violent movies
[email protected]
Pam, I think I see your point. I too know many kind, good people who
enjoy this kind of "entertainment" (my DH included). But 1) it is
different for an adult who truly understands it is fiction and
"entertainment" than it is for a child whose brain is trying to figure
out the world, and 2) how might our world be different if millions of
people (my DH included - I'm not picking on you and yours) spent that
time doing something else? Not to mention the billions of dollars that
goes into the whole industry of movie making.
Mary Ellen
Thanks. I needed that.
from
them, but I know when it comes down to it, he remains a good man -- kind,
compassionate, not prone to violence.
Actually, I take it back -- I suspect what "good" comes from it in his
case
is a chance to vent. Is it healthy? He appears healthy. He has made solid
and lasting relationships. Looks like a duck, quacks like a duck... is a
duck. Looks healthy, acts healthy... is healthy.
Now me, I hate horror movies and can only tolerate action movies by
covering
my eyes during the violent scenes until Wally taps me on the shoulder and
says, "it's over". I don't appear to be less violent than he is. Not more
so, but not less.
I think it's easy to blame television, but I don't feel "desensitized" in
the least. I ache on those few occasions I witness real-life violence. So
does my husband, though it's fun for him to watch Mel Gibson get beat up
by
the bad guys and win the day in the end.
Reality is reality, fantasy is fantasy, and when the twain meet, I look
to
the character and health of the individual, not to the medium whether
that's
television, radio, books, fireside songs or racial memory.
Pam
___________________________________________________________________
Get the Internet just the way you want it.
Free software, free e-mail, and free Internet access for a month!
Try Juno Web: http://dl.www.juno.com/dynoget/tagj.
enjoy this kind of "entertainment" (my DH included). But 1) it is
different for an adult who truly understands it is fiction and
"entertainment" than it is for a child whose brain is trying to figure
out the world, and 2) how might our world be different if millions of
people (my DH included - I'm not picking on you and yours) spent that
time doing something else? Not to mention the billions of dollars that
goes into the whole industry of movie making.
Mary Ellen
Thanks. I needed that.
>>>>My husband loves "action flicks" and horror movies. Blood, gore,decapitations -- bring 'em on. I don't know what possible good he gets
from
them, but I know when it comes down to it, he remains a good man -- kind,
compassionate, not prone to violence.
Actually, I take it back -- I suspect what "good" comes from it in his
case
is a chance to vent. Is it healthy? He appears healthy. He has made solid
and lasting relationships. Looks like a duck, quacks like a duck... is a
duck. Looks healthy, acts healthy... is healthy.
Now me, I hate horror movies and can only tolerate action movies by
covering
my eyes during the violent scenes until Wally taps me on the shoulder and
says, "it's over". I don't appear to be less violent than he is. Not more
so, but not less.
I think it's easy to blame television, but I don't feel "desensitized" in
the least. I ache on those few occasions I witness real-life violence. So
does my husband, though it's fun for him to watch Mel Gibson get beat up
by
the bad guys and win the day in the end.
Reality is reality, fantasy is fantasy, and when the twain meet, I look
to
the character and health of the individual, not to the medium whether
that's
television, radio, books, fireside songs or racial memory.
Pam
___________________________________________________________________
Get the Internet just the way you want it.
Free software, free e-mail, and free Internet access for a month!
Try Juno Web: http://dl.www.juno.com/dynoget/tagj.
Pam Hartley
----------
productive for society, "doing something else" we'd a) collapse from mental
and physical exhaustion and b) I'd have to give up reading for pleasure,
needlepoint (and I'm just starting to get competent!) and staring out the
window. :)
Point 1 is of course well taken, but what I am finding is that my daughter
self-regulates. If I *were* of the mind (which I'm not) to let her watch
horror movies, she wouldn't. She's a sensitive girl. I don't think most
small children want to watch horrific violence on screen or off, (maybe
sometimes if it's high fantasy -- i.e, Jurassic Park.)
So what does that leave us with? Cartoon violence? The evening news?
Does anyone have little children, in the "fantasy is reality" years of oh,
say, 2 to 6, who *want* to watch very violent "real life type" movies? It
would surprise me, but maybe I'm too used to living with my clone, the girl
who makes me put away all the Disney videos that are "too bad" to watch.
