1
   

Younger teens getting R-rated movie passes

 
 
au1929
 
Reply Mon 7 Jun, 2004 03:39 pm
Younger teens getting R-rated movie passes
Monday, June 7, 2004 Posted: 1:38 PM EDT (1738 GMT)

BLOOMINGTON, Illinois (AP) -- Still weeks shy of her 16th birthday, Sydni Norris caught the R-rated war epic "Troy" on the big screen last month while her parents stayed home.
The Bloomington teen-ager's way around the rating system's age limit was a parent-approved pass card that has started a debate over convenience vs. parental responsibility and raised fears that the government might jump in to settle the dispute.
Supporters say parents can sign off on movies for their kids without the time and expense of chaperoning them with the new R-card, which Springfield-based GKC Theatres began rolling out last fall in parts of its 22-city chain in Illinois and three other Midwest states. The card only works for the R-rating, which requires children under 17 to be accompanied by a parent or adult guardian.
"I like it because now we don't have to wait until they come out on video," said Norris, a high school junior whose parents had to accompany her and sign for the $2 photo ID.
Critics argue that the cards amount to parents handing the delicate decision about what movies are appropriate to their kids, a shift they say violates the intent of the motion picture industry's voluntary rating system.
"All R-rated films are not alike. It is the parents' responsibility to make specific judgments about R films -- and wrong to give a blanket endorsement to all," said Jack Valenti, president and CEO of the Motion Picture Association of America, which issues movie ratings.
GKC, the nation's 15th largest theater chain, is the only theater network in the nation offering the card, said John Fithian, president of the National Association of Theater Owners.
Some opponents fear that leaving movie choices to kids could taint the ratings system, voluntarily enforced by theaters since 1968. They say that could open the door to government regulation that would stifle creativity and experimentation in film making.
"If parents lose faith in the system, the first thing they'll ask is 'What are our recourses?' Then, we could start hearing from every politician that wants to make a name for himself in the name of family values," said Dann Gire, president of the Chicago Film Critics Association.
GKC has issued about 700 R-cards -- most in central Illinois -- and plans to offer them throughout the chain by the end of the year, said James Whitman, the company's director of operations and marketing.
A convenience factor

Whitman said he came up with the idea after parents complained that they wanted to let their kids see R-rated movies but didn't want to sit through the films themselves. He said GKC encourages parents to give the cards to kids only after approving a movie.
"From what I can tell, the people who have them like them and the parents are trying to use them responsibly. We're not being inundated with kids whose parents are giving them access to everything that comes on the screen," Whitman said.
The motion picture and theater owners associations are pressing GKC to abandon the program, but some parents think the cards are a good idea.
Joyce Needham, of Peoria, said she discusses every movie "before and after" her 16-year-old grandson uses his R-card. With or without a card, she said, kids will find a way to get what they want.
"I just think communication is the answer and trusting the child," Needham said. "If you can discuss what's going on in this world, you're better off than letting them find a way to do it on their own."

What do you think? Is this just another way for parents to abrogate their responsibility?
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 2,886 • Replies: 16
No top replies

 
NickFun
 
  1  
Reply Mon 7 Jun, 2004 03:52 pm
The government should keep its big nose out of these kind of things. Leave it to the individual theaters or theater chains to issue them if that's what they want to do. Frequently I go to R rated movies and the kids are there anyway. How are they getting in now?
0 Replies
 
Individual
 
  1  
Reply Mon 7 Jun, 2004 03:56 pm
Teleporters Nick, lots and lots of teleporters.

I don't think this part of society needs or even wants to be regulated by the government. It's unnecessary and unethical to push so much when all the children are doing is watching a bit of popular entertainment.

I could understand the need to ban kids from graphic sex scenes but showing children a toned down version of what happens in the real world isn't the worst thing in the world.
0 Replies
 
au1929
 
  1  
Reply Mon 7 Jun, 2004 04:09 pm
Much of what is shown is not real life but becomes so when our youngsters emulate it.
0 Replies
 
Individual
 
  1  
Reply Mon 7 Jun, 2004 04:13 pm
Do young people really copy what is in movies past common sense?

Ok...bad question.

