Censorship and DD3's teacher... AIBU?

(471 Posts)
NoNoNora Sat 06-Oct-12 20:12:05

Yesterday evening DD3's teacher called to voice her concerns about how appropriate the programmes we let her watch are. DD3 is ten and for all four DDs we haven't paid any attention to ratings, they'll watch what we watch and we won't question what they want to watch during their TV time (unless a fight breaks out between them), none of them are at all traumatised or have nightmares and they always voice their fears and/or leave the room if something is too much for them.
The latest craze at DD3's school is top trump cards and she took DD2's Buffy ones in last week (DD2 is at uni so DD3 has the run of her bedroom and belongings). As a family we all watch Buffy together and have done since it first started, we own the DVDs and the girls have grown up watching it. Of course there are things that the younger ones don't pick up on (i.e. much of the sixth season) but DP and I feel that it is a very positive programme for our girls to watch.
DD3's teacher did not agree with our view. She confiscated the cards for the day on Friday and then called me that evening. Apparently she was concerned that our older girls had been showing 'innapropriate' programmes to the younger ones. I explained that we watched Buffy as a family and I had given her permission to take the cards into school. She then proceeded to explain the importance to ratings and the problems with 'desensitising' children to violence and sex. I was flabbergasted and promised not to let DD3 take the cards into school again but maintained that I was doing nothing wrong in my parenting.

I can't be the only mum who thinks like this? DP is incredibly anti-censorship and wants to send her in with DD2's much more graphic 'Angel' cards on Monday, with a note to the (and I quote) "fascists".

ll31 Sat 06-Oct-12 20:15:45

think you are completely right to parent as you want and teacher is also right to confisicste cards if she wants. think your dp sounds childish tho

BigFatLegsInWoolyTIghts Sat 06-Oct-12 20:16:06

Er...it's inappropriate viewing. Your DDs teacher is correct.

LFCisTarkaDahl Sat 06-Oct-12 20:17:05

You and your husband sound like idiots and incredibly childish to call it fascistic.

It's not 'fascist' - it's common sense. Buffy is a great programme for older teenagers but entirely inappropriate for a ten year old.

I don't agree with censorship either, for adults obviously.

I suppose you think that watching porn or horror films is ok then for a ten year old? hmm

BigFatLegsInWoolyTIghts Sat 06-Oct-12 20:17:25

this isn't somthing I would like my 8 year old to see...and you say you have younger DDS?

BigFatLegsInWoolyTIghts Sat 06-Oct-12 20:18:36

If a parent sent their child in with "graphic" Angel cards and my child saw them I would be be complaining heavily.

pointythings Sat 06-Oct-12 20:19:00

I wouldn't let my children watch Buffy and they are 9 and 11, but to each their own - you know your children best. The teacher was being OTT, I would imagine there are children in her class who are watching much worse stuff than Buffy.

Just don't let your DD take the cards in again and get on with your life as it is.

gordyslovesheep Sat 06-Oct-12 20:20:47

hmmm see I don't think Buffy is that bad BUT I do think you have to protect other kids from stuff that may scare them - watch stuff at home but LEAVE it at home

and grow up a little

gordyslovesheep Sat 06-Oct-12 20:22:03

DD1 is 10 and 2 of her class mates have i-phones <rolls eyes> ...they watch episodes of Family Guy - I did complain about that as it is an adult program

BigFatLegsInWoolyTIghts Sat 06-Oct-12 20:22:36

Are they allowed the phones in school Gordy??

Funnylittleturkishdelight Sat 06-Oct-12 20:22:43

I worry that my yr 7s talk about watching films like 'the human centipede' and 'saw'.

Where will you draw the line? I don't think it's censorship, it's common sense. The cards would have been seen by other children whose parents may be making conservative efforts to ensure their children aren't exposed to adult material.

NoNoNora Sat 06-Oct-12 20:22:48

Big Fat Legs- Yes, DD4 (the youngest and preferably the last) is nearly seven. My girls always found the master quite funny... But then they've been desensitised.

LFC- Horror movies, yes- if they asked to watch them (not really mine or dh's thing). But I hardly think you can compare porn to horror movies/ genre TV. (Completely different set of values, exploitative etc.)
(And DP was the one to call them fascists, not me)

stargirl1701 Sat 06-Oct-12 20:24:30

As a teacher I would record it as a child protection concern if a child was consistently watching material that was rated 15 or 18. The ratings are there for a reason. The material is inappropriate for children aged under 15/18. The teacher was correct to raise this with you in my opinion. Many other parents in the class may be concerned that your child is sharing inappropriate material with their child.

LFCisTarkaDahl Sat 06-Oct-12 20:25:33

I compare horror movies to porn - they're 18's and films like Hostel an Human Centipede and a Serbian Film are extremely pornographic.

So if they asked to watch THOSE horror films you'd say yes then??

tiggytape Sat 06-Oct-12 20:26:51

YABU - I don't think the teacher intended to lecture you. She may know you have older children and was concerned one of them was exposing your younger children to things that are unsuitable for their age. It then turned out this wasn't the case and that you, in fact, fully encourage them watching anything they please.
There's not a lot she can say to that except that a 10 year old will be stopped from flaunting it at school and discussing it where the content is unsuitable for other 10 year olds who most definitely won't be watching these programmes at home.

There's nothing she can do about your parenting (unless the children report watching something of a sexual / violent nature that is so unsuitable that it tips over in to concerns about abuse) but she can stop you introducing the topic at school. Which is fair enough - many other parents don't share your views and think that actually a lot of people who proclaim to be liberal and relaxed are in fact just too lazy to parent properly and miss out watching things because it is not suitable for all the family to see. You and your DP obviously disagree.

gordyslovesheep Sat 06-Oct-12 20:26:58

yes - makes me rather cross - they have them in their trays and take them out at lunch

LFCisTarkaDahl Sat 06-Oct-12 20:27:11

And if not those horror films which 18 rated horror films do you think is appropriate for your ten year old to watch then?

FannyFifer Sat 06-Oct-12 20:29:14

Never thought Buffy was unsuitable, DS 7 has seen it on occasion, no worse than Dr Who I wouldn't have thought, have only seen a few of them though.

NoNoNora Sat 06-Oct-12 20:30:28

LFC- I would ask why and start a dialogue about the torture-porn aspect of that side of the horror genre but if they still wanted to watch then we'd watch as a family, discussing what we were seeing and ensuring that the children knew to speak up if it was too much for them. I would much rather they watched such films with me in controlled conditions than at a sleepover with a bunch of hysterical peers.

(Also I think it's funny that DD2 got these cards in primary school (year five or six, she's now twenty) and most of the kids on the playground would watch Buffy.)

Inneedofbrandy Sat 06-Oct-12 20:31:18

Is buffy really a 15 and over? I remember it being on at 6pm when I first started watching it. Also that picture someone linked is nothing compared to the aliens in Sarah Jane adventures on CBBC.

Fairenuff Sat 06-Oct-12 20:31:44

I would consider this a child protection issue. Ratings are there for a reason.

stargirl1701 Sat 06-Oct-12 20:34:02

Buffy Seasons 6 and 7 are def 15 rating. What is broadcast on TV can be heavily edited to make it suitable for pre-watershed viewing.

FannyFifer Sat 06-Oct-12 20:34:14

I remember Buffy being on at tea time as well, was never a late night show.

I think you're insane but your kids, your rules.

LFCisTarkaDahl Sat 06-Oct-12 20:36:06

Message deleted by Mumsnet for breaking our Talk Guidelines. Replies may also be deleted.

hatesponge Sat 06-Oct-12 20:36:53

I was just about to post I used to watch it early evening, about 6-7pm? (I'm sure Angel was on later because it was 'darker' in nature) At the time it was on lots of 10 year olds probably would have watched it.

I'm be extremely hmm about a teacher commenting on this. DS2 wouldn't have watched programmes like this just because they wouldn't interest him but he was very keen on CSI from the age of about 8/9 (he even made up a playground game based around them investigating a crime scene). I'd not have been happy about a teacher telling me my parenting choices were inappropriate.

Out of interest is this a church school? I have heard of people being quite anti any programme with vampires in for religious reasons though cant remember why it was exactly...

candr Sat 06-Oct-12 20:37:19

You may think it is fine for them to watch as they don't 'seem' to have issues with the choices they make but you need to pay attention as these things can manifest in other ways. I have seen children who watch older films and programs playing 'inappropriatly' in the playground and having very confused ideas about the body and emotions during lessons as they are too young to understand grown up emotions and actions from films.
The ratings are there for a reason and there should be a distinction between what your children of different ages gets to watch on occassion.
The younger children often don't want to ask or say if they don't like something incase they are made to feel silly - they rely on you to make sure they are watching appropriate content - it is lazy not liberal to leave them to it. You are the parent so act like one.

LFCisTarkaDahl Sat 06-Oct-12 20:37:48

And just to be crystal clear as someone involved in safeguarding - if I knew you let your child watch torture porn because they asked I'd report it to SS.