Pam
>From: [email protected]I think if we all spent our leisure time, during which we accomplish nothing
>To: [email protected]
>Subject: [Unschooling-dotcom] Digest Number 291
>Date: Thu, Nov 11, 1999, 3:14 AM
>
>1) it is
>different for an adult who truly understands it is fiction and
>"entertainment" than it is for a child whose brain is trying to figure
>out the world, and 2) how might our world be different if millions of
>people (my DH included - I'm not picking on you and yours) spent that
>time doing something else?
productive for society, "doing something else" we'd a) collapse from mental
and physical exhaustion and b) I'd have to give up reading for pleasure,
needlepoint (and I'm just starting to get competent!) and staring out the
window. :)
Point 1 is of course well taken, but what I am finding is that my daughter
self-regulates. If I *were* of the mind (which I'm not) to let her watch
horror movies, she wouldn't. She's a sensitive girl. I don't think most
small children want to watch horrific violence on screen or off, (maybe
sometimes if it's high fantasy -- i.e, Jurassic Park.)
So what does that leave us with? Cartoon violence? The evening news?
Does anyone have little children, in the "fantasy is reality" years of oh,
say, 2 to 6, who *want* to watch very violent "real life type" movies? It
would surprise me, but maybe I'm too used to living with my clone, the girl
who makes me put away all the Disney videos that are "too bad" to watch.
Pam
Thomas and Nanci Kuykendall
>Does anyone have little children, in the "fantasy is reality" years of oh,My little ones do not request violent material, but then I do not let them
>say, 2 to 6, who *want* to watch very violent "real life type" movies? It
>would surprise me, but maybe I'm too used to living with my clone, the girl
>who makes me put away all the Disney videos that are "too bad" to watch.
>
>Pam
watch it, even at other people's houses. The do not watch a lot of popular
cartoons which I feel are too violent for them or have other elements I do
not like, such as poor values, lack of respect for others showed, rudeness,
unhealthy relationships, etc.
However, my niece and nephew, now teenagers, were allowed to watch
"Nightmare on Elm Street" Movies when they were in the age range you
mentioned. When I questioned their mother about it, she said "Oh they KNOW
it's not real, it's just make believe." and would them have them parrot
back what she had said. I can't help cringing when I think about it
though. Also how many of us know little ones who are crazy about "Power
Rangers" or another violence based show? I know a few, to say the least.
The first thing that comes to mind when I think about the children who are
into those types of entertainment is how kids that age ALWAYS act out and
emmulate what they see, particulrly in their entertainment. I would much
rather see my sons acting out healthy relationships, animal activities or
other of the things in the shows I let them watch, then to see them act out
violence and normalize the use of weapons.
Nanci K. in Idaho
Don and Crys Meaker
On 11 Nov 99, at 11:23, Thomas and Nanci Kuykendall wrote:
asleep during the opening credits. A few weeks later (when she
was 6 weeks old) she saw "Men in Black" and LOVED it. She still
does, believe it or not. Last weekend we had a friend and his son
over and we watched the Mummy (Terry was asleep and had
already seen it .. she mentioned that the Mummy REALLY needed
to brush his teeth). The son was 3 1/2.
I have been a horror nut from day one myself. I believe that it was
up to me to teach fantasy from reality and that children were only
as stupid as the information the parent's don't give them.
The entire family has watched Queen (violent Civil War/Slavery
movie) and Roots and Aliens and we have gleaned the morals out
of all these movies (it's not hard if you can see past the end of your
nose). The list goes on and on.
My dh and I were talking just last night about parents protecting
the children from all the "bad" in the world. My mother protected
me from drugs and alcohol. I have now been sober and drug free
for almost 10 years. My mother protected me from sex. I was
pregnant at 17 (having sex at 13). I didn't recognize the dangers as
I had never been exposed to them.
