shirarocklin

My husband was trying to explain to me tonight something about good reasons to restrict television, and somehow the conversation moved over to "If our 13 year old son came and asked us to look at pornography" ending with how we would basically say no, and forbid it, and of course he wouldn't be allowed to look at it.

I tried talking about why he would come to us about it in the first place, what his reasons for wanting to see might be (as in, hearing about it from other kids, but not really knowing what they are talking about, or something)... because, as I pointed out to him, if a boy really wanted access to porn, why ask their parents? I would think they have many other, probably more fruitful, avenues to access it.

But the conversation wasn't very productive, and we both agreed to stop talking about it because it was creating tension. He did come to see that making up extreme scenerios about the distant future might not be so productive... although I did tell them that his concerns about long term issues, like pornography, are very valid and welcome to discuss.

He does better when he's had lots to read. So, I went and found this: http://sandradodd.com/sex, but I don't think its laid out quite right for his style of learning. I was wondering if there were any articles that could be recommended? Or old discussions on this list that would be good to print out?

Also, he talked about studies about television being addictive, changing the patterns in the brain, and how watching television doesn't promote active thinking because the images are all there (versus books, where you have to imagine the story). Are there any good discussions or articles for me to print about that?

Actually, I can think of one right now. Television provides pictures... but it does not provide the emotional depth, and internal dialogues, that books provide. So I imagine that we have to 'learn' how to add those in, the same way that we add the images in when we read books.

Jenny Cyphers

*** "If our 13 year old son came and asked us to look at pornography" ending with how we would basically say no, and forbid it, and of course he wouldn't be allowed to look at it. ***

These days, kids don't have to go looking for it! The teen boys that I know personally have been sent unsolicited picture text messages of girls wanting to show off their bodies.

***I tried talking about why he would come to us about it in the first place, what his reasons for wanting to see might be (as in, hearing about it from other kids, but not really knowing what they are talking about, or something).. . because, as I pointed out to him, if a boy really wanted access to porn, why ask their parents? I would think they have many other, probably more fruitful, avenues to access it.***

If you keep open communication an ongoing process, porn and sex will be just one more thing that is talked about openly, well at least as openly as the teen in question is comfortable with. One of the aforementioned boys asked for my help in getting a girl to stop sending him pictures. Easier said than done!

So as far as hypothetical futures go, when Chamille was little I had no idea that kids would be able to send each other pictures of themselves via phone!

***Also, he talked about studies about television being addictive, changing the patterns in the brain, and how watching television doesn't promote active thinking because the images are all there (versus books, where you have to imagine the story). Are there any good discussions or articles for me to print about that? ***

Sandra's site will link you in a never ending chain of good tv reading...

http://sandradodd.com/tv
http://joyfullyrejoycing.com/influencing%20kid%20behavior/tv%20and%20video%20games/argumentsagainsttv.html

If you scroll down on Joyce's page, on the left are many links to TV articles.

After reading all that stuff you may change your mind about this:

***Actually, I can think of one right now. Television provides pictures... but it does not provide the emotional depth, and internal dialogues, that books provide. So I imagine that we have to 'learn' how to add those in, the same way that we add the images in when we read books.***





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Sandra Dodd

-=-He does better when he's had lots to read. So, I went and found
this: http://sandradodd.com/sex, but I don't think its laid out quite
right for his style of learning. I was wondering if there were any
articles that could be recommended? -=-

How old is your son?

I don't think there's any other account of a teenaged boy's porn
situation, for a couple of reasons. Many of the best writers have
girls. Of those who have boys, many of the boys have more privacy now
than my boys did when we all shared a computer, as when that bit was
written. <G>

-=-"If our 13 year old son came and asked us to look at pornography"
ending with how we would basically say no, and forbid it, and of
course he wouldn't be allowed to look at it. -=-

People ask a similar question of unschoolers all the time. It's a
massively stupid question. It is this: "If your child wanted heroin,
would you give it to him?" I'm pretty sure that off all the heroin
users on the planet, present and past, not one single one asked his
mother for it the first time he thought he might want to use some.

However old your child is, someday he will jerk off. That has
nothing on earth to do with television. Kids jerked off before
electricity, before books, before the wheel. I think pornography
keeps the crime rate way down, personally. I think that's one of the
last things you should be talking about to your husband, honestly.

-=-Also, he talked about studies about television being addictive,
changing the patterns in the brain, and how watching television
doesn't promote active thinking because the images are all there
(versus books, where you have to imagine the story). Are there any
good discussions or articles for me to print about that? -=-

Use the search box here, upper right. it will cover Joyce's page and
mine both.

http://unschooling.blogspot.com

There are lots of mainstream articles linked there. Maybe not about
the topics you've mentioned, but you might find something useful.