CakeBump Sat 06-Oct-12 20:42:13

I think the approach you and your DH are taking is idiotic.

ravenAK Sat 06-Oct-12 20:43:12

I'd've probably rung you to explain that the cards had been confiscated as unsuitable for school, but returned to your dc to take home. & invited you to come in & collect them if it happened again.

Generally speaking, I'd say 'Your gaff your rules' with anything shown on TV, but you lost me at letting a 10 year old sit down to watch A Serbian Film.

CakeBump Sat 06-Oct-12 20:43:42

"your kids your rules" makes no sense whatsoever....

Inneedofbrandy Sat 06-Oct-12 20:44:52

Can anyone actually link me to some ratings please, I have googled and wiki'd it but I cant find anything. Buffy is not anything like torture porn either.

Totally agree with LFC. I would raise this as a concern, particularly if you had voiced your lazy liberal parenting views.

Fairenuff Sat 06-Oct-12 20:45:04

If the school heard about your dd watching torture porn they would report it to social services. That is child abuse. Please, please, please do not allow them to watch that.

Bigwheel Sat 06-Oct-12 20:45:23

I'm pretty libel about most things I think but you would seriously let your 7 and 10 year old wach a horror / porn film like hostel if they wanted to? If so that is awful, really awful.

amistillsexy Sat 06-Oct-12 20:45:43

I don't undersand why anyone would want to show ther children films/programmes that are intended for older viewers.

There is plenty of good age-appropriate stuff available, and plenty of time to watc adult things when they are aults (and can choose for themselves what they want to watch).

I expect school to be aplace where my children can go without having innapropriate material shown to the, so IMO the teacher was right to confiscate the cards. It is clear that you don't understand that viewing sex ad violence desensitises children to those things so IMO the teaher was right to 'educate' you in these matters. She seems to care about what happens to your daughter, which makes a change from all the threads recently about teachers who don't care about the children in their classes!

You and your husband sound very immature.

Grow up.

ShutTheFrontDoor Sat 06-Oct-12 20:46:43

I think you're too cool for skool and should home ed them then you can be as slack arsed as you like !

If you'd said Scream or something I'd agree with the teacher, but Buffy ffs?! I was watching it at that age and it was fine, but then it depends on the child as well, Jurassic Park would give me nightmares and that has a much lower age rating.

Saying that though, I really don't agree with your stance that they can watch anything they ask to watch, whilst I agree that in some cases the material is fine if the child is okay with it and you are on hand to talk through things, some things just shouldn't be watched by children.

ShutTheFrontDoor Sat 06-Oct-12 20:47:26

I really hope to god you are trip trapping

DixieD Sat 06-Oct-12 20:48:43

Are you joking? Buffy is one thing, although I never watched it so not sure of the content, but the fucking Human Centipede? Saw? You'd let a 10 and a 7 year old watch that because they wanted to? You are mental if you think viewing that sort of shit wouldn't effect them even if they didn't show it at the time. I only read the summary about what the human centipede was about and it haunted me for days.
Ratings are not the same as censorship. They are a child protection tool. We are meant to censor some things for our kids FFS.

TidyGOLDDancer Sat 06-Oct-12 20:50:14

Oh dear. It's rare I read something on MN and I'm immediately concerned for the welfare of the children, but this really does worry me.

You are wrong. Very, very wrong.

Where children are concerned, some censorship is a good and healthy thing.

I agree with some others. If you were actually showing your DCs the torture-porn films, it is a CP issue and I would report you to SS.

LFCisTarkaDahl Sat 06-Oct-12 20:50:36

No one is comparing Buffy to torture porn grin ineedofbrandy

The only reason we're talking about torture porn is because the OP said she would let them watch that if they wanted to as she would watch it with them.

SomersetONeil Sat 06-Oct-12 20:51:52

You seem to have a very limited understanding of how these things impact on a child, OP.

Please read candr's post. And then re-read it.

Felicitywascold Sat 06-Oct-12 20:52:47

I think the approach you and your DH are taking is idiotic.


ravenAK Sat 06-Oct-12 20:53:01

'"your kids your rules" makes no sense whatsoever.... '

Of course it does, where it's about an individual child's response to something that might be a bit scary to some kids of that age but not others - the parent has to exercise judgment; I know as a young child I found Alien hilarious but The Children of Green Knowe blardy creepy. Ratings are a very blunt tool, & personally I'd always regard them as for guidance.

There's a distinction between 'possibly scary effects but ultimately good clean fun' like Buffy, & actively horrible stuff exploring the nastier corners of the human psyche, like The Human Centipede or Hostel, though.

NoNoNora Sat 06-Oct-12 20:53:30

I doubt either of the younger DDs have even heard of the Hostel/Saw films, so I don't see that coming up in the foreseeable future (and if one wanted to watch the other obviously wouldn't have to).
Also, I don't see what's lazy about my parenting. To me lazy parenting is sitting them in front of the Disney channel and getting on with other things, not watching things as a family and discussing them.

(Buffy box sets are all rated 15 and only one Angel episode has an 18 rating, FYI, the episoded shown on the Beeb at teatime were heavily edited to the point of many plots not making much sense.)

cookingnumbertwo Sat 06-Oct-12 20:53:43

Buffy as it was shown at tea-time was very heavily edited, for example the attempted rape in Season 5/6? was cut out. The early seasons may well be suitable for a 10 yr old but I would say definitely not the later ones. And I love Buffy!

4ducks Sat 06-Oct-12 20:55:16

The teacher contacted you because she does not want the other children to be exposed to inappropriate material via your daughter. I would be shocked too if my children's teachers contacted me about something like this but not for the reasons you are shocked. Agree with other posters, your dh sounds completely immature.

Inneedofbrandy Sat 06-Oct-12 20:55:40

Well I do think certain things are really not meant to be watched by children, no matter who is in the room. Like above mentioned films but not just horror, I wouldn't let mine watch clockwork orange due to the male rape. I wouldn't let them watch any type or rape.

I think buffy is fine though, Dr who is scarier then buffy and I let mine watch that.

DoMeDon Sat 06-Oct-12 20:55:45

I usually try to make some reasoned argument but tonight I CBA. You and your husband are the type of idiots I wish didn't get the privilege of having DC. Do the research. You're ridiculous ideas are damaging.

CakeBump Sat 06-Oct-12 20:56:16

raven what I mean is that it does not = "anything goes if I say so"

Some rules are there for a reason, obviously.

DoMeDon Sat 06-Oct-12 20:56:33

Your blush - I am that annoyed by this I can't type properly!

Inneedofbrandy Sat 06-Oct-12 20:56:46

I might buy the boxsets to re watch, didn't realise there was more.

Bobyan Sat 06-Oct-12 20:58:00

I can't believe that 8 year olds are allowed to watch CSI and 10 year olds are watching buffy.
There's more to life than inappropriate television, why not try switching the TV off and actually doing something with your children.

ravenAK Sat 06-Oct-12 20:58:06

ah I see CakeBump. Yes, there I agree with you.

It needs a 'within reason' caveat, certainly.

LFCisTarkaDahl Sat 06-Oct-12 20:58:40

Yet again your last post entirely misses the point.

Your children should not get to choose what they watch, that's YOUR decision - liberalism and anti censorship is not about letting a ten year old decide to watch Saw, it's the adult that's supposed to parent and choose age appropriate entertainment.

Just cos your kids fancy it doesn't mean they should get it.

You come across as incredibly childish in your last post saying that you doubt they'd have heard of it but if they did you would let them.

It's just so bizarrely childish.

Inneedofbrandy Sat 06-Oct-12 20:59:15

I think CSI is fine. I don't see anything wrong snuggeling up to your children and watching tv.

Fairenuff Sat 06-Oct-12 20:59:56

Now, I have to say, I think this is a wind up. It's just not possible for two people to be that ignorant is it?

I do not take massive notice at home of age ratings.
But I do watch things first and deem them unsuitable or suitable based on dds maturity.

Dd is ten nearly and has watched a 12 but there are lower ratings she has not watched as they would scare her

I wouldn't lie to get her in a higher age rating at cinema though.

I wouldn't let her watch Buffy or angel.

ThatBloodyKnid Sat 06-Oct-12 21:01:35

I doubt either of the younger DDs have even heard of the Hostel/Saw films, so I don't see that coming up in the foreseeable future (and if one wanted to watch the other obviously wouldn't have to).

But you would still let them watch it if they asked for it?! shock

Bloody hell. I'm very liberal when it comes to parenting, but I would draw the line there - or probably even earlier.

Bobyan Sat 06-Oct-12 21:01:44

Yes rape and violent death are great watching for an 8 year old hmm

BoneyBackJefferson Sat 06-Oct-12 21:02:30

the buffy box set is rated 15
Angel is rated 18.

I'm not sure why you consider the Angel cards more graphic, although you may have a different set to me.

Also, the teacher has to look after 30 kids, she shouldn't have to worry about upsetting parents because of your choices.