Hmmm...If they emulate it (assuming it's something bad) then their parents obviously haven't done a good job of raising their children.
0 Replies
 
au1929
 
  1  
Reply Mon 7 Jun, 2004 04:27 pm
Individual

Quote:
BOSTON Anyone more than a decade removed from high school has probably wondered what it's like to be a teenager in today's sexually saturated times. On Sunday, The New York Times Magazine provided a bleak answer..
Benoit Denizet-Lewis's cover story, based on interviews and exchanges with nearly 100 suburban American teenagers, opens a window onto a world of sexual encounters devoid of emotional connection, of casual assignations, arranged via e-mail or cellphone, deliberately divorced from dating or romance..
The picture the writer paints is of sexuality shorn of the rituals and romance many of us recall from the days when we were growing toward young adulthood. Flirtation, infatuation, invitation, dating, becoming steadies, progressing, stage by stage, toward sexual intimacy - all that, for many suburban teens, has been replaced by matter-of-fact liaisons that treat sex as though it was little more than a biological urge to be indulged, by appointment, at the mutual convenience of mere acquaintances..
Among the teens Denizet-Lewis surveyed, "hooking up" and "friends with benefits" - that is, friends who have casual sex - offer convenient answers to a high school environment where actual relationships are deemed too demanding or limiting, where oral sex is considered more social skill than intimate act, and where contemporaries who are steady couples are viewed as uncool or, even worse, losers. It's a world often absent any sort of emotional bond between sexual partners..
Brian, 16, explained it this way: "Being in a real relationship just complicates everything. You feel obligated to be all, like, couply. And that gets really boring after a while. When you're friends with benefits, you go over, hook up, then play video games or something. It rocks.".
Against the backdrop of not-so-distant sexual repression enforced by a conservative alliance of church and state, it's hard to think that legal or moral codes that condemn teenage sexuality are a preferred alternative. Sovereignty in sexual matters best rests not with church or state but rather with the individual. That's why modifying people's behavior should be the province of persuasion, not of compulsion..
Yet to read the Times story is to come away fearing that the ideology of sexual freedom has robbed many of today's young people of an important internal check on their own conduct..
Conscience isn't quite the right word. Perhaps self-consciousness would be more apt. A realistic approach to sexuality isn't necessarily abstinence, as the various conservative movements would have it, but rather the recognition that liberty and license aren't the same thing and that sex is important enough not to be trivialized..
What sentient people remember as central when they look back on high school and college are not the casual sexual encounters they had but the emotional experiences: the glow in learning that a romantic interest shared their feelings, the giddy delight of falling in love, the heartache of breaking up. Everyone recalls various physical encounters, of course, but what helped shape us is the emotional connection of real relationships..
That's why it's truly sad to read of a high-school generation too detached to date, too indifferent for romance, too distant for commitment. And why it's hard to believe that the physical and the emotional can truly be compartmentalized, that two teenagers can be friends with benefits but without psychological consequences, that hooking up can reduce sex to a pure physical transaction without scarring psyche or soul..
Those are lessons no doubt hard to teach in the face of today's culture of casual carnality. And yet if you believe in the importance of love for achieving a happy, meaningful life, you can't help but hope that today's teenagers will come to understand that to rob sex of romance, to divorce it from of emotion, is to deny themselves exactly what makes it special..
Scot Lehigh's column appears regularly in The Boston Globe.

Where do you think this attitude stems from. Could it be the smut the young see on the silver screen and TV? Sure they emulate it.
0 Replies
 
Individual
 
  1  
Reply Mon 7 Jun, 2004 04:34 pm
Were you alive during the 60's?
0 Replies
 
au1929
 
  1  
Reply Mon 7 Jun, 2004 04:47 pm
Individual
Sixties Ha. Try the 30 's . I was a teenager in the 40's and by the sixties had two teenage sons. Have seen and suffered through it all. From Woodstock to communes and etc.
0 Replies
 
Individual
 
  1  
Reply Mon 7 Jun, 2004 04:54 pm
Good times, eh? Laughing

My point is that this type of stuff happens all the time, the difference is what we blame it on.

Back when women first started showing their ankles, it was obviously witchcraft. Nowadays, people think that the casual sex is a result of movies.

If anything, this problem stems from the high divorce rates in America. Children are learning from their parents that relationships don't mean very much. On top of that, these divorces often leave emotional scars which manifest themselves in various sexually centered ways, promiscuity is just one result.