And there's Pam's article on the economics of TV:
http://www.sandradodd.com/t/economics.html

Sandra

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Sandra Dodd

-=-After reading all that stuff you may change your mind about this:

***Actually, I can think of one right now. Television provides
pictures... but it does not provide the emotional depth, and internal
dialogues, that books provide. So I imagine that we have to 'learn'
how to add those in, the same way that we add the images in when we
read books.*** -=-

Yeah, I didn't even comment about that part. Books don't provide the
music, scenery, acting, costumes and accents that books do.

I'm listening to "The Help," a book about Alabama in the early
1960's. I'm guessing it's written in dialect. I would never have
been able to read it. Hearing it read aloud by people who know the
accents is WAY better than limping through with it looking like Tom
Sawyer or B'rer Rabbit.

I watched "Moon" recently, with Sam Rockwell and Kevin Spacey. Both
of them are really especially good actors. Really good. And the
movie would NOT work in a book very well. It works because of the
acting, the visuals, the soundtrack, the lighting, the timing.

People don't learn to add images when they read books. The words in
the book create the pictures. People don't have to learn to add
emotional depth; they have to be able to read faces, tone of voice,
posture.

I recommend a round of reading about multiple intelligences and book
worship. If you don't feel better in a week, let me know.

http://sandradodd.com/intelligences
http://sandradodd.com/bookworship

Sandra

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Bob Collier

--- In [email protected], "shirarocklin" <shirarocklin@...> wrote:
>
>
>
> Also, he talked about studies about television being addictive, changing the patterns in the brain, and how watching television doesn't promote active thinking because the images are all there (versus books, where you have to imagine the story). Are there any good discussions or articles for me to print about that?
>
>


You might find this article an interesting read:

If games had come before books...
http://www.odemagazine.com/doc/36/if_games_had_come_before_books

"In his book Everything Bad Is Good For You, Steven Johnson contends that video games and television programs are making us increasingly intelligent. What if video and computer games had been invented first, he wonders, and books had come later?"

There's also this one:

Is The TV Making Me Stupid?
http://www.adam-eason.com/2009/03/19/is-the-tv-making-me-stupid/

A very personal view from British hypnotherapist Adam Eason.

I'm totally pro-TV, by the way, though I watch relatively little these days - but I regard that as a natural effect of having freedom of choice. :-)

Hope that helps.

Bob

Joyce Fetteroll

On Feb 13, 2010, at 8:44 PM, shirarocklin wrote:

> Also, he talked about studies about television being addictive,
> changing the patterns in the brain, and how watching television
> doesn't promote active thinking because the images are all there
> (versus books, where you have to imagine the story). Are there any
> good discussions or articles for me to print about that?

There are 10 links about TV at:

http://joyfullyrejoycing.com/

most of them several pages long. That should be quite a bit of reading!

Sandra has links to some studies at:

http://sandradodd.com/tv

>
> Actually, I can think of one right now. Television provides
> pictures... but it does not provide the emotional depth,

You've never cried during a TV show? Not even the last episode of MASH?

> and internal dialogues, that books provide. So I imagine that we
> have to 'learn' how to add those in, the same way that we add the
> images in when we read books.

I think it's a mistake to put books on a pedestal as the ideal
everything else should aspire to. Books do somethings well, but do
other things poorly. What they do best for education is make it
possible for one teacher to cheaply teach a room full of students. :-/

But books are just one medium. Other media have their own strengths
and weaknesses. If paintings were held as the ultimate, books rob
people of creating their own story. If music were held as the
ultimate, books rob us of sound.

In terms of visuals and lack of internal dialogue, how is TV
different than a play, story teller or puppet show?

It's as much a handicap for a visual learner to be kept from the
medium they learn best from (video and watching people) as it would
be for someone who learns best by reading to be kept from books. An
artist needs to see what things look like and how other artists have
interpreted reality. Words are a poor substitute. (And a writer needs
to read how others have captured reality in words.)

Joyce




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Robin Bentley

> I watched "Moon" recently, with Sam Rockwell and Kevin Spacey. Both
> of them are really especially good actors. Really good. And the
> movie would NOT work in a book very well. It works because of the
> acting, the visuals, the soundtrack, the lighting, the timing.
>
Before books and the printed word, people either drew pictures, told
stories, or acted them out.

I know plenty of former high school students who hated Shakespeare
because they were made to read the plays instead of seeing them
performed. Most people can barely understand the language or
Shakespeare's intentions if they never see the interactions between
characters. The plays are a *totally* different (and wonderful)
experience.

They're good on TV, too!

Robin B.



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Shira Rocklin

Thanks for the links!