NoNoNora Sat 06-Oct-12 21:04:54

Can I re-iterate that I would let them watch the Hostel/Saw films if they asked to see them and were able to have a reasoned conversation with me about why, about why they would want to watch them. We would then watch them in controlled conditions while watching them to see if they were at all distressed and switch off the moment that became apparent.

pointythings Sat 06-Oct-12 21:05:00

I am very hmm at the idea of letting my DDs watch things like Saw if they ask - that is very much not OK. I can't believe the OP does not see this.

I would like my DDs to see Buffy as I think it has some really great female role models - but not until they are a good bit older. Probably 14 for the early seasons, 15 for seasons 6 and 7, 17+ for Angel. I've only just let them see Willow and am slowly working my way through those parts of the DVD collection DH and I think are suitable. They have not yet watched Jurassic Park and will not for some time (they get nightmares) and although DD1 is reading LOTR I have told her she will not be watching the films until she is 15. We've also stopped the Harry Potters for now and will not be watching the Half-Blood Prince for a few years yet.

OutragedAtThePriceOfFreddos Sat 06-Oct-12 21:05:12

I think the teacher has the right to say what she likes when you allow your underage child to take something like that into her classroom. You were very wrong to let your child take those cards to school,

You parent how you like, but keep your controversial choices away from other people's children.

ZeldaUpNorth Sat 06-Oct-12 21:06:12

The 1st episode of Buffy wad on today and it only got half way through the opening credits and dd2 told me to turn it iff cos it was scary (i wasnt going to watch it, just a bit reminiscent) I dont even let my 8 yr old watch dr who.

FairPhyllis Sat 06-Oct-12 21:07:15

Buffy was edited for the pre-watershed slot - a lot of the more gruesome bits of violence were cut, like Caleb gouging out Xander's eye - and it was only repeated uncut way after the watershed. I adore the show, but I do think there is a lot in it that it is not suitable even for younger teenagers. Season 6 is particularly grim and contains a really horrible scene where one of the show's most popular characters attempts to rape Buffy.

I bought my niece (13 at the time) the first season of Buffy (as an antidote to too much Twilight), which I think is OK for a younger teen, but I did warn my sister that if she wanted to watch later seasons it does get a lot more adult from season 4 on.

NoNoNora Sat 06-Oct-12 21:08:19

BoneyBackJefferson- IMO the monsters on the Angel cards (and in Angel) are much better done and the descriptions on the cards are more graphic. I've just got the DVDs down, only season 1 of Angel is rated 18 and that's only for one disk (and one episode) of the season.

I would have had no problem with a note from DD's teacher asking that she didn't take the cards in again, it was the lecture she gave me about how terrible my parenting choices were that got to me.

LFCisTarkaDahl Sat 06-Oct-12 21:08:20

You wouldn't notice the distress or impact of the child abuse at the time. They could shut down emotionally or laugh and they would still be abused and distressed.

There is no such thing as 'controlled conditions' when subjecting a 10 year old to torture porn.

The fact you don't understand that means you probably shouldn't be parenting until you've got a bit of sense/education.

gordyslovesheep Sat 06-Oct-12 21:09:21

to be fair the teacher seem to have a point

TidyGOLDDancer Sat 06-Oct-12 21:10:48

OP, you are not helping yourself. It is just plain wrong to even consider letting your DCs watch those kind of things.

The teacher was right. If your comments on this thread are anything to go by, your parenting choices are potentially terrible.

candr Sat 06-Oct-12 21:12:02

How can young children have a reasoned discussion with you about a film they have not seen. For gods sake just say NO you are too young. Being a parent does not mean you say yes to stay their friend or be cool. Read my earlier post and stop being so bloody silly. You are in a position of caring for your kids physically and emotionally and they need to know some things are unsuitable and why. If when they are older they want to watch them then fine. As a teacher I would be making notes on your childrens records as I would fully expect reprecussions from this at some stage. How are your kids supposed to make sensible choices if you don't set an example?

EverybodysCryEyed Sat 06-Oct-12 21:12:07

By the time they are showing distress the harm has been done

would you not even read up on the film or watch it before putting it on for your kids? I read the plot of The Serbian Film and it made me feel sick and bothered me for a few days. Not sure what actually watching it would do to a young child

Is your objection to the ratings system or to parental censorship? I don't object to you choosing what your kids watch, but I would expect you to exercise some judgement

DixieD Sat 06-Oct-12 21:12:10

She has a point about your parenting decisions tbh. They are questionable to say the least.

ShutTheFrontDoor Sat 06-Oct-12 21:12:42

So you disagree with everyone on here aswell as the teacher ?

ProphetOfDoom Sat 06-Oct-12 21:13:17

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

BasicallySFB Sat 06-Oct-12 21:13:59

Wow. Just wow.

How unbelievably naive.

ShutTheFrontDoor Sat 06-Oct-12 21:15:08

Do you choose what you dc's eat or do they decide for themselves? Smarties for breakfast ? Chocolate for lunch maybe? Children feel secure when they have boundaries and routine.

pictish Sat 06-Oct-12 21:16:05

You do what you like OP - I think your approach is very flawed and idealistic, but it's your call. Think your comment about letting her watch torture porn with you if she wanted to marks you out as someone silly rather than nasty, but I sincerely hope such an event never comes to pass. You could discuss it with her until your were blue in the face, but at ten it will mean nothing sensible - she has NO experience to draw on. I think you'd do well to remember that.

Most of ALL - for god's sake, the top trumps card/Angel/fascist idea will earn your family nothing but ridicule among the staff at the school.
I'd laugh at it and pass it round for a group smirk and eye roll.

BoneyBackJefferson Sat 06-Oct-12 21:16:07

Sorry I was goig by the box sets.

But Angel series 2 - 5 are rated at 15
and all of Buffy is rated 15.

The lecture is part of the job.

BasicallySFB Sat 06-Oct-12 21:17:07

And thank God for that teacher - what gives you the right to potentially expose MY children to stuff I don't want them to see? What if your DC had a friend over who asked to watch it? Would that be ok too?

fuzzpig Sat 06-Oct-12 21:17:44

Can't comment on buffy as I've not seen it. I am not big on age ratings but that doesn't mean I'd let my DCs watch anything. Just a few things that I've seen and consider to be ok. Common sense, not open access.

SomersetONeil Sat 06-Oct-12 21:18:38

They're not necessarily going to show distress while they're watching it. That's sort of the point.

Surely you can see from the reactions to your thread, where the teacher was coming from a bit now?

And your use of the word censorship in relation to this just shows your limited understanding of the issues. That, and your DH calling the teacher a fascist - it's all just like you don't really have too much of a clue.

It's like you've moved on with your older DCs and gave sort of forgotten about the age and sensibilities and needs and protection requirements of your youngest DCs in the process.

OP, in my opinion YABVVU. Ratings are there for a reason.

We do let our kids watch some 12 rated films/programmes (they're 5 and 8), but strictly on a case by case basis and only if at least one of us has already seen it and assessed it as suitable.

As far as Buffy goes we would love to sit and watch our DVDs through with the kids, but we'll be waiting until the kids are old enough. If the heavily edited tea-time versions were re-shown I'd let them watch those, or at least the 8 year old, but the DVDs are going to be just sitting on the shelf for a good while longer.

NoNoNora Sat 06-Oct-12 21:18:55

ShutTheFrontDoor- So you mean that Smarties and cigarettes aren't a balanced breakfast?! My children eat healthy balanced meals and are HAPPY. Not traumatised, not violent. Normal, questioning, secure children who aren't spoken down to because of their age.

OP, you say: "they've been desensitised"

And it sounds like you are proud of this? shock and sad.

lisad123 Sat 06-Oct-12 21:20:07

Sorry but allowing your child to watch movies and shows that are rated well over their physical age is irresponsible and very wrong. They have ratings for a reason!! It's also a child protection issue and wouldn't be surprised if school reported you to SS.

TeaBrick Sat 06-Oct-12 21:20:23

Op, you definitely needed the lecture from the teacher. You should be protecting your children from inappropriate material, instead of trying to be their hip best friend. There's no need for anyone to watch saw or hostel, let alone a child.

ProphetOfDoom Sat 06-Oct-12 21:20:32

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

ShutTheFrontDoor Sat 06-Oct-12 21:21:42

So just to confirm everyone on here and the teacher are wrong and you are sooooo right? Are you not listening to anything people are saying?

NoNoNora Sat 06-Oct-12 21:23:08

BasicallySFB- Of course I wouldn't let DD's friends watch anything above PG rating without their parent's consent, just as I wouldn't let the older DD's friends drink under the age of 18 in my home without parental consent.

EverybodysCryEyed Sat 06-Oct-12 21:23:08

How is saying 'no that isn't appropriate viewing for you, let's watch something else' talking down to them?

Belmo Sat 06-Oct-12 21:23:09

If they are distressed by eyes being popped out of skulls, turning it off is too late they'll still have seen it! (I hate gore, I was 21 when I watched Saw, and think that was too young!)
Buffy is fantastic, though. But season 6&7 are a bit graphic I'd have thought.