My 2 cents,
Pax,
Crys (hoping I remember where I put that asbestos jacket <G>)
> However, my niece and nephew, now teenagers, were allowed to watchThe very first movie Terry saw was "Murder at 1600". She fell
> "Nightmare on Elm Street" Movies when they were in the age range you
> mentioned. When I questioned their mother about it, she said "Oh they
> KNOW it's not real, it's just make believe." and would them have them
> parrot back what she had said. I can't help cringing when I think about
> it though. Also how many of us know little ones who are crazy about
> "Power Rangers" or another violence based show? I know a few, to say the
> least. The first thing that comes to mind when I think about the children
> who are into those types of entertainment is how kids that age ALWAYS act
> out and emmulate what they see, particulrly in their entertainment. I
> would much rather see my sons acting out healthy relationships, animal
> activities or other of the things in the shows I let them watch, then to
> see them act out violence and normalize the use of weapons.
>
> Nanci K. in Idaho
>
asleep during the opening credits. A few weeks later (when she
was 6 weeks old) she saw "Men in Black" and LOVED it. She still
does, believe it or not. Last weekend we had a friend and his son
over and we watched the Mummy (Terry was asleep and had
already seen it .. she mentioned that the Mummy REALLY needed
to brush his teeth). The son was 3 1/2.
I have been a horror nut from day one myself. I believe that it was
up to me to teach fantasy from reality and that children were only
as stupid as the information the parent's don't give them.
The entire family has watched Queen (violent Civil War/Slavery
movie) and Roots and Aliens and we have gleaned the morals out
of all these movies (it's not hard if you can see past the end of your
nose). The list goes on and on.
My dh and I were talking just last night about parents protecting
the children from all the "bad" in the world. My mother protected
me from drugs and alcohol. I have now been sober and drug free
for almost 10 years. My mother protected me from sex. I was
pregnant at 17 (having sex at 13). I didn't recognize the dangers as
I had never been exposed to them.
My 2 cents,
Pax,
Crys (hoping I remember where I put that asbestos jacket <G>)
Joel Hawthorne
Jurassic park was absolutely terrifying for small children and even lots of
older children. It was not a movie appropriate for children. Was it PG? I
would hope so. Though from my perspective PG 13 would be a little more bearable.
Pam Hartley wrote:
best wishes
Joel
For a wonderful gift possibility and to support a great cause check out:
http://www.naturalchild.com/calendar_pictures.html
All children behave as well as they are treated. The Natural Child
Project http://naturalchild.com/home/
older children. It was not a movie appropriate for children. Was it PG? I
would hope so. Though from my perspective PG 13 would be a little more bearable.
Pam Hartley wrote:
> From: "Pam Hartley" <pamhartley@...>--
>
> ----------
> >From: [email protected]
> >To: [email protected]
> >Subject: [Unschooling-dotcom] Digest Number 291
> >Date: Thu, Nov 11, 1999, 3:14 AM
> >
>
> >1) it is
> >different for an adult who truly understands it is fiction and
> >"entertainment" than it is for a child whose brain is trying to figure
> >out the world, and 2) how might our world be different if millions of
> >people (my DH included - I'm not picking on you and yours) spent that
> >time doing something else?
>
> I think if we all spent our leisure time, during which we accomplish nothing
> productive for society, "doing something else" we'd a) collapse from mental
> and physical exhaustion and b) I'd have to give up reading for pleasure,
> needlepoint (and I'm just starting to get competent!) and staring out the
> window. :)
>
> Point 1 is of course well taken, but what I am finding is that my daughter
> self-regulates. If I *were* of the mind (which I'm not) to let her watch
> horror movies, she wouldn't. She's a sensitive girl. I don't think most
> small children want to watch horrific violence on screen or off, (maybe
> sometimes if it's high fantasy -- i.e, Jurassic Park.)
>
> So what does that leave us with? Cartoon violence? The evening news?
>
> Does anyone have little children, in the "fantasy is reality" years of oh,
> say, 2 to 6, who *want* to watch very violent "real life type" movies? It
> would surprise me, but maybe I'm too used to living with my clone, the girl
> who makes me put away all the Disney videos that are "too bad" to watch.
>
> Pam
>
> > Check it out!
> http://www.unschooling.com
best wishes
Joel
For a wonderful gift possibility and to support a great cause check out:
http://www.naturalchild.com/calendar_pictures.html
All children behave as well as they are treated. The Natural Child
Project http://naturalchild.com/home/
Joel Hawthorne
I hope your asbestos jacket is not necessary but keep it nearby in case this is
hotter than I think it is.