***Actually, I can think of one right now. Television provides
pictures... but it does not provide the emotional depth, and internal
dialogues, that books provide. So I imagine that we have to 'learn'
how to add those in, the same way that we add the images in when we
read books.***

Yes, upon rereading, what I wrote is not very thought out. I took
something that I like in books and miss in TV/Movies and then created a
theory around it that really doesn't stand up. I sometimes find I miss
the internal dialog that I find in books, when I'm watching something...
but thats usually when its a movie made of a book I've already read.
Nothing to do with this really, except that my husband was trying to say
that television does everything for you, provides the images so you
don't have to think and that books are better for not doing that...
which didn't seem true to me, so I was trying to think of why TV would
make us think, just as much as reading. It wasn't clearly thought out
though.

Joanna

--- In [email protected], Jenny Cyphers <jenstarc4@...> wrote:
>
> *** "If our 13 year old son came and asked us to look at pornography" ending with how we would basically say no, and forbid it, and of course he wouldn't be allowed to look at it. ***
>
> These days, kids don't have to go looking for it! The teen boys that I know personally have been sent unsolicited picture text messages of girls wanting to show off their bodies.
>

I'm also curious to know how old your son is. One of the things that I didn't think about when my son (now 14) was younger was the fact that as he grew he would become a young man. My son hit puberty on the earlier side, and he is indeed a young man--not really a child. I have certainly felt a natural "closing of the door" as far as how much of his personal physical life is any of my damn business! :-) When he was younger it was hard for me to imagine that transition happening so young, but then it happened and that was that. There are certain things that I could say that I don't really want to know about, and don't think I should!

And he would never come to us and ask for pornography. He has the internet, like most kids do by 13, whether they are unschooled or not, and he knows how to clear the cache, so... Can't see it ever happening. Kids have always been able to get their hands on it and pass it around. Did your husband REALLY never see any as a teen? Not that that's impossible, I guess, but... And if he did see it, was it because he asked his parents for it??

This is why those future hypothetical arguments really don't work very well to help someone understand unschooling and choices better, because the whole scenario isn't very realistic.

Joanna

Joanna

I sometimes find I miss
> the internal dialog that I find in books, when I'm watching something...
> but thats usually when its a movie made of a book I've already read.

I agree that I've missed the internal dialog, and have judged movies as lacking because of that--BUT I don't think that anymore, because it dismisses all the wonderful visuals that happen in movies, that we can easily take for granted. But tons of creative work goes into the making of a living, visual version of a story--it's different. I love how, in a movie, one sweeping view, or one tight shot of some visual bit can make up for many pages of description that I find tedious to wade through, waiting to get to the action and/or dialog. Different artistic expressions.

> Nothing to do with this really, except that my husband was trying to say
> that television does everything for you, provides the images so you
> don't have to think and that books are better for not doing that...
> which didn't seem true to me, so I was trying to think of why TV would
> make us think, just as much as reading. It wasn't clearly thought out
> though.

I think that if you watch good t.v. or movies through different eyes, you'll see more to appreciate by thinking of it as a visual medium. I completely disagree about the lack of emotional depth. Visual mediums can be every bit as poignant, and sometimes even more directly so, since the information is going in through the eyes rather than being interpreted abstractly through the written word, as books. However, you don't want to be comparing Barney to Wuthering Heights.

Joanna

Joanna
>

[email protected]

> *** "If our 13 year old son came and asked us to look at pornography"
ending with how we would basically say no, and forbid it, and of course he
wouldn't be allowed to look at it. ***
>
> These days, kids don't have to go looking for it! The teen boys that I
know personally have been sent unsolicited picture text messages of girls
wanting to show off their bodies.
>

>I'm also curious to know how old your son is. One of the things that I
didn't think about when my son (now >14) was younger was the fact that as he
grew he would become a young man. My son hit puberty on the >earlier side,
and he is indeed a young man--not really a child. I have certainly felt a
natural "closing of the >door" as far as how much of his personal physical
life is any of my damn business! :-) When he was >younger it was hard for me
to imagine that transition happening so young, but then it happened and
that >was that. There are certain things that I could say that I don't really
want to know about, and don't think I >should!
>
>And he would never come to us and ask for pornography. He has the
internet, like most kids do by 13, >whether they are unschooled or not, and he
knows how to clear the cache, so... Can't see it ever >happening. Kids have
always been able to get their hands on it and pass it around. Did your
husband >REALLY never see any as a teen? Not that that's impossible, I guess,
but... And if he did see it, was it >because he asked his parents for it??

Got to say, as the mother of a 12-going-on-13 year-old for whom puberty's
come fairly early, I recognize a lot of this. And as someone who's always
been very pro-TV, I'm a bit concerned right now as Jess has a growing
fascination with "A Clockwork Orange". She's not seen it yet but wants to, and
I'm sure she's probably downloaded clips from the web already. It's as a
result of a band that she likes who've recommended it as important in order
to grasp their music; as well as an interest in dystopian novels and films.