LFCisTarkaDahl Sat 06-Oct-12 21:23:49

'spoken down to' hmm

There is a vast grey area between patronising a child and having age appropriate conversations and boundaries.

I can't believe how black and white you are.

I dont 'talk down' to my child but I also don't let her watch inappropriate content.

I don't let her drink wine by the glass either just cos at 14 she really really wants to.

YAB extremely U.

As a secondary teacher, we get to deal every day with pupils who simply don't understand the boundaries of appropriateness. Very often this behaviour is influenced by them viewing inappropriate material, films, TV, playing inappropriate games, having internet access in their bedroom (unmonitored/filtered late at night). I am sure many of them don't have nightmares, appear unduly bothered at home, but at school when they act out in their play (I am particularly talking about KS3 students here) these behaviours they have no idea that it is unacceptable. I have rung parents before to voice our concerns over the content of things children are viewing at home on a regular basis.

I am absolutely gobsmacked that you would even contemplate showing your 10 year old or 7 year old something like Saw? Do you even watch all these things before making the decision or just view them for the first time alongside them?

I seriously hope this isn't serious.

I would much rather they watched such films with me in controlled conditions than at a sleepover with a bunch of hysterical peers.

Call me overprotective, but I'd rather my children didn't watch them at all.

NumericalMum Sat 06-Oct-12 21:26:12

I watched Saw (the first 30 mins maximum) when I was 25 and I am still disturbed by it. I can't imagine how you know it is disturbing them until it is FAR FAR too late? And if your DDs are de-sensitised to that sort of thing heaven help us all.

IneedAsockamnesty Sat 06-Oct-12 21:27:19

why in gods name are you letting your kids take the cards into school,do you know how many arguements trading cards cause

ShutTheFrontDoor Sat 06-Oct-12 21:28:41

So just to confirm everyone on here and the teacher are wrong and you are sooooo right? Are you not listening to anything people are saying?

Flobbadobs Sat 06-Oct-12 21:28:50

Buffy gets more towards an 18 rating as the series gets further on, believe me I've watched all of it! Top Tumps cards aren't allowed in our school along with match attacks, pokemon etc as illicit swapping was going on and arguments were breaking out over who won what so they got banned. A sensible option I think so the teacher may well have had another reason to take them.
It's not censorship, it's appropriate concern about what a small child is being exposed to at home! How do you know that your DC isn't copying fighting moves at school for example?
Would you seriously let them watch Saw? I found out that DS (12) has been watching The inbetweeners and Paranormal Activity at his friends house and had to have a bloody good chat about what is appropriate to watch at his age. He's generally a sensible lad but Paranormal Activity scared the shit out of him and led to weeks of nightmares and the inbetweeners taught him some language that got him grounded for a week. (FWIW, I like both of them, but I'm 36).
YANBU. Very.

pictish Sat 06-Oct-12 21:29:53

OP - I'm not going to have a go at you, but I will advise you to reconsider your stance on this one.
Your dd can't process these images and ideas - she is 10 and hasn't lived...she has nothing to compare it to, nothing to provide any context? Do you see what I mean?
She can't be told it, she's got to know it!

Come on OP - please....censoring inappropriate imagery isn't talking down to kids, it's protecting them from things they have no hope of understanding. It is not yet their time to understand. That comes later...when they are no longer children.

Your job is to be the grown up, and make those choices for her. I also oppose censorship OP, it may interest you to know, but I'm an adult and I have context and maturity on my side.

lisad123 Sat 06-Oct-12 21:30:19

Thing is its not just the gore and horror but the sexual content of 18 rated movies. Showing a sexual movie to a child is classed as abuse and you could well have police knocking too, alongside ss

crazygracieuk Sat 06-Oct-12 21:30:21

I have an 11 year old who comes home from school asking about programmes/films that are inappropriate for his age. He's heard of Saw and he's definitely not going to watch it until he's much older.

There's plenty of 12a stuff to watch - why go for 15 material?

Does anyone know why Gremlins is a 15? Is it because there was no 12 at the time it came out?

BoneyBackJefferson Sat 06-Oct-12 21:31:10


What are you going to do when your children are the ones that are avoided by other children when their parents tell them to stay away as your kids are the ones with the reputation for bringing in the undesirable materials?

WearingGreen Sat 06-Oct-12 21:32:09

YABU and idiotic and immature.

Ratings aren't there to spoil your fun or to make you look like the cool parent who ignores them. They are there because watching violent programmes actually changes the person you are, it hardwires you in a way that you wouldn't be if you were allowed to be a kid and watch the vast array of age appropriate programmes that are available. Huge amounts of research have been done into this.

IneedAsockamnesty Sat 06-Oct-12 21:32:20

joking aside, im a bit hmmm at most ratings and am often surprised by how they choose, in my house 18's are off the table compleatly unless your 18 but anything under that gets watched by me and i decide who its suitable for.

and i wouldnt bat an eyelid at csi but have never seen the dvd version of buffy only the tv ones and i never minded the kids watching the tv version

amistillsexy Sat 06-Oct-12 21:32:50

OP, I don't believe that you all sit down to watch these types of things in the way you describe, with you and your DP vigilantly watching the DCs for signs of stress, and the whole family having a good old intellectual debate after the showing about the various merits of what you've just seen. I simply don't believe it is ever like that when your children are watching these things. I think it's more likely that they just get whatever they want off the shelf and shove it in the machine without you having any clue what they're watching!

NoNoNora Sat 06-Oct-12 21:32:50

Yes, I do believe I'm right (for my situation, for my childrens' maturity and intelligence levels) and the teacher is wrong. I'm very surprised at the reaction this thread has gotten.

crazygracieuk Sat 06-Oct-12 21:33:17

The teacher isn't bu.

Even if your daughters are unaffected, the teacher needs to take the safe option and act in the interests of the majority and shield the other kids from inappropriate movies. At our school, they ask permission to show pg films to year 4s. How did you think they would react to 15 material?

LetsFaceTheMusicAndDance Sat 06-Oct-12 21:34:33

This would be a matter for the child protection officer at a school.

I'm going to be blunt. You are not parenting your children well if you do not set appropriate boundaries for their protection and safety. Kids need parents to look after them not be their 'mates'.

Your husband sounds like a nob.

fairyfriend Sat 06-Oct-12 21:34:51

I'm not one to follow guidelines blindly, OP. I believe that I know my children best, and I decide what they watch. But you and your DH sound like a pair of eejits.

Do you understand anything at all about the developing brain? Do you know that a child's emotions when they watch these things will not be the same as yours? Do you realise that the part of their brain that gives them empathy and adult understanding is nowhere near fully developed yet, and won't be until their mid-twenties?

If you are going to 'stick it to the man' and make parenting choices that go against conventional wisdom then at least do your fucking research.

BoneyBackJefferson Sat 06-Oct-12 21:35:05


are you right for everybody elses situation and children's maturity/ intelligence levels?

pictish Sat 06-Oct-12 21:35:42

My eldest is nearly 11. The thought of sitting through Saw with him....well no. Just no. I love the fact that he's a child, an innocent, and sees good in the world and feels secure. I don't want his vibe assaulted by images designed to be frightening or sickening! Why do you need that at 11?

EverybodysSpookyEyed Sat 06-Oct-12 21:36:07

You can have the worlds most intelligent 8 year old - it still doesn't make them emotionally mature

Childhoods are such magical times. It's a shame to expose them to the harsher realities of life so early on when there is no need to

crazygracieuk Sat 06-Oct-12 21:37:00

There will be children who watch or play 15/18 material at home but their parents won't be lectured as they are not bringing it in.

DoMeDon Sat 06-Oct-12 21:37:35

Your children's maturity and intelligence levels <hollow laugh>

Deluded. Children are children - they have many differences but far more similarities. If you cannot live you lives in an age appropriate way I would suggest you are lacking the requisite common sense to decide whether your children can cope with these images.

BTW exposing children to emotionally damaging violent or sexual images is emotional abuse. Watching Hostel with a 10 year old would be child abuse.

LFCisTarkaDahl Sat 06-Oct-12 21:37:50

Well, with nearly a hundred people disagreeing you're going to have to have a serious think about it.

Yet again in your last post you seem to think that because your children are 'intelligent' it means they can cognitively understand sexual violence/abuse better and be less affected by it - you are very wrong on this.

GupX Sat 06-Oct-12 21:39:42

OP is a numpty.

Like HerculePoirot, I deal with the fallout from children whose parents won't parent responsibly every day.

NoNoNora Sat 06-Oct-12 21:40:00

amistillsexy- Well yes, actually we do discuss what they are watching and anything harder than Buffy is watched as a family. The DDs don't watch TV all day (usually about an hour each after school and then something in the evening) and someone is usually in the room with them when they're watching TV.

LetsFaceTheMusicAndDance Sat 06-Oct-12 21:40:04

Actually - FFS look after your kids. Take your responsibilities seriously. OOO so angry. Am thinking of a Year 4 boy I taught who was blue under the eyes and when I asked him, he said he was tired because his dad watched Gladiator in the boy's bedroom because mum was watching something else downstairs. He was then too scared and upset to sleep. When I asked him whether he told his dad that he didn't like the film, that poor little boy said no because I don't want my dad to think I'm a baby.

