To be decided during the debate

The topic of debate is whether the Rating system for movies is under control. My opponent suggests that the rating system is out of control whereas I shall argue otherwise. My opponent's preliminary argument, which was made in the comment section and which I have allowed to be part of this debate focused primarily on the movie "Spiderman", and what my opponent believes to be an invalid rating of PG13. "Children in this age are growing up, and the rating system is not following. A movie directed at 7-8 year olds is Spiderman, rated PG13, I belive, here is a site about why: . http://www.imdb.com...; First of all, I must greatly disagree with my opponent's contention that the movie "Spiderman" is directed at 7-8 year olds. I find this to be a gross exaggeration and challenge my opponent to come up with some statistics to prove that point. So far, my opponent is just relying on personal belief as to what group would find the plot appealing: "How many 13 year olds are exited about a guy who gets bit by a spider, and has to save New York? Not as many as there are 6-7 year olds. " While it is true that the plot might appeal to younger children, the movie-attending experience is catered to a much larger crowd. This includes children and young adults of all ages, and part of the appeal of "Spiderman" and other movies is that it is a movie meant for all ages. Action, suspense, plot twists, romance, these aspects of "Spiderman" are what made it so successful in the box office, not quite simply the notion of "A guy who gets bit by a spider and has to save New York". "It makes it seem worse than it is. How many kids have not heard any of the words listed on the above site? Kids are growing up faster, they know there is violence in the world, they have heard cursing, in school, from parents, from older siblings, the movie's ratings are not going to change that. " This is absolutely not the point. Children under the age of 13 are generally not allowed to work. As such, they have no form of pay and probably get their money from their parents via allowance. Thus, the PG13 rating is very appropriate a safeguard not for ensuring the moral upbringing of children, but to appease parents who may not want their children to expose themselves to something that the parents do not approve of. It serves as a simple warning or precaution and it is solely up to the parents. Thus, my opponent's point about the movie industry trying to curb or censor children's exposure is invalid. They are merely reflecting the wishes of their parents. "I understand that, but now PG13 means 6-7 year old movie, R means 12-14 movie, (same as M), it's not how it was when it was set up and needs to be changed. " Why my opponent would "understand" this is beyond me. There is nothing to suggest that PG13 movies are catered to 6-7 year olds and that R/M rated movies are catered to 12-14 year olds. . http://www.mpaa.org... The Motion Picture Association of America has guidelines as to what rating they give a movie based on what is referenced. Drug use, profanity, sexual images or nudity, these are very common things that parents would want their young children to avoid. To me, the rating system for movies is in no way "out of control". In fact, it seems to be under very good control, as the rubric/guidelines for movie rating is very structured and orderly. As can be seen from the very site my opponent wanted to use as evidence against me, the reasons given for rating it PG13 are clear cut, concise, and very plainly listed. I find that my opponent's case has not yet been made and I await my opponent's response.