I know that she won't want to watch this film in my company but I feel
that if she does see this particular film at such a young age then she at
least needs me there to discuss it with her and to minimize the psychological
impact of so much disturbing imagery. I really would rather she waited a
couple of years before seeing it at all. This is the first time I've ever
been genuinely worried about exposure to anything on a screen and I suppose
it's ironic that she's found it as a result of music and books. Those of
you with older kids, have you been through this stage and how did you deal
with it?

Jude xx


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Sandra Dodd

-=--13 year-old for whom puberty's
come fairly early, I recognize a lot of this. And as someone who's
always
been very pro-TV, I'm a bit concerned right now as Jess has a growing
fascination with "A Clockwork Orange". She's not seen it yet but wants
to, and
I'm sure she's probably downloaded clips from the web already.-=-

Marty watched it recently, with a download from Netflix (not
download... instant whatever it is--it won't necessarily be available
longterm).

When people saw that movie when it was new, the comments from friends
and the reviews caused me not to go and see it. I'm squeamish. Also,
though, in those days the only way to see it was to be in the theater,
in the dark, and making it last the whole time of the movie, that
that's more intense than watching a DVD is. Watching scenes or a
DVD, with the sun up in your own house with a "mute" or "pause" tool
in your hand is a whole different situation.

There's also this: Old movies look old to kids. They're not as
shocked or persuaded as people were when the movies were new and
"cutting edge." I watched The Exorcist with a bunch of kids here,
like twelve all at once, mostly unschooled kids I knew well, and
friends of Kirby's, and I was really afraid it would be way too
horrible for Holly, who was maybe eight or nine. I was wrong. She
was fine, and there was more laughter than fear in the room.

Sandra

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Pam Sorooshian

> I know that she won't want to watch this film in my company<



Is that because you've made some kind of big deal about that film being
inappropriate for her and now she's self-conscious about it?



It is an extraordinarily thought-provoking film and has so much to say about
parenting and psychology and how teens are treated and so on. Why not just
have it in the mix of movies you watch?



I can't even remember which of my kids was the one who brought the movie up
- but it came up and I told them how I had just walked into a theater and
seen it, with no prior knowledge about what I was about to see. I was
traveling, camping across Canada, with other kids my age, and we hadn't even
heard of it, but just went to a movie in some little one theater/one movie
town. I had to go out into the lobby a few times - and didn't see the whole
thing. I've watched it a few times since, though. So, I warned them it could
be intense and upsetting, but that I thought it was still quite an amazing
movie.



This sounds more like a matter of mom not wanting her little girl to grow up
(puberty at 12 isn't at all early) - and, I just want to say, it will happen
and you can make things harder by resisting or you can be supportive and
part of it. IF you are supportive and part of it, you'll free your daughter
to be young and childlike when that's how she's feeling, even though there
are times she wants to be older and worldy. My now-19 year old has a 24 year
old very serious boyfriend - but she can still be my little girl and hold my
hand and cuddle up and ooh and aah over watching Mr. Rogers reruns on tv and
love re-reading her favorite children's books, etc. She doesn't feel the
need to prove she's an adult. I really think that if I'd resisted her more
grown-up interests, she'd have dug in her heels and felt like she needed to
prove she was grown up and that could have gone in some not-great
directions.



I'd get the movie and say, "I got interested in rewatching A Clockwork
Orange after you'd mentioned it - it is on Netflix watch instantly if you
want to watch it." Maybe you could get her the book, first. Does she know
anything at all about Skinnerian conditioning and all that? Does she know
what you think of it? Do you? Give her some context. One of the things about
unschooling is that we aren't big fans of Skinnerian conditioning - we don't
use reward and punishment as tools to shape or condition our kids.
Mentioning that might be a cool way to connect the movie to your ideas -
something to converse about, anyway. Maybe.



OR - maybe she has completely different reasons for wanting to see it. Maybe
some kids she knows are talking about it - making it a big deal that they've
seen it - and she just doesn't want to feel left out. Not at all a bad
reason to want to see it.



If she really wouldn't want to watch it with you, then maybe get it and
watch it yourself and let her watch it herself - but you'd both watch it
within the same day or two. But, really, I'd try to just lighten WAY up over
it and treat it just like you'd normally treat a movie she's expressed an
interest in.



-pam



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Sandra Dodd

-=-If she really wouldn't want to watch it with you, then maybe get it
and
watch it yourself and let her watch it herself - but you'd both watch it
within the same day or two. But, really, I'd try to just lighten WAY
up over
it and treat it just like you'd normally treat a movie she's expressed
an
interest in.-=-

Increasingly at our house, movie discussions are that way--we've seen
the movie, but not at the same time. <g> Usually one or two of us saw
it in the theater, and another one or two on DVD later, and THEN we
discuss it. That's not a problem for me. I like it. And over the
years we've really learned which movies various others in the family
are likely to really like, which will be so-so or unpredictable, and
which should be recommended against. It's not a big deal. I know
which movies to ask Marty to go with me to, and which would be better
seen with Holly. Kirby gives me DVDs sometimes, of things he liked
and thinks I'll like.