So sad.

IneedAsockamnesty Sat 06-Oct-12 21:40:58

op would you seriously let your small children watch saw or films that featured enough sexual content to be classed as soft porn?

ShutTheFrontDoor Sat 06-Oct-12 21:41:01

Yes, I do believe I'm right (for my situation, for my childrens' maturity and intelligence levels) and the teacher is wrong. I'm very surprised at the reaction this thread has gotten.
Aah so it's because your children are intelligent that they can deal with the abuse?

TidyGOLDDancer Sat 06-Oct-12 21:41:44

You are not right. Do you understand why so many people are telling you that you are wrong? It's because you are. You are very, very wrong.

Thank God for your DC's teacher. Someone has to point out the right things for them because their parents apparently won't or can't.

lisad123 Sat 06-Oct-12 21:41:55

So OP do you not understand that this is a child protection issue, or are you just skimming over any negative comments because clearly you are the only right one here hmm

BasicallySFB Sat 06-Oct-12 21:43:19

Again - wow. Not only do you seem unbelievably naive, but you're also completely blind to the 118+ poster suggesting that maybe Saw isn't appropriate viewing for a child.

I hope - and I never ever thought I'd say this - that someone at school HAS flagged your conversation as a concern.

allthegoodnamesweretaken Sat 06-Oct-12 21:43:20

There is a mixed reaction to you letting them watch buffy. I'd say it's not so bad, and I'd probably let a ten year old watch the early series (but then I have only seen the tv version). But EVERYBODY thinks you would be incredibly unreasonable and abusive to let a seven year old watch the human centepide or similar and I wholeheartedly agree.
You can raise your children however you want up to a certain point, but as a pp pointed out letting a child watch porn is legally classsed as sexual abuse you can't do this and if you are caught doing it, you could have your kids taken off you. (I know you haven't actually done this so I'm not trying to say you should have your kids taken off you!)

NoNoNora Sat 06-Oct-12 21:44:03

ShutTheFrontDoor- No, it's because they are supported and secure and have been nurtured enough to ask questions and voice concerns when they are unsure/scared.

LetsFaceTheMusicAndDance Sat 06-Oct-12 21:44:11

I think it IS abuse actually. You need to get your head out of your arse and do the right thing by your kids.

zeeboo Sat 06-Oct-12 21:46:12

I don't censor much and would happily let my lot watch Buffy if they liked that kind of bollocks but thankfully they don't. I'm actually gobsmacked that people think its so terrible it's Dr Who with boobies basically.
But no, I'd not let a primary sch

zeeboo Sat 06-Oct-12 21:46:20

primary sch

fairyfriend Sat 06-Oct-12 21:46:37

OP, can I ask how old you are? And how old is your DP?

NoNoNora Sat 06-Oct-12 21:47:26

I'm 48 and DP is 49.

gordyslovesheep Sat 06-Oct-12 21:48:09

if you are showing them films with a sexual content it is actually an offence - www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/42/section/12 if those films are graphic you are on shaky ground

zeeboo Sat 06-Oct-12 21:48:10

Primary school child watch saw or any type if porn. That is a whole different board game. But I've seen Buffy in the tv listings long before the watershed. If it was truly bad they wouldn't show it. But then my kids adore family guy and South Park. Thank God they are too clever to tell a teacher tho.

GupX Sat 06-Oct-12 21:48:57

Message deleted by Mumsnet for breaking our Talk Guidelines. Replies may also be deleted.

GupX Sat 06-Oct-12 21:49:08


BasicallySFB Sat 06-Oct-12 21:49:42

But WHY would you want to allow your kids to be exposed to anything like that at that age? That leaves them 'unsure/scared'?

There's a massive difference between kids discovering that sometimes, bad things happen, and then having an age appropriate conversation to allay their fears etc - and deliberately allowing them to be exposed, from a young age, to material that is absolutely NOT meant for young children. One's normal parenting. One is at best neglectful and a worst abusive.

WearingGreen Sat 06-Oct-12 21:50:19

zeeboo, there is a huge difference between the edited pre watershed Buffy and the 15 rated dvd. I've let a 7 year old watch a 12 before (bend it like beckham) but a 15 is in a different league.

zeeboo Sat 06-Oct-12 21:50:45

Just googled 'human centipede' yeah, you show that to a child and you are clearly wrong in the head. I wouldn't let my adult son being that into my home never mind let the kids see it.

GupX Sat 06-Oct-12 21:50:47

and "if it's too much for them they leave the room"



Lazy, awful parenting.

Eugh again.

DoMeDon Sat 06-Oct-12 21:50:50

I have watched all the Buffy and Angel series and it gets dark and very adult as it goes on. The monsters get more sinister, the killings more graphic, the emotional relationships more complicated. First series is a bit silly but still wholly unnecessary for a 10 yo. Why would they need to watch it? There is so much more they can watch.

CSIJanner Sat 06-Oct-12 21:51:02

So you'll let them watch Saw if they can can articulate why they need to watch it? Give them a decent classic book instead. That's what tv was called before it was invented. Let their minds make the story instead of the gratuitous violence of films.

And for the record - YABU. You're their parent not their über kool mate. Be a parent. Watching such images can screw with perceptions, attitudes and emotions later down the line. Watching immediate reactions from the sidelines won't pick up on long term effects. Intelligence maturity is one thing, emotional maturity is something different. Grow up, be parents and set the boundaries

Fairenuff Sat 06-Oct-12 21:51:49

I don't think your children have been 'nurtured'

I think they have been neglected

Emotionally abused

And sexually abused

Torture porn is not suitable for children and if you insist that you think it is you are either a liar or very poorly educated.

zeeboo Sat 06-Oct-12 21:51:51

Wearing green yes I get you but I'd assume the top trumps cards were completely sanitised and I think the teacher made a bit too much of it.

BoneyBackJefferson Sat 06-Oct-12 21:51:52

"Thank God they are too clever to tell a teacher tho."

I doubt that they are that clever, more that it doesn't come up in general conversation.

Mumsyblouse Sat 06-Oct-12 21:52:34

What a load of rubbish! Your children don't need to abide by conventional age limits because they are so clever and secure and emotionally expressive, unlike the rest of us presumably? It's almost laughable, if it wasn't so sad.

I was very much traumatised by things I saw on TV/video as a child, I still remember them. Having my lovely mum there didn't make any difference.

And, being proud of desensitizing your children to violence by the age of 10 (or let's face it, much younger as you have watched many series with this child)? I am honestly speechless.

LynetteScavo Sat 06-Oct-12 21:52:38

I find being anti-censorship very odd.

I've always censored what my DC are exposed to.Almost constantly since the moment they are born. Obviously there are times that I have to trust other adults will do that for me. I wouldn't want DC exposed to inappropriate things at school or friends houses.

I think the teacher has a point.

weeonion Sat 06-Oct-12 21:52:40

NoNoNora - I am really unsure what to think of this thread and your reactions (or non-reactions) to some of what others are asking, suggesting and pointing out.

You used the word "censorship" in original post. An interesting choice of word in this context.

How have you framed this in your discussions with yr youngest dds? Have you shown support to the school and an understanding of why they think it is inappropriate for her to bring material into school like that? I know you would not want to create or even suggest to dd3 that there is an issue between you and her teacher.

I am presuming dp has not criticised the teacher to them and I sincerely "facist" was not used in front of them in relation to this? Of course if it was - I would suppose you would have a long family discussion as to the origin of that word and how it should be correctly applied.

NNN - can you see any sense in what others are highlighting to you??

lisad123 Sat 06-Oct-12 21:53:04

Criminal minds is on in the day, I wouldn't let me kids watch that either!!

ravenAK Sat 06-Oct-12 21:54:02

It doesn't work like that, though, OP.

Dc watch upsetting & unsuitable stuff - they don't necesarily 'voice concerns' there & then. Adults don't, either. It takes time to filter through. Quite often time spent alone, or even asleep when it manifests itself as dreams. Or at school when they share it with their peers.

I suspect your dd's teacher didn't just ring you about the trading cards, put it that way - sounds like an ongoing concern.

I can see where you're coming from with wanting to watch stuff with them & discuss it, but, to be blunt, you don't come across as very concerned or knowledgable about the effects of graphic images on a young child's brain.

lisad123 Sat 06-Oct-12 21:54:05

Message deleted by Mumsnet for breaking our Talk Guidelines. Replies may also be deleted.