There is a very big difference between "protecting" children from drugs, sex
and violence in an authoritarian and /or deceitful fashion (which frequently
leads to rebellion and often acting out the proscribed behaviours) and
protecting young children from gratuitous exposure to those same things.
Of course most children are resilient enough to not be permanently damaged by
exposure to such things however I think there is evidence that exposure to such
things can have lasting effects on the sensibilities of children. They will
armour themselves emotionally and toughen themselves in a way which detracts
from the kind of openness I personally want to foster in my children.
My children will and have inevitably been exposed to the violence and genuine
horror in the world. They are initially horrified. They adapt. I am glad it
happened in a way which was modulated by our intervention.
Our six year old daughter watched Bambi for the first time with no ill
effects. Her older sister would have not been ready at six. We won't let her
watch Star Wars which her 10 year old sister just watched. We screened the
Star Wars trilogy for the older when little sister was doing something else.
Little sister thought it terribly unfair but this is understandable.
I think it is a possible confusion to equate the oppressive practices of your
parents with protecting children from unnecessary exposure to horror, gore,
promiscuous sexuality, violence whether it be physical or psychological.
Documentaries can be every bit if not more disturbing and damaging to children
as fiction. Roots is full of adult/older child themes and scenes. The news is
unsuitable for very young children. They will deal with all of those issues
when they are ready.
We cannot "protect" our children from all that is harsh and negative and
horrifying even if we set out to do that. This does not mean that we should
not try to protect them from those things that we can. Protecting does not
mean saying "Don't do that. Its very bad and dangerous." It is much more
complicated and involves really communicating with children not handing down
edicts from on high.
Our children protest when they can't watch something that we want to watch but
is not appropriate for them (doesn't happen often) but that is okay. We are a
democracy but as parents hold a number of vetoes which the children do not
have. We use them with discretion, respect and restraint. (at least when we are
behaving as adults).
Interesting topic.
Don and Crys Meaker wrote:
best wishes
Joel
For a wonderful gift possibility and to support a great cause check out:
http://www.naturalchild.com/calendar_pictures.html
All children behave as well as they are treated. The Natural Child
Project http://naturalchild.com/home/
hotter than I think it is.
There is a very big difference between "protecting" children from drugs, sex
and violence in an authoritarian and /or deceitful fashion (which frequently
leads to rebellion and often acting out the proscribed behaviours) and
protecting young children from gratuitous exposure to those same things.
Of course most children are resilient enough to not be permanently damaged by
exposure to such things however I think there is evidence that exposure to such
things can have lasting effects on the sensibilities of children. They will
armour themselves emotionally and toughen themselves in a way which detracts
from the kind of openness I personally want to foster in my children.
My children will and have inevitably been exposed to the violence and genuine
horror in the world. They are initially horrified. They adapt. I am glad it
happened in a way which was modulated by our intervention.
Our six year old daughter watched Bambi for the first time with no ill
effects. Her older sister would have not been ready at six. We won't let her
watch Star Wars which her 10 year old sister just watched. We screened the
Star Wars trilogy for the older when little sister was doing something else.
Little sister thought it terribly unfair but this is understandable.
I think it is a possible confusion to equate the oppressive practices of your
parents with protecting children from unnecessary exposure to horror, gore,
promiscuous sexuality, violence whether it be physical or psychological.
Documentaries can be every bit if not more disturbing and damaging to children
as fiction. Roots is full of adult/older child themes and scenes. The news is
unsuitable for very young children. They will deal with all of those issues
when they are ready.
We cannot "protect" our children from all that is harsh and negative and
horrifying even if we set out to do that. This does not mean that we should
not try to protect them from those things that we can. Protecting does not
mean saying "Don't do that. Its very bad and dangerous." It is much more
complicated and involves really communicating with children not handing down
edicts from on high.
Our children protest when they can't watch something that we want to watch but
is not appropriate for them (doesn't happen often) but that is okay. We are a
democracy but as parents hold a number of vetoes which the children do not
have. We use them with discretion, respect and restraint. (at least when we are
behaving as adults).
Interesting topic.