Sandra




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Jude

>
> Marty watched it recently, with a download from Netflix (not
> download... instant whatever it is--it won't necessarily be available
> longterm).
>
> When people saw that movie when it was new, the comments from friends
> and the reviews caused me not to go and see it. I'm squeamish. Also,
> though, in those days the only way to see it was to be in the theater,
> in the dark, and making it last the whole time of the movie, that
> that's more intense than watching a DVD is. Watching scenes or a
> DVD, with the sun up in your own house with a "mute" or "pause" tool
> in your hand is a whole different situation.
>
> There's also this: Old movies look old to kids. They're not as
> shocked or persuaded as people were when the movies were new and
> "cutting edge." I watched The Exorcist with a bunch of kids here,
> like twelve all at once, mostly unschooled kids I knew well, and
> friends of Kirby's, and I was really afraid it would be way too
> horrible for Holly, who was maybe eight or nine. I was wrong. She
> was fine, and there was more laughter than fear in the room.
>
> Sandra
>

Thanks for the wise words, Sandra. It's so easy to blow things out of proportion. Of course I'd not like Jess to think that the Clockwork Orange characters have a healthy view of life in general or women in particular, but really I know she's perfectly capable of deconstructing the film's message, particularly if I keep an eye out for anything that really does upset her. Mute, pause and daylight are all such useful things.

Of course, The Exorcist was the other folk-devil of the 70s, wasn't it? Yet recently I heard one of the sweetest young teenagers I know, who sings in a Cathedral Choir and is hardly a poster-boy for teen rebellion, playing the music from Mike Oldfield's Tubular Bells on the piano. I asked him how he'd latched on to this piece, not often on iPods these days. Of course, he'd first heard it as soundtrack to The Exorcist.

Oh, and thinking of Holly laughing at it reminded me of this classic skit: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=epzC88bzghA , which entirely defuses the scary bits!

Jude x

Sandra Dodd

This seemed worth quoting. Perhaps it will make the difference in
many people's view of the TV!

" Mute, pause and daylight are all such useful things." --Jude



Sandra

Joanna

Those of
> you with older kids, have you been through this stage and how did you deal
> with it?
>
I wouldn't call this a "stage" but rather that it's her own personality and curiosity. Maybe the "stage" is just that part of growing up that means coming out of the protection and "innocence" of childhood--where children will often just not notice or look away from things that are too mature for them. My daughter very obviously and consciously is holding on tight to that--I see it in her friend too. She is 11 and wants to believe in Santa Claus, the tooth fairy, play with Barbies and live in lots of make believe. Other 11's are looking for boyfriends and interested in fashion.

Neither of my kids has really been interested in anything, at this point (11 and 14), that I didn't think they were ready for, so I haven't had your experience. They don't want to watch things that they aren't ready for. If there's something borderline, we talk about it and they decide if they're ready. I've been open to the fact that they might, and have even suggested some things that they declined. I remember how I felt as a kid, and it was pretty much always that I could handle more, and knew more, than the adults around presumed.

You didn't say whether you've talked with her about it? If you get specific about what it is that you are concerned about, maybe you'll find some connection with her around what she's interested in about Clockwork Orange. Share you concerns with her in a way that opens conversation rather than closes a door. Maybe she'll decide she's not ready, maybe you could agree to look for other movies that explore these realms but that aren't so disturbing, or maybe you'll find that she really is ready. I have found thus far that if my kids are interested, then they are ready.

That may or may not apply to your daughter, but obviously there's something there that she's looking for, so it's better that you try to support it in some way rather than becoming the censoring blockade standing in her way. 'Cause if you do that, she'll figure out some way around you, and then you've been left out of the loop and your relationship has suffered.

There's always the option to turn the movie off.

Joanna

Jude

--- In [email protected], "Pam Sorooshian" <pamsoroosh@...> wrote:
>
> Is that because you've made some kind of big deal about that film being
> inappropriate for her and now she's self-conscious about it?
>

No, I've been careful not to make a big deal of it (then again, there may have been unconscious body language that said different!). She just likes her own space around anything to do with her favourite band (crush on the lead singer, etc, etc)

>
>
> It is an extraordinarily thought-provoking film and has so much to say about
> parenting and psychology and how teens are treated and so on. Why not just
> have it in the mix of movies you watch?

Definitely what I'd aim for - for it to be normal and not beyond the pale. I just need to sort out my own head before we watch it. I reckon I'll tell her I've not seen it before (actually, I think it's true that I've not seen it right through, so am probably fearing the unknown scenes that I may have missed) and would like to share it with her just like we share her favourite comedies.


> IF you are supportive and part of it, you'll free your daughter
> to be young and childlike when that's how she's feeling, even though there
> are times she wants to be older and worldy.