MadgeHarvey Sat 06-Oct-12 21:54:17

Message deleted by Mumsnet for breaking our Talk Guidelines. Replies may also be deleted.

zeeboo Sat 06-Oct-12 21:55:09

See my kids have seen criminal minds and loved it. I'm talking post age 10. I've only paused and then turned over a few episodes.

lisad123 Sat 06-Oct-12 21:56:16

I love Criminal minds but dd1 is very sensitive (clearly I haven't shown her enough horror movies!!) and dd2 is only 5

DoMeDon Sat 06-Oct-12 21:56:24

I find being anti-censorship is about trying to be liberal and all encompassing and so utterly selfish as an adult that you cannot live a life that is appropriate. Freedom of speech/expression is possible without graphic sexual/violent images, swearing, etc. As usual a lovely principle is hijacked by selfish wanky types.

BoneyBackJefferson Sat 06-Oct-12 21:57:23


"but I'd assume the top trumps cards were completely sanitised and I think the teacher made a bit too much of it."

There is a poster up thread that has said she wouldn't want her children to see a picture of the master and there are other pictures that parents may not want their children to see.

SomersetONeil Sat 06-Oct-12 21:57:26

Why did you post this this thread, if you don't think you're in any way unreasonable. confused

Did you expect everyone to agree with you, and think the teacher was over-reacting? If you're so sure of your stance - why question it via an AIBU thread?

Do you even know what fascist means? I mean, actually means? Who the Fascist party was?

nannyof3 Sat 06-Oct-12 21:58:33

I don't let the kids watch certain things, i think children need protecting !

But there ur kids, so its up to.
I don't agree with u but as i said, there ur kids

Pourquoimoi Sat 06-Oct-12 21:59:08

Message deleted by Mumsnet for breaking our Talk Guidelines. Replies may also be deleted.

Pourquoimoi Sat 06-Oct-12 22:00:29

Oh and I think the teacher was not being unreasonable.
Who knows what your kids have going on in their heads and also what inappropriate things they're saying to other kids?

amistillsexy Sat 06-Oct-12 22:02:53

anything harder than Buffy is watched as a family.

You are avoiding the issue that everyone is presenting you with, OP. Your children should not be watching anything 'hard', with or without you in the room. In fact, I'd say that you being in the room would suggest to a child that what is being watched is deemed 'safe' for them to watch, and would actually be more confusing for them to process.

When I was about the same age as your daughter, I went to babysit with my biog sister. The father of the couple she babysat for was an utter tosser who would point out to her the 18 rated films in his collection ( he later went on to sexually assault her when taking her home from babysitting...read into that what you will). She encouraged me to watch one of them and the images I saw have remained with me for ever. You cannot know what is going through your children's minds as they watch this stuff.

BasicallySFB Sat 06-Oct-12 22:03:28

Quite, pourquoi - I remember being absolutely petrified after a classmate watched 'Nightmare on Elm Street' when we were about 10, and described it to me in graphic detail. Ditto watching 'IT' at a mates aged about 11, and not sleeping for days afterwards.

OP - how do you know your DD's won't talk about what they watch to classmates? Or haven't? You're vicariously exposing other kids too through your uncritical perspective - an exposing them less vicariously through allowing non-age appropriate material to be taken in to school.

ravenAK Sat 06-Oct-12 22:03:33

I'm confident that my year 4 ds is in regular contact with dc who've experienced more graphic content than a Buffy box set tbh, Pourquoimoi!

It's more the complacency here that would concern me.

NoNoNora Sat 06-Oct-12 22:04:24

weeonion- DD doesn't know about the phonecall, I wouldn't want her to think she was in trouble. But we have discussed why the cards were confiscated and why she will only be taking in her Harry Potter ones on Monday so as not to scare the other children.

Of course I can understand why I shouldn't show children pornography or torture porn but that really isn't the issue here. We don't own any porn/torture porn (I find both genres repugnant) and the children don't watch TV post-watershed alone so they'll have no access to it- I'm not going to watch something I hate just to please the children.

lisad123 Sat 06-Oct-12 22:06:21

We aren't talking about full blown porn FGS!!! Any sexual content in 18 films is likely to unsuitable to a child. Are you so deluded you can't even read posts??

Nanny0gg Sat 06-Oct-12 22:06:38

I thought the whole point was that people shouldn't be desensitised to shocking things? That we don't want those things to be considered 'normal'.
You are doing your children no favours at all.

EverybodysSpookyEyed Sat 06-Oct-12 22:08:01

so the only way you censor is according to your tastes?

weeonion Sat 06-Oct-12 22:10:56

I do some work with young people on media and media literacy (more specifically around sexualised images/ tropes). It strikes how often they talk about not being able to unsee what they have seen and despite their developing critical faculties, they all remember how confused and conflicted certain things from their younger years made them feel. I know many of them also grew up in nurturing supportive environments. What approach do you have to your DDs accessing material online? Should that be "censored"?

Pourquoimoi Sat 06-Oct-12 22:11:07

ravenAK - I wasn't just thinking of Buffy, the OP seems to have little censorship so it could apply to any inappropriate viewing.

SomersetONeil Sat 06-Oct-12 22:11:34

You find them repugnant? As an adult?


Wild idea, but maybe your children have their own, individual ideas of what is 'repugnant'. And maybe, just possibly, it differs from yours?

Fairenuff Sat 06-Oct-12 22:13:19

People who groom children do things like this.

People who want to encourage children to perform violent and/or sexual acts on each other do things like this.

They need to desensitive the children.

It's sick.

4ducks Sat 06-Oct-12 22:13:31

OP why do you think there is a watershed? What do you think is the reason other parents limit what their children can watch dependant on age (not intelligence/ "maturity"..........)

SomersetONeil Sat 06-Oct-12 22:15:05

The fact is, you do apply censorship to your children's viewing if you admit you wouldn't actually let them watch (in your own words, 'repugnant') porn. So technically, you're just as much of a fascist as the teacher...

PandaNot Sat 06-Oct-12 22:17:18

You do realise that if your dc show distress at school because of seeing something before they can leave the room or turning the telly off then SS will be at your door quicker than you can say 'completely irresponsible'? And your opinions on censorship won't wash with them. Good luck.

Message deleted by Mumsnet for breaking our Talk Guidelines. Replies may also be deleted.

As a parent you need to learn to say "no" and explain why something is not appropriate.

Are you the same poster who got a hump and wanted to complain to the head that your dd was told to do something, and when she didnt do as teacher instructed but did her own thing instead was told off and started crying (tantrum)?

Letting your children decide everything while you just meekly follow their lead, is both lazy and unintelligent parenting. Rod for your own back.

HelenMumsnet (MNHQ) Sat 06-Oct-12 22:24:54

Evening. Thanks for all the reports about this thread.

We have no reason right now to think the OP is anything other than genuine.

We appreciate that feelings are running high - but please can we remind you that personal attacks are against our Talk Guidelines.

Why on earth was my post deleted????

Showing porn IS child abuse. It's used to groom children.

I cannot believe that HQ would delete that. Are you worried OP's feelings will be hurt? Perhaps you should be more concerned about people like her thinking that this is acceptable parenting.

MadgeHarvey Sat 06-Oct-12 22:28:20

Goodness. What a lot of deletions on this thread. Not that that leaves a lingering smell of something odd in the air.........oh no..........

HelenMumsnet (MNHQ) Sat 06-Oct-12 22:28:23


Why on earth was my post deleted????

Showing porn IS child abuse. It's used to groom children.

I cannot believe that HQ would delete that. Are you worried OP's feelings will be hurt? Perhaps you should be more concerned about people like her thinking that this is acceptable parenting.

Because you said this thread was a wind-up - implying the OP is a troll. Trollhunting is against our guidelines, too.

You're welcome to repost that post without that last sentence.

MadgeHarvey Sat 06-Oct-12 22:28:59

I'd like to know the same about mine walter - but I suppose it'll remain a mystery. Another among many.

HelenMumsnet (MNHQ) Sat 06-Oct-12 22:29:54


I'd like to know the same about mine walter - but I suppose it'll remain a mystery. Another among many.

You made a personal attack on the OP, Madge.

MadgeHarvey Sat 06-Oct-12 22:31:30

I did? I thought I made an attack on the OP's reasoning. Do forgive me. I think I'll go play nice by myself somewhere! grin

Fairenuff Sat 06-Oct-12 22:31:47

Has the op asked for the thread to be censored? shock grin

lisad123 Sat 06-Oct-12 22:34:08

Why were mine deleted?? She is abusive, I spent enough time with SS to know that much

HelenMumsnet (MNHQ) Sat 06-Oct-12 22:34:17


I did? I thought I made an attack on the OP's reasoning. Do forgive me. I think I'll go play nice by myself somewhere! grin


I actually didn't mean that OP was a troll.

It was just bad wording for "I can't believe somebody actually thinks this is acceptable". Sorry!

HelenMumsnet (MNHQ) Sat 06-Oct-12 22:35:26


Why were mine deleted?? She is abusive, I spent enough time with SS to know that much

That part of your post was fine, lisa123, but you started it with a personal attack.

HelenMumsnet (MNHQ) Sat 06-Oct-12 22:36:38


I actually didn't mean that OP was a troll.

It was just bad wording for "I can't believe somebody actually thinks this is acceptable". Sorry!

