence against men wich would cause uproar among the females if done teh same way, but teh dumbing down of men in general is what I find the most disturbing. Men are portrayed as dumb, lazy, and that all they want is sex. I have yet to see a t.v. show about a healthy fmaily with balance in their lives and relationship. But I guess no one would find that entertaining. I find it disturbing that our young boys grow up thinking that this is the norm for males. and then possibly don't aspire to be much different unless they have strong influences in their lives. We have devalued men and their role in almost all areas. And we are teaching our children to do the same. It is sad and sadly not enough parents monitor what their kids watch. WE don't even watch television just videos or tapes af cartoons and such. We spend a lot more time together and are a lot more productive than if we had television. anway just my opinion.
To All:
Thanks for all of the encouraging support and the website info. It is nice to know that I am not the only one who has noticed and is offended by this. I was beginning to wonder if I was simply completely out of step with the rest of humanity because I have written numerous "letters to the editor" to newspapers, to movie-critic websites (family oriented or not), and to other publications, yet none have ever published these letters (suggesting that they, or their readers, don't give a hoot). I agree with all of you that it is critical to control what our kids see because of the many poor influences that have taken over the mass-media. Unfortunately, because the movie reviewers (TV too) seem blind to so much, it is hard to truly know about content.
The only two web sites that
I have found to fully report all of the violence, language and sexual content of movies are kidsinmind.com and screenit.com. The latter, however, adds editorial content that suggests (my interpretation, I could be wrong of course) that groin attacks are legitimate humor by frequently labeling such scenes as "played for laughs". The only other major websites that I have found for family-friendly reviews are moviemom.com and parentstv.com. Neither fully reports the violence (especially of the groin-kicking kind), but both do (as far as I can tell) a pretty good job addressing the sexual and language content.
Anyway, thanks for the feedback and helpful hints.
Best Regards----Doug Wells
I agree with you all. I remember seeing the previews for the Hulk movie. He says he looses
control and his temper and he likes it. I am thinking now thats a great thing to teach our kids! I think my son is the only 4th grader who did not see that movie. Everyone I know took the kids to see it. I get so mad at times about what they think is ok for kids to see. I still remember watching Stuart Little with my son and the cats said 2 swear words. I was soo mad. I read once that the reason they do that is because more parents will take kids to see a pg movie than a g rated one. Now that is just sad.
Although this thread is several years old, it is not only a common problem but it is even more wide spread then it was when this thread was started.
In a new sit com on Fox called "RAISING HOPE" they have a woman who practices "reverse gender pologomy who was divorcing one of the 4 men she was married to. She told him he knew the divorce ritual and he said yes, closed his eyes and spread his legs. She than gave him "a swift kick in the .... "
I posted on the Raising Hope forum for Fox this message:
I do not want to rain on your parade for comedy but as the founder of an
domestic violence ministry for abused MEN, I do not find aggravated sexual assault the lest bit funny. Far too often women are able to kick men in the testicles without any fear of anything being done about it. I do ask. what do you think would happen if this or any show had a man assault a woman and nothing is done about it? In reality, very little is ever done to women who hit, grab or kick testicles but I do know a man who spent a year in jail for accidently
touching a teen age girl's breast.
Too often when we get people to laugh at
something, no one takes it seriously and it starts happening far more often. We have seen a man getting his testicles hit in many more commercials lately and in many more movies, TV shows and other things...and it is happening in real life far more often because of it! Even now, in many schools, we have boys getting
hit and some have lost a testicle due to it
I contend that any time anyone hits or causes pain such as this, it should be called and dealt with as aggravated sexual assault unless it is proven self defense.
Since Mike was "married" to this woman, it would be domestic violence. In reality, just as many and some unbiased research shows that there are more men who are the victims of domestic violence as are women but men have less than a
half dozen shelters to help them and even fewer who can include their children to go but women have over 2,000 and the full backing of the federal government by the Violence Against Women Act which does nothing to help half the victims of domestic violence who happen to be men. Is it worth a moment of laughter when hundreds of thousands are being battered...or killed?
The show on Tues 3/9/11 showed a woman with 4 husbands which they said was reversed gender polygamy. One of the men was the nephew of Burt and they came there because the woman was leaving him and "divorcing him" As they were
leaving, she told him "You know the divorce ritual" He then nodded yes and closed his eyes spead his legs and they than show here kicking him and they have clips of it on the website with this part actually labled a shift kick in
the.... (they spell it out)
http://www.fox.com/raisinghope/full-episodes/816339464001/the-cultish-personalit\
y
Since I posted the above on the forum on "Raising Hope" I got this from them:
The forum thread "Sexual Assult is NOT Funny" has been deleted by a moderator. The thread has been removed from your forum thread subscriptions list.
The last time I checked, my thread had 3 comments which strongly supported what was said including one which used THIS thread to back up what she said, and it had over 45 views of the thread.
I guess the "Fair and Balanced" FOX did not want the TRUTH to get out!
|
Members