Yes, though right now she's still at the novelty stage of wanting to always seem older and worldly. I suppose that's the same with most people experiencing a change in their lives - it defines them for a while. She was at school for a long time too, and I'm sure this also has an impact. Your relationship with your daughter sounds really wonderful and I get what you're saying about allowing her to grow without arbitrary restrictions of what's age-appropriate. I try to avoid these but, as I said before, my face and body language may indicate differently on occasions (suppose I need to genuinely relax in order to stop giving off these signals!)

>>
>
> I'd get the movie and say, "I got interested in rewatching A Clockwork
> Orange after you'd mentioned it - it is on Netflix watch instantly if you
> want to watch it." Maybe you could get her the book, first. Does she know
> anything at all about Skinnerian conditioning and all that? Does she know
> what you think of it? Do you? Give her some context. One of the things about
> unschooling is that we aren't big fans of Skinnerian conditioning - we don't
> use reward and punishment as tools to shape or condition our kids.
> Mentioning that might be a cool way to connect the movie to your ideas -
> something to converse about, anyway. Maybe.

Lovely idea, thanks. We've talked around these ideas in general before, but not looked at them in specific terms of Skinnerian conditioning.


>
> OR - maybe she has completely different reasons for wanting to see it. Maybe
> some kids she knows are talking about it - making it a big deal that they've
> seen it - and she just doesn't want to feel left out. Not at all a bad
> reason to want to see it.
> >
> If she really wouldn't want to watch it with you, then maybe get it and
> watch it yourself and let her watch it herself - but you'd both watch it
> within the same day or two. But, really, I'd try to just lighten WAY up over
> it and treat it just like you'd normally treat a movie she's expressed an
> interest in.
>

Of course, of course, thanks to both you and Sandra for making me understand that I'd let this get out of proportion.

Jude x

Pam Sorooshian

" Mute, pause and daylight are all such useful things." -Jude





And choices of screen sizes. I've recently watched everything from IMAX
movies to tv on my iPod nano.



-pam



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Sandra Dodd

-=-That may or may not apply to your daughter, but obviously there's
something there that she's looking for, so it's better that you try to
support it in some way rather than becoming the censoring blockade
standing in her way. 'Cause if you do that, she'll figure out some way
around you, and then you've been left out of the loop and your
relationship has suffered.

-=-There's always the option to turn the movie off.-=-

OH YES!

Mute, pause and OFF. <g>

I've started many movies I've never finished. Maybe she just wants to
look at the movie, not watch the whole thing. Maybe just let it run,
fast forward to another scene, fast forward, just to get the visuals
the band she likes has in mine, without becoming involved in the whole
thing. Maybe. Maybe she'll watch it 45 times and write a thesis on
it. <g>

Sandra

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Jude

--- In [email protected], "Joanna" <ridingmom@...> wrote:
>
> I remember how I felt as a kid, and it was pretty much always that I could handle more, and knew more, than the adults around presumed.
>

Yes, I'm sure that's the case. And anyway the things that can cause most upset are often different to the ones parents worry about. I can personally remember encountering when I was 11 or 12 something that I really wasn't ready for (a documentary about the Nazi concentration camps left me with nightmares for quite a long time ), but it wasn't something that might have flagged up obvious alarm signals. I could watch all kinds of horror films but that slice of reality was something completely different.

>
> You didn't say whether you've talked with her about it? If you get specific about what it is that you are concerned about, maybe you'll find some connection with her around what she's interested in about Clockwork Orange. Share you concerns with her in a way that opens conversation rather than closes a door.
>

I know why she's interested: it's a specific reference point in the image and lyrics of her favourite band (Angelspit). I've probably not talked to her sufficiently about it because I've not wanted to make too big a deal of it and turn it into something she felt the need to download in secret. I don't want to get it wrong and 'close the door'.


> I have found thus far that if my kids are interested, then they are ready.
>
> there's something there that she's looking for, so it's better that you try to support it in some way rather than becoming the censoring blockade standing in her way. 'Cause if you do that, she'll figure out some way around you, and then you've been left out of the loop and your relationship has suffered.
>

Yes, that's what I've decided - better to share and discuss than to set up barriers that don't need exist. Thanks to you, Sandra and Pam.

Jude x

Schuyler

I saw a bit of Clockwork Orange on television a few months ago. Simon and Linnaea were in the room. Neither of them remember the scenes that I remember seeing. It was after the treatment to the end. I don't think I made it to the end. I think Jess can handle Clockwork Orange if she wants to. I think it is not as big or as scary as it may have once been. Really.

I would absolutely get it and have it and invite her to watch it with you. If she doesn't want to, then you can watch it with Dave and see if it is as scary as you remember or as sexual. It certainly isn't raising up sexism and violence to heights of glory, I think it is effectively doing the opposite.