OK. Can see what you mean. We have had reports from people concerned that the OP is a troll, though, so we hope you can understand that your post was easily taken the other way.

pictish Sat 06-Oct-12 22:36:55

i don't think letting a 10 yr old watch Buffy is abusive. Calm down.
The Op's ideology is questionable, but she hasn't abused her child. Stop saying she has.

HelenMumsnet (MNHQ) Sat 06-Oct-12 22:37:15


Has the op asked for the thread to be censored? shock grin

No, actually.

Which does make her very consistent. wink

lisad123 Sat 06-Oct-12 22:37:32

Message deleted by Mumsnet for breaking our Talk Guidelines. Replies may also be deleted.

pictish Sat 06-Oct-12 22:38:03

I've been deleted for less....

pictish Sat 06-Oct-12 22:38:24

Or in other words - no.

HelenMumsnet (MNHQ) Sat 06-Oct-12 22:38:35


But you can say that you think her decisions are idiotic.

Don't attack the poster; but you can attack her opinions.

HQ I can understand! It was a bad choice of words. smile

pictish we're not referring to Buffy.

TidyGOLDDancer Sat 06-Oct-12 22:38:49

Pictish, you may wish to read through some of the other posts before telling people to calm down. The OP's attitude is extremely worrying.

BasicallySFB Sat 06-Oct-12 22:38:59

grin Helen! I thought MNHQ were all neutral an that smile

lisad123 Sat 06-Oct-12 22:40:27

Ok her ideas and decisions are idiotic and could be classed as abusive.
She is showing children 18 rated movies which may contain violent or sexual content which under CP rules is an abusive situation.

But we have discussed why the cards were confiscated and why she will only be taking in her Harry Potter ones on Monday so as not to scare the other children.
So basically you've explained that your children are superior to their classmates, and it's ok to patronise and talk down to other children, but not your own. Nice.
I can tell you from my own experience that when you read what children write in class, and observe their behaviour with their peers, you can tell which ones have no boundaries at home in what they watch or games they play because their perspectives are askew.
People like me (and many others who have posted here) deal with the fallout from your poor parenting because you refuse to see the damage your inability to take responsibility does not only to your own children, but to the others around them.

HelenMumsnet (MNHQ) Sat 06-Oct-12 22:41:01


grin Helen! I thought MNHQ were all neutral an that smile

We are. And shock that you could think otherwise.

I was merely explaining to lisa123 what she could and couldn't say - should she wish to take issue with the OP's reasoning.

pictish Sat 06-Oct-12 22:42:33

I've read it....or at least most of it. I agree that the OP gives cause for some concern. But she says she would do this, or would do that.
What we know that HAS taken place is watching Buffy.

If there's anything else I missed it.

BasicallySFB Sat 06-Oct-12 22:43:13

'twas your post about the consistency of OP not requesting censorship of this thread - made me chuckle - have been at the [sodding non alcoholic] wine smile

Bugger! It took me so long to type that last post I missed all the excitement!!!

pictish that's why people have said it would be child abuse if she allowed her children to watch those movies!

Felicitywascold Sat 06-Oct-12 22:45:05

OP, do you really think all the different posters on this thread are wrong? Have you noticed that people aren't agreeing with you, how do you explain that?

BasicallySFB Sat 06-Oct-12 22:46:04

And erm ... [gin] and [coffee] for suggesting you're not neutral - not my intention ... god it's late, I need to put my well-worn-and-so-tightly-clutched pearls away and get to bed!

YouSmegHead Sat 06-Oct-12 22:46:20

Well seeing as Buffy is on tv during the day I'd tell her where to go.

NoNoNora Sat 06-Oct-12 22:47:24

Felicitywascold- I believe I'm right and that my parenting is sound- I know my children and the atmosphere in our home and the other posters do not.

smeg have you read the thread?!

LilQueenie Sat 06-Oct-12 22:48:19

big buffy fan here and YANBU at all. First of all before it came out on dvd, how did you know what rating it was when it was shown on tv? Also the rating is a guide only. Does the teacher insist on telling parents not to allow WWF action figures to kids too? IMO the teacher overstepped her mark. How long have teachers been complaining parents dont teach kids abc and so on expecting them to do it. Now they take on the role of what kids should and should not be doing at home....time the teachers took a step back.

Well OP posters here know about child protection issues and laws and are telling you that that sort of behaviour is abusive.

BasicallySFB Sat 06-Oct-12 22:49:01

Erm if you're so convinced you're right, why start a thread in AIBU?

This is a side track but is this not an issue for DD2 "(DD2 is at uni so DD3 has the run of her bedroom and belongings)" - really?

Fairenuff Sat 06-Oct-12 22:50:53

A child at my school told me she had had nightmares after watching a programme with vampires in it. Could have been Scooby Doo for all I know, but I still recorded it in the Welfare Book. It's standard child protection procedure.

NoNoNora Sat 06-Oct-12 22:52:00

BasicallySFB- Because I was feeling unsure about whether I was right or wrong and didn't know that I was so different to other parents. Seeing the other posters have only cemented my view that my parenting is right for my children.

lisad123 Sat 06-Oct-12 22:54:03

Well I hope you feel so right when school report you and SS are knocking on your door hmm

BasicallySFB Sat 06-Oct-12 22:54:10

See I find that most odd - I'm certainly not one for slavishly following The Parenting Rules - but if 99% of posters on a thread I'd started were telling me I was going wrong somewhere, I'd take a closer and questioning look at my parenting.

Fairenuff Sat 06-Oct-12 22:54:42

Are you above the law though op?

NoNoNora Sat 06-Oct-12 22:54:52

TheEnglishWomanInTheAttic- We only have a three-bed home and the younger two usually share a bedroom (and bunk beds, which DD3 hates), so when DD2 is at uni DD3 sleeps in her room. She's taken anything she really cares about with her (has a much bigger bedroom at uni) and DD3 knows not to break/ lose anything.

KenLeeeeeee Sat 06-Oct-12 22:55:12

As someone else said very early on in the thread, YANBU to let your dc watch something like Buffy at home, with your supervision and being on hand to discuss issues with them. YABU to have an issue with the teacher upholding different rules at school, which is her/his domain and they have every right to confiscate what they deem to be inappropriate materials.

I have mixed feelings on the whole 'letting kids watch programmes rated 12+' issue. My ds (coming up to 8yo) LOVES Buffy, and we watched a couple of episodes on SyFy earlier today, which he enjoyed and I certainly didn't find graphic or obscene. That said, I have very clear memories of my violent and abusive stepfather forcing me to watch the Alien movies when I was little, being utterly terrified and him finding that funny. While I can't bear the thought of my children ever being that frightened by something I've allowed them to watch, I do also trust my judgment in deciding if something like Buffy is ok or not, and I would more than raise an eyebrow at anyone calling me abusive for making that judgment call.

weeonion Sat 06-Oct-12 22:55:39

NNN - framing these cards as "scary" for other children implies it is their lacking / coolness / niaviety and a need to protect them - not her. When you say you discussed why with yr dd - did you say you were doing this because you thought it was important or because the school asked?

You say you are surprised by this thread and the reactions on it. I am heartened. Whilst I am not an advocate for blindly accepting all rules, I am a believer in being guided by good practice, research and professionals. Age Ratings / classificactions give parents added weight (and for some the permission) to restrict what children / young people are exposed to until age / standard appropriate. I am often surprised by what appears to be the wilful disregard by some parents of the volume of recommendations by those who have some expertise in this area.

I am still interested in your dps notion of the teacher being facist. How does he plan on reconciling that opinion of the teacher with supportively engaging with them in the future. You may well have answered that whilst I have been typing!

LFCisTarkaDahl Sat 06-Oct-12 22:55:58

How can 'seeing the other posters cement your view that your parenting is right for your children'

HOW??? How has us saying your wrong prove that what you're doing is right???

That makes literally no sense whatsoever.

I hope SS catches up with you. I really do because your attitude is not good for your children.

NoNoNora Sat 06-Oct-12 22:58:46

Fairenuff- Above the law? Surely SS has better things to do then check what I'm showing to my DDs, especially as they are secure, bright and well-behaved children.
DH is a solicitor and is very hmm about some of the reactions on this thread.

LFCisTarkaDahl Sat 06-Oct-12 23:01:02

A 49 year old solicitor?

Who calls a teacher facist?

Who doesn't know that having a child watch torture porn is child abuse?

Who thinks his children are too intelligent to be affected by adult porn?

Do me a lemon. hmm

BasicallySFB "Erm if you're so convinced you're right, why start a thread in AIBU?"

NoNoNora "BasicallySFB- Because I was feeling unsure about whether I was right or wrong and didn't know that I was so different to other parents. Seeing the other posters have only cemented my view that my parenting is right for my children."

Can I just ask, OP - why does 99% of the other posters disagreeing with you convince you that you are right?

BasicallySFB Sat 06-Oct-12 23:01:15

Your DH - a solicitor - is hmm about you stating you would theoretically let your small DC's watch whatever they wanted as long as they can explain why and leave the room if they found it too much? Gosh.

