From: pmd@cbnews.cb.att.com (Paul Dubuc)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
Subject: Re: BOOK: Hollywood vs. America by Michael Medved
Date: 5 Nov 92 18:42:21 GMT
Organization: AT&T

In article <1992Nov4.222348.19305@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu> (Matthew Crosby) writes:
}In article <1992Nov4.180518.20115@cbnews.cb.att.com> (Paul Dubuc) writes:
}>... Seems to me that parents can't always
}>be enforcing the standards while "anything goes" in the larger society.
}>At some point, shouldn't we be able to trust others not to sell beer
}>and cigarettes to our kids, or to rent X-rated videos to them, or admit
}>them to "topless" bars?  We make laws to enforce standards like this.
}>Placing all responsibility in the hands of parents might be a good argument
}>against such laws.
}
}Yes, but why are these things bad?

Who said they're bad?  It's just that, for whatever reason, I think most
parents don't want others exposing their kids to these things without
their consent.


}Cigarettes:  yes, I'll accept that there
}is tangable harm to the child, ditto with beer, but this is immaterial to this
}argument which concerns Parents controlling their childrens cultural intake,
}and especially their reading habits.

Sure it does.  These are all examples of things our society will generally
not tolerate anyone exposing children to without parents consent (in some
cases I suppose even parents could get in trouble for exposing their own
children to these things).  They're all seen to generally cause "harm" to
children in one way or another.

}Why is it bad to show Kiddies X rated videos?  Is it because of the old
}argument about degrading women?  If so, then I will probably accept that, but
}how about these new "femenist" X rated movies?  Are these bad too?  Why?
}
}Even more so, WHY is it bad to let children into a topless bar?  Coming from
}a culture where topless beaches are the norm, and haveing been exposed to them
}from quite a young age, I would like to know this.  Have I somehow been
}corrupted by this?  I suppose that it can be argued that the booze aspect is
}bad, but in that case, why just *topless* bars?


Why is it *not bad* (or "good") to do these things?  Should the owner of an
X-rated movie theater be free to decide where other people's children are
concerned?  I don't see an enforced legal limit as necessarily implying
these things are bad for children.  I do think they reflect what most
parents would want for their kids.


}
}The fundamental problem with all of this is that the Father Knows Best
}mentality is often untrue.  The fact is, parents are often bigotted, are
}hardly perfect, etc etc.

I think the idea that parents know best for their children is one that
ought to be adhered to.  I disagree with you in that I think that most
often parents do well by their children.  Even if I am wrong, I think that
the alternatives (kids know best? social workers? politicians?) are much
likely to be worse.  Parents are certainly held responsible for their
own children.  Their influence shouldn't be diluted by the larger society.

}Personally, I find something wrong with the entire
}concept that, for example, at 21 you magically are responsible enough to get
}plastered.  Or that at 17, hormonal changes happen that suddenly make you
}responsible enough to get into NC-17's.  Exactly on your birthday.

I don't thing age restrictions imply this at all.  It's just that we think
a general line has to be drawn somewhere.  Again, I think it's what most
parents would want others to observe with their children in the absence
of the parent.  If your's don't, get them to buy you the beer.  I won't
complain.  You can also try your hand at convincing the public that the
age limit should be lower or done away with.  But some rules will be made.
And there will always be a minority who object to them.

}Now, if you will allow me the indulgence of giveing my personal background:

[deleted]

}
}Anyway, the point of this anecdote is that I fail to see any reason for
}controlling childrens access to things like this.  My experience is that
}this only serves to encourage them to pursue the item.  The main problem I
}have seen, for example, for those who advocate the removal of sex education
}from schools is that their children already know a large amount of what they
}are being taught, but usually in the form of half-truths, rumors and some
}such.  Do not underestimate the playground as a communications medium!  Believe
}me, your little child WILL know most of the dirty words you know by the time he
}has been there a few months!

I just think that, whatever children are exposed to or not in these
areas, parents should be the primary channel for such exposure.  I see
nothing wrong with requirements that kids go through their parents to
get the widest possible exposure in controversial matters like this.
If we think parents are doing a bad job we should try to help them do
it better, not take the job out of their hands.

}
}>There's always the question of where to draw the line.  But every community
}>assumes some standards will be upheld outside the immediate family.
}>Broadly speaking, "community standards" are defined by those things which
}>most people living in a given area will not tolerate publicly.  People
}>often move from one place to another because the prevailing standards
}>don't fit with their own.  We could argue for a long time about whether
}>the line some communities draw (and their means of drawing it) make them
}>"intolerant censors" or "decent human beings".  But in every community some
}>balance is struck between parental responsibility and that of the larger
}>community.  Either extreme can be pretty ugly.
}
}On the other hand, I would basically agree with this.  Please do not think
}from my previous statements that I am in favor of buying children X rated
}videos or anything like that.  I just consider it pointless and often damaging
}to specifically go all out to prevent children aquiring these, or even worse
}ignoring them entireley.  My opinion is:  sure, guide your child, just make
}sure you do it in a *positive* manner (read this, you'll like it!)  rather then
}in a negative manner (If I catch you reading this I will...)  In terms of
}parental responsibility, I would say that it is the most important responsibility
}of the parent to allow a child leeway, to form his own opinions of the world.
}Be a positive, not a negative, role model!  If your child comes home with a
}Communist party pamphlet, explain to him, in non-partisan terms, about the
}differences between "Them" and "us" (the eternal pronouns).  Don't just say
}"communism is evil".

I think this is basically good advice to parents.  I also think it should
be left up to them whether they follow it or not.

}The reason people advocate controls on things like TV
}is that they are shirking their own responsibility.

This is only necessarily true if you assume all responsibility for what
children are exposed to lies with parents.  This assumption is well founded
for things that most parents willingly allow into their home or otherwise
expose to their children.  If parents are going to have a television
in their home, they are primarily responsible for its use.  Still I don't
blame them for trying to make network programers bear at least some of
the responsiblity in the case of TV.  People have taken it for granted
as a highly accessible medium for quite a while now.  If parents have
to constantly monitor its use by their children it becomes a great burden;
a "drastic" choice of whether to have a television at all.  TV networks
should have an interest in not making that choice so drastic for parents.


}Unfortunately, no one is
}perfect, so probably SOME level of societal control is needed, but only the
}BARE MINIMUM--especially as values vary so widely.

Who decides the bare minimum?  Values may very widely across the nation,
but within certain communities they do not.  That is a big factor in
where people choose to live (if they have the ability to choose).  I don't
see a problem with communities setting strict standards as long as they
don't make it overly difficult for parents to modify them where their own
children are concerned.  The standard for what parents may expose their
own children to through their own efforts should always be much looser
than that for anyone else.
-- 
Paul Dubuc    |   "For religion all men are equal, as all pennies
att!cbvox!pmd |   are equal, because the only value in any of them
	      |   is that they bear the image of the king."
	      |   			G. K. Chesterton