Schuyler


________________________________
From: "JudithAnneMurphy@..." <JudithAnneMurphy@...>




I know that she won't want to watch this film in my company but I feel
that if she does see this particular film at such a young age then she at
least needs me there to discuss it with her and to minimize the psychological
impact of so much disturbing imagery. I really would rather she waited a
couple of years before seeing it at all. This is the first time I've ever
been genuinely worried about exposure to anything on a screen and I suppose
it's ironic that she's found it as a result of music and books. Those of
you with older kids, have you been through this stage and how did you deal
with it?

Jude xx


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Jude

> I think Jess can handle Clockwork Orange if she wants to. I think it is not as big or as scary as it may have once been. Really.
>
Thanks - you know Jess and I'm sure you're right!
>
> I would absolutely get it and have it and invite her to watch it with you. If she doesn't want to, then you can watch it with Dave and see if it is as scary as you remember or as sexual. It certainly isn't raising up sexism and violence to heights of glory, I think it is effectively doing the opposite.
>
> Schuyler

I like that approach - if I bring it into the house then it defuses any silly mystique I might have built around it by looking uncertain when she mentioned the film.

Schuyler, it's so good to have your advice (we don't see enough of you).

This loop is such a special place where ideas, rather than folk-devils, reign.

Jude x

Sandra Dodd

-=-I said before, my face and body language may indicate differently
on occasions (suppose I need to genuinely relax in order to stop
giving off these signals!)-=-

OH for sure. Not just "relax," but understand and accept!

http://sandradodd.com/being
http://sandradodd.com/respect

Sandra

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Jenny Cyphers

***I know that she won't want to watch this film in my company but I feel
that if she does see this particular film at such a young age then she at
least needs me there to discuss it with her and to minimize the psychological
impact of so much disturbing imagery. ***

*** Those of
you with older kids, have you been through this stage and how did you deal
with it?***

I'd watch it together. Why don't you think she'd want to watch it with you? The things that I never would have said, done, watched, etc, with my parents, my daughter was fine with. She got into horror movies pretty young and I watched with her. Sometimes we'd run into the sadistic torture kind, although that isn't her favorite by a long shot, and we'd pause, fast forward, and talk about it as needed.





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Deb Lewis

***I know that she won't want to watch this film in my company but I feel
that if she does see this particular film at such a young age then she at
least needs me there to discuss it with her and to minimize the psychological
impact of so much disturbing imagery.***

My son watched "A Clockwork Orange" when he was thirteen. He would have watched it sooner but we couldn't find it. He's seventeen now, a nice boy, hasn't raped or killed anyone. He is at this moment playing "O Come, O Come Emanuel" on the organ.

I thought the scenes depicting rape and physical violence were less disturbing than the scenes with Alex and his parents - so revealing, so brilliantly done.
You shouldn't be afraid of that movie.

Our kids have the perspective of time. They have almost forty years of other movies since "A Clockwork Orange" came out. It is still a very visually interesting movie but I'd bet your daughter has seen more graphic depictions of violence in movies and on TV and other perps as bad (but few as interesting!) as Alex.

Deb Lewis

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Paige Hancock-Parr

I have a little bit of a fascination with "dark" movies and books...the more
disturbing, the better, and I have a small collection of my favorite
movies (Martyrs, The Exorcist, Funny Games, etc.), including A Clockwork
Orange, in our media closet.

Not too long ago, Shelby (16, maybe 15 then) asked me if she and her
boyfriend could watch it one night when he was over. The rest of the family
was getting ready for bed and I just didn't feel comfortable with her
watching it...maybe because her boyfriend was with her? I don't know. My
mind kept flashing to the (to me) most memorable parts, which were the
graphic rape scene(s) and the part with the threesome.

I pulled Shelby aside and told her how I didn't think it was a good idea,
because I didn't want her or Noah to feel awkward or embarrassed about
anything they might see. That said, I certainly didn't want to sit down and
watch it *with *them, either, and for a split second I thought of taking it
with me to my bedroom, just to be sure that they wouldn't watch it. ;-) I
didn't do that, but I did tell Shelby (again, in an aside moment), that I
would watch it with her later, just the two of us.

The next morning I went downstairs and of course, the dvd box was on the
coffee table, so I knew that they had watched it. I waited till Noah had
left before I said anything to Shelby, and basically she told me that they
had started the movie, were still playing around on the internet as it
began, getting snacks and whatnot, and that it really hadn't kept their
interest and they had decided to watch something else. <g>

I think what Sandra wrote about below is true in this instance, too. How
"futuristic" the movie is supposed to look! Fact is, it was made in '71, so
*of course* it looks "old" to our kids! ;-)

Oh, Sandra...I wanted to see Moon when it was at our little indie/artsy
theater. Did you know it was directed by David Bowie's son?