Don and Crys Meaker wrote:
> From: "Don and Crys Meaker" <famromo@...>--
>
> On 11 Nov 99, at 11:23, Thomas and Nanci Kuykendall wrote:
>
> > However, my niece and nephew, now teenagers, were allowed to watch
> > "Nightmare on Elm Street" Movies when they were in the age range you
> > mentioned. When I questioned their mother about it, she said "Oh they
> > KNOW it's not real, it's just make believe." and would them have them
> > parrot back what she had said. I can't help cringing when I think about
> > it though. Also how many of us know little ones who are crazy about
> > "Power Rangers" or another violence based show? I know a few, to say the
> > least. The first thing that comes to mind when I think about the children
> > who are into those types of entertainment is how kids that age ALWAYS act
> > out and emmulate what they see, particulrly in their entertainment. I
> > would much rather see my sons acting out healthy relationships, animal
> > activities or other of the things in the shows I let them watch, then to
> > see them act out violence and normalize the use of weapons.
> >
> > Nanci K. in Idaho
> >
>
> The very first movie Terry saw was "Murder at 1600". She fell
> asleep during the opening credits. A few weeks later (when she
> was 6 weeks old) she saw "Men in Black" and LOVED it. She still
> does, believe it or not. Last weekend we had a friend and his son
> over and we watched the Mummy (Terry was asleep and had
> already seen it .. she mentioned that the Mummy REALLY needed
> to brush his teeth). The son was 3 1/2.
>
> I have been a horror nut from day one myself. I believe that it was
> up to me to teach fantasy from reality and that children were only
> as stupid as the information the parent's don't give them.
>
> The entire family has watched Queen (violent Civil War/Slavery
> movie) and Roots and Aliens and we have gleaned the morals out
> of all these movies (it's not hard if you can see past the end of your
> nose). The list goes on and on.
>
> My dh and I were talking just last night about parents protecting
> the children from all the "bad" in the world. My mother protected
> me from drugs and alcohol. I have now been sober and drug free
> for almost 10 years. My mother protected me from sex. I was
> pregnant at 17 (having sex at 13). I didn't recognize the dangers as
> I had never been exposed to them.
>
> My 2 cents,
>
> Pax,
> Crys (hoping I remember where I put that asbestos jacket <G>)
>
> > Check it out!
> http://www.unschooling.com
best wishes
Joel
For a wonderful gift possibility and to support a great cause check out:
http://www.naturalchild.com/calendar_pictures.html
All children behave as well as they are treated. The Natural Child
Project http://naturalchild.com/home/
Don and Crys Meaker
On 11 Nov 99, at 13:16, Joel Hawthorne wrote:
won't let the oldest of all the children (13) watch any of this stuff.
She IS one of those who cannot handle it. Point made <G>.
Pax, Crys
> Interesting topic.It most certainly is. And it wasn't in the least bit hot. We actually
won't let the oldest of all the children (13) watch any of this stuff.
She IS one of those who cannot handle it. Point made <G>.
Pax, Crys
Jeff & Diane Gwirtz
> Point 1 is of course well taken, but what I am finding is that my daughterBoth my kids (19 and 13) were definitely self-regulatory so I agree
> self-regulates. If I *were* of the mind (which I'm not) to let her watch
> horror movies, she wouldn't. She's a sensitive girl. I don't think most
> small children want to watch horrific violence on screen or off, (maybe
> sometimes if it's high fantasy -- i.e, Jurassic Park.)
>
with you. I have seen families though, where the kids couldn't
self-regulate. This happened for many reasons, but the biggest
being that they didn't have a choice. They were exposed to movies
that they weren't ready for by older siblings or parents. We were
very careful about this. The kids were comfortable telling us what
they were ready for. My daughter is 6 years older than my son so
there was a time when we had a second tv and vcr so that her choices
didn't have to be his. I definitely think self-regulation works but
it has to happen in the right environment.
Diane in KS
Thomas and Nanci Kuykendall
At 01:03 PM 11/11/1999 -0800, you wrote:
JP scared me! I am the type that has nightmares from stuff like that. At
the same time though, I am not the least bit squeamish about "natural"
stuff, and have no problem watching medical programs, and worked in a zoo
for 5 years where I had to do lots of "icky" stuff and work with
potentially dangerous animals, and yes was even injured on occassion.
Nanci K.
>From: Joel Hawthorne <jhawthorne@...>bearable.