But then we could also blame it on biological urges. Humans, by nature, are noncommittal. We would just have sex with whatever woman we wanted (providing the leader wasn't around) and get on with our lives.

Or we could blame it on the fact that moving pictures are poisoning our children's minds.

I've given you three options. If you could choose one, would it really be movies?
0 Replies
 
au1929
 
  1  
Reply Mon 7 Jun, 2004 05:16 pm
I would blame a good part of today's promiscuity on the entertainment industry. They have trivialized sex.
The same biological urges that youngsters have today were always there. However, there was no media telling us or shouting at us that it was OK to act upon those urges.
0 Replies
 
ehBeth
 
  1  
Reply Mon 7 Jun, 2004 05:38 pm
People have never needed to be told to act on the urges. They always have. Our parents did, our grandparents did, our great-grandparents did, our great-great-grandparents did ... There wasn't a lot of media coverage of it (there was some - think of Chaucer ... ), but it was happening.
0 Replies
 
ehBeth
 
  1  
Reply Mon 7 Jun, 2004 05:41 pm
Now, that being said, I do think parents should have to go to R-rated movies with their children. They need to be aware of what their children are watching. Of course, I think more ratings should be given for violence, not sex. I thought it was interesting that Harry Potter 3 had been given a 15+ rating in Australia. It wasn't found suitable for children. Brilliant!

I'm much more worried about kids killing each other, than about kids having sex.
0 Replies
 
au1929
 
  1  
Reply Mon 7 Jun, 2004 06:00 pm
ehBeth
I beg to differ with you. Sure there were always a few. But they were the exception not the rule. And sexually active 13 year olds. Fugedaboutit. You can't equate the sexual morality of the 40's and 50's with that of today.
0 Replies
 
hamburger
 
  1  
Reply Mon 7 Jun, 2004 07:17 pm
i think we should adopt the morality code of the british royal family or of movie stars. surely we could all agree that they are setting good examples for all of mankind (including children). since most people are frequenting movie houses, watching "various" kinds of movies, see t.v. shows, i'd think that we are tacitly approving of the lifestyles of our "stars" ? hbg
0 Replies
 
GeneralTsao
 
  1  
Reply Mon 7 Jun, 2004 08:22 pm
Re: Younger teens getting R-rated movie passes
au1929 wrote:
Younger teens getting R-rated movie passes
Monday, June 7, 2004 Posted: 1:38 PM EDT (1738 GMT)

The Bloomington teen-ager's way around the rating system's age limit was a parent-approved pass card



Whatever happened to sneaking in, or buying a PG ticket then walking into the room showing the R film, or asking the adult person in front of you in line to say you were with him?

I think this pass card idea robs children of creativity, and one of the more memorable things of childhood.

General Tsao
0 Replies
 
MyOwnUsername
 
  1  
Reply Tue 8 Jun, 2004 02:32 am
I think much bigger problem is what exactly is rated as unappropriate today. ehBeth has excellent example of Harry Potter in her post.
In some countries (luckily, so far not in Europe) censorship is getting dictatorship proportions.

I am not saying teenagers should see erotic movies or be exposed to sex images or scenes, but having all country screaming in terror because kids saw one tit at SuperBowl is way way too much
0 Replies
 
MyOwnUsername
 
  1  
Reply Tue 8 Jun, 2004 02:36 am
by the way, prohibitions and censorships never do any good. I am not saying au does not have some good and important points, I just think that those are not ways to fight problems.

For example, in most european countries (not sure about every single one) teenagers can see "Troy" without problem. Same time, in all european countries together there is lesser number of school shootings then in USA. I am not saying that censorship of all kinds is responsible (although it might be), but it's more then clear that it's pointless.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Tween girls - Discussion by sozobe
Excessive Public Affection to Small Children - Discussion by Phoenix32890
BS child support! - Discussion by Baldimo
Teaching boy how to be boys again - Discussion by Baldimo
Sex Education and Applied Psychology? - Discussion by gungasnake
A very sick 6 years old boy - Discussion by navigator
Baby at 8 weeks - Discussion by irisalert
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Younger teens getting R-rated movie passes
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 04/26/2024 at 04:15:58