Paige, in Virginia

http://freshpeaches.tumblr.com/

The hard work of one accomplishes more than the prayers of millions.



On Sun, Feb 14, 2010 at 10:39 AM, Sandra Dodd <Sandra@...> wrote:

>
>
>
> There's also this: Old movies look old to kids. They're not as
> shocked or persuaded as people were when the movies were new and
> "cutting edge." I watched The Exorcist with a bunch of kids here,
> like twelve all at once, mostly unschooled kids I knew well, and
> friends of Kirby's, and I was really afraid it would be way too
>
>
>
>
>
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Shira Rocklin

"...as well as an interest in dystopian novels and films."

I actually really enjoyed reading dystopian novels in university in a
literature class. It was really interesting to learn how authors can
use those settings/stories as ways to explore things that could have
existed in our society (such as Anarchism, in a book, but I can't
remember the name of it, by Ursula Le Guin, I think). I like movies
about it too, but they tend to have a bit more suspense than I enjoy.
Could she watch it while you are kind of cleaning on the sidelines or
something else that isn't quite watching it with her, so you can be
there to discuss if needded?

Robyn Coburn

If you don't want a movie trivia story just hit delete now....

Before Jayn was born and I worked in the art department I decorated a movie
with Malcolm McDowell. He was very pleasant and professional - not the
slightest touch of diva (what's the equivalent male word? Christian Bale?).

One time he was kept very late on set, a super long shoot day, and no-one
wanted to go and wake him up for his shot, not because we were worried about
him being cranky but because we all felt so sympathetic towards him. He
wasn't happy, but he was still professional, and took a couple of deep
breaths. In the end he was a little stern about expecting to be able to go
home after this shot and that this not happen again, but we all agreed with
him!

When we went to shoot at the Ambassador Hotel (of historical significance)
while it was still a filming location and not a school. (:p~~~) we were
shooting in one of the old two storey bungalows decorated as a slum hovel
inside. On the wall was an existing collage including (I swear I didn't put
it there) a photo of the Malcolm in the famous conditioning scene. After
some debate within our department, I left it as homage (I won the debate).
It does appear in the final movie as the camera passes over that part of the
wall. Malcolm didn't mind the reference.

The movie is called "Yesterday's Target" and also features LeVar Burton
fresh off "Star Trek: Next Generation" and Daniel Baldwin.

Now there was an interesting guy - he went into the family business of
acting, but I wonder if he really enjoys it. I know what one of his real
passions was. He just lit up when he started talking about his dogs. It
really struck me at the time how his whole demeanor changed and I still
remember having this brief conversation after all these years. He bred
Rottweilers. I wonder if he still does.

I suppose that what I really wanted to do here was give one tiny example of
the idea that a ton of thought goes into every little detail that appears on
screen - including the emotional life of the character that the actors
supply with the assistance of the costume designer, art department, props
master, cinematographer and each other. Nothing that appears on screen is
there by accident, except perhaps in live to air tv - which has its own
excitement. You can watch with this in mind and it becomes a whole different
level of enjoyment.

Robyn L. Coburn
www.iggyjingles.blogspot.com



>
>
>
>
>
>



--
Robyn L. Coburn


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Robyn Coburn

> I love how, in a movie, one sweeping view, or one tight shot of some
> visual bit can make up for many pages of description that I find tedious to
> wade through, waiting to get to the action and/or dialog. Different artistic
> expressions. >>>>
>

I see you've been reading The Twilight Saga.

The movies appear to leave out almost nothing of the story. I believe it's
because the books have about 100 pages of story all wrapped up in 500 pages
of endless yearning exposition. The whole thing is just a metaphor for
Abstinence. (If he can resist his natural impulses, so can you human
teenagers.)

Our kids don't have to resist their natural impulses, because with any luck
they can talk to us about them without us having conniptions.

Jayn went to a birthday party for a girl turning 12. Initially she was
nervous because she would be the only home schooled person, as well as being
younger (10). It turned out most of them were 11, and there was a lot of
polite exchange of information about the difference between their schooling
lives and Jayn's home schooled life. She thought they would be hostile and
condescending but they weren't. Plus Jayn was very diplomatic from her
retelling of the conversations - I didn't know she had it in her. Some of
them have to get straight A's before their parents will buy them a Wii. Jayn
did use the infamous (g) phrase, "I just do whatever I want" - but it was
in the context of a conversation about schoolwork.

However - speaking of natural impulses - being only 11 and 12 didn't stop
the kids from playing Spin the Bottle. (There were at least 20 kids at the
party - James thinks more.) Jayn said she just watched. Given that it is flu
season, I'm happier about that. It wasn't a secret game. I guess the few
parents there thought it was cute or something. James took Jayn, I stayed
home and wrote 5 1/2 pages on my novel.

Robyn L. Coburn
www.iggyjingles.blogspot.com


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]