>
>Jurassic park was absolutely terrifying for small children and even lots of
>older children. It was not a movie appropriate for children. Was it PG? I
>would hope so. Though from my perspective PG 13 would be a little more
JP scared me! I am the type that has nightmares from stuff like that. At
the same time though, I am not the least bit squeamish about "natural"
stuff, and have no problem watching medical programs, and worked in a zoo
for 5 years where I had to do lots of "icky" stuff and work with
potentially dangerous animals, and yes was even injured on occassion.
Nanci K.
Campbell & Wyman
>would surprise me, but maybe I'm too used to living with my clone, the girlWell......interesting. My daughters are nearly 9 and 11 and they still
>who makes me put away all the Disney videos that are "too bad" to watch.
>
>Pam
>
don't like Disney Movies....they love old movies. They do not enjoy any
movies where people or animals are being maliciously hurt or killed.
That is their choice. And I find it interesting that they steer away from
violent movies. They can tell when the music changes that "something is
going to happen" and they leave the room. They are usually right.
I think that childrens minds are as fragile and in need of protection as
their young bodies. Why can't children live in innocence for a while? Why
do we want them to be 'adult' before their time? What is the big hurry? I
wouldn't tell my daughter to go hang-gliding or play in the traffic nor
would I introduce her to harmful visual imagery that could be ingrained in
her heart,soul and mind for eternity. I find it very strange that people
will protect their children from physical pain but expose them to
psychologically-damaging TV and movie violence.
Blast away (pun intended)....I feel strongly about TV viewing, violence,
and loose gun laws (is my Canadian side showing?):)
Brooke in B.C.
brynlee@...
Pam Hartley
----------
in tv and movies is psychologically-damaging. Not everyone *does* agree, so
it is not at all strange that those who don't also do not protect their
children from it.
Some people believe that Pit Bulls are child-eating savages, across the
board. It would seem very strange to those people that Pit Bulls are one of
the breeds I am most relaxed to have my children around. In their opinion, I
might as well be sending my children out to play on the freeway. My opinion
is different.
All lives contain some risk.
Some feel that risk comes from Pit Bulls, from violent TV, from school
shootings, from home intruders, from forcing curriculum on their children,
from coersion in any form, from absolute non-coersion, from CO2, from rock
concerts doing ear damage, from Teletubbies promoting a gay lifestyle, from
elephants crashing through their tent, from nests of wasps, from allergic
reactions to wool, from incompetent ER doctors at 3 a.m., from walking
across a street, driving anywhere in a car, from rare airborne diseases,
from raw meat, from shark attack, well, you get the idea...
Any decent parent evaluates the risk, forms their own opinion, and acts
accordingly. It has nothing to do with wanting children to be adult before
their time. It has to do with *personal opinion on the risk involved*
Pam, who debates but does not flame. People who know me know that the
boogerhead example is looming. <g>
>From: [email protected]You are assuming that everyone agrees with you on your opinion that violence
>To: [email protected]
>Subject: [Unschooling-dotcom] Digest Number 293
>Date: Fri, Nov 12, 1999, 3:15 AM
>
>I find it very strange that people
>will protect their children from physical pain but expose them to
>psychologically-damaging TV and movie violence.
>
in tv and movies is psychologically-damaging. Not everyone *does* agree, so
it is not at all strange that those who don't also do not protect their
children from it.
Some people believe that Pit Bulls are child-eating savages, across the
board. It would seem very strange to those people that Pit Bulls are one of
the breeds I am most relaxed to have my children around. In their opinion, I
might as well be sending my children out to play on the freeway. My opinion
is different.
All lives contain some risk.
Some feel that risk comes from Pit Bulls, from violent TV, from school
shootings, from home intruders, from forcing curriculum on their children,
from coersion in any form, from absolute non-coersion, from CO2, from rock
concerts doing ear damage, from Teletubbies promoting a gay lifestyle, from
elephants crashing through their tent, from nests of wasps, from allergic
reactions to wool, from incompetent ER doctors at 3 a.m., from walking
across a street, driving anywhere in a car, from rare airborne diseases,
from raw meat, from shark attack, well, you get the idea...
Any decent parent evaluates the risk, forms their own opinion, and acts
accordingly. It has nothing to do with wanting children to be adult before
their time. It has to do with *personal opinion on the risk involved*
Pam, who debates but does not flame. People who know me know that the
boogerhead example is looming. <g>