Fairenuff Sat 06-Oct-12 23:01:32

You said that you would let your children watch scenes of sexual torture. You would watch films like Saw with them, etc. This is child abuse. It is against the law. If your dh was a solicitor he would already know that, but in any case it has been pointed out many times on this thread with at least one link to the relevant law.

lisad123 Sat 06-Oct-12 23:02:50

Nope not in my experience, child abuse is abuse no matter what else is happening in home and no matter how clever your kids are hmm
Of course this is only the case if you are showing them 18 films, because you have said you would, you haven't said you have.
If your dh is a solicitor I'm assuming his not a family one, otherwise he would be aware of laws of showing children movies with adult content

LilQueenie Sat 06-Oct-12 23:03:09

for everyone on about SS you really would put trust in them would you? You do realise they have been in the spotlight recently for covering up child abuse.

midori1999 Sat 06-Oct-12 23:04:39

I am an adult and not easily shocked, but I was so disturbed by Hostel that there is no way I would watch Hostel 2 and I certainly wouldn't let my DC watch it. Surely children as young as 7 and 10 have a right to a childhood and to be protected from these sort of images?

I haven't seen that much of Buffy, but from what I have seen I would probably allow a ten year old to watch it, but if it is a 15, then I wouldn't allow my child to take cards depicting images from it into school where other ten year olds may see it.

butterfingerz Sat 06-Oct-12 23:05:22

I think YABU op, I was about 14/15 when I first watched Buffy... I enjoyed it a lot but I think I was the right age and level of maturity. The naughtiest thing my mum let us watch in junior school was 'friends' or maybe 'bottom'! Buffy does have some rather adult undertones which I don't think a 10 yr old needs to see.

And as much as I enjoyed Buffy when I was younger, I don't see how its supposed to portray positive female role models? Do girls aspire to be vampire slayers or witches?

And you say your kids are allowed to watch things 'harder' than Buffy? Can you give an example?

NoNoNora Sat 06-Oct-12 23:06:31

I feel I'm right even after reading this (mammoth) thread because it has given me food for thought, has made me think and has made me come to the conclusion that I'm doing what's right for my children.

DH is very passionate about censorship and freedom of speech (and really dislikes much of his job) and the fascist comment was in the heat of the moment, not one he would repeat to them (well, maybe in an ill-conceived attempt at humour).

lilqueenie that's not even relevant. The point is that OP is willing to carry out child abuse and break the law.

OP I hope your DH is planning on retraining if he doesn't know that what your suggesting is a crime.

weeonion Sat 06-Oct-12 23:06:54

Can yr DH as a solicitor acknowledge other profession's expertise? Teachers and those involved in child protection / safeguarding have voiced their opinions - are they to be given no credence?

SS have a duty of care. Even with stretched resources - that includes following up on any reports or concerns from schools. Your school has expressed concern around desensitization. I am not saying there is any further reporting or procedures happening but can you not see that you have presented evidence already to them that you do happily expose your children to non age appropriate materials?

Narked Sat 06-Oct-12 23:07:19

Do you not have a hobby? Is winding people up on MN your idea of Saturday night entertainment?

WorraLiberty Sat 06-Oct-12 23:08:03

OP have you thought about a career as a child minder?

You sound like a real Mary Poppins grin

pictish Sat 06-Oct-12 23:08:23

Ok. I'm out. grin

If this is legit I must say your DH sounds like a total knob.

He also sounds like he hasn't a bully's notion what he's talking about.

NoNoNora Sat 06-Oct-12 23:10:26

butterfingerz- They aspire to be strong, empowered women. Women who are respected and not cast as victims and damsels.

We'll watch most procedural crime programmes with them (DH likes to pick out their flaws), Firefly is very popular with the girls, Carnivale they watched but it bored them to sleep... One thing that we avoid is rape-situations but that's because they trigger me.

hatesponge Sat 06-Oct-12 23:10:27

I am more than a little relieved that the parents (and indeed teachers) I come into contact with take a more pragmatic approach than some of the responses on this thread.

From what I've read the OP isn't showing her children Saw, Hostel or any other pointless horror film. They're only ACTUALLY watching Buffy.

My DS2 (now 11) doesn't watch horror films, as mentioned he does like CSI and the like. He does also play games like Black Ops though, and has done for the last year or so. In common with every child in his class who has an Xbox (at least half of them).

So feel free to tell me I'll get referred to SS as well.

BasicallySFB Sat 06-Oct-12 23:10:51

Here is a MASSIVE difference between being 'passionate' about censorship and freedom of speech, and allowing children to be exposed to material that is not age appropriate, as defined by law, and that research suggests can be harmful, disturbing, distressing.

EverybodysSpookyEyed Sat 06-Oct-12 23:11:29

I don't get the censorship thing. Who is censoring what they watch?

If he disagrees with the classification system then fine. i just don't understand why that would stop you taking parental responsibility by watching a film before you let your kids.

Or is it about parental censorship? In which case, how do you ensure the kids are able to watch a full spectrum of things and not just the things you have in the house because that is what you as parents have a preference for?

hatesponge what are you on about??

ravenAK Sat 06-Oct-12 23:13:13

I think it unlikely that SS would go steaming in in a case of young dc (in a household where there are also adult dc) watching mainstream 15/18 certificate movies or TV series, to be fair.

They'd need to make it their life's work.

So it really comes down to: not surprising school had a word about the Buffy cards, so take that on the chin, OP, & stop banging on about fascists.

The watching of torture porn is all hypothetical & the OP obviously hasn't thought that one through, not having reason to. Presumably the older dds haven't expressed an interest - it's all just posturing, really.

EmBOOsa Sat 06-Oct-12 23:15:30

People like the OP are why so many kids feel they have to watch stuff that isn't age appropriate. And why so many think rules/age restrictions just don't apply to them.

There is no good reason to show kids this stuff! Their lives will not be hampered by not being allowed to watch 15 rated film/TV/games at the age of 10. It is totally and utterly unnecessary, and stupid.

"Can I just ask, OP - why does 99% of the other posters disagreeing with you convince you that you are right?"

Because she (and her DH) think they are rebels hmm

butterfingerz Sat 06-Oct-12 23:15:49

Are you scifi boffs? I had to google firefly and carnivale and wouldn't know if they're appropriate for kids or not...

Re crime programmes, would you let them watch silent witness or waking the dead? As even I find those quite disturbing tbh.

EmBOOsa Sat 06-Oct-12 23:17:00

Tell me, does your DH ever use 4chan? What does he think of Anonymous? Does he own a V for Vendetta mask?

apostropheuse Sat 06-Oct-12 23:17:34

"But there ur kids, so its up to.
I don't agree with u but as i said, there ur kids"

Someone actually said this upthread. I cannot believe people have that mentality - just because you have children surely doesn't mean you can do whatever the hell you like with them! What a stupid and nonsensical statement to make.

Regarding the thread topic - I agree with the vast majority of posters that the OP is acting in a totally inappropriate and potentially damaging manner. Hopefully the school is monitoring the situation carefully.

Narked Sat 06-Oct-12 23:23:23

I have no time for people who treat age restrictions on tv and film as written in stone. I have just as little time for those who completely disregard them.

WorraLiberty Sat 06-Oct-12 23:25:40

I have no time for people who treat age restrictions on tv and film as written in stone. I have just as little time for those who completely disregard them.

That's it totally.

NoNoNora Sat 06-Oct-12 23:26:33

butterfingerz- DH is a scifi person and has slowly got me into the less Star Trek side of the genre... One of the main characters on Firefly is a prostitute and Carnivale's main characters include a family who run a peep show/prostitution business in a 1930s travelling carnival.

EmBOOsa- I just had to google 4chan and still don't quite get it so I doubt it... It seems a bit of a teenage-boy thing.

BoneyBackJefferson Sat 06-Oct-12 23:27:02

In the first episode of firefly someone is shot through the head and later in the season has graphic scenes of torture.

In fact shooting people is prevalent throughout the entire show.

And I actually like the show.

I'm NOT troll hunting but OP seems very eager to point out the sexual content in what her children are watching. Just sayin'!

NoNoNora Sat 06-Oct-12 23:28:19

butterfingerz- Waking the Dead and Silent Witness are sometimes watched, though they are usually in bed when they're on. Crime shows send them to sleep, for the most part- too much plot and not enough action.

NoNoNora Sat 06-Oct-12 23:29:43

waltermittymissus- Or someone said they were unfamiliar with the programmes I mentioned and I told them what most find to be the most objectionable parts of the series.

ThreadWatcher Sat 06-Oct-12 23:29:43

Op - so you dont avoid watching 'rape situations' because it would be damaging for your children - only because it would be difficult for you.

I think your attitude is bordering on abusive to your children shock

TheonlyWayisGerard Sat 06-Oct-12 23:32:09

One thing that we avoid is rape-situations but that's because they trigger me.
So it's ok for you to avoid watching certain things, but your kids can watch whatever they express a desire to watch. I'm 23 and I hate blood and gore. I don't believe I'm emotionally immature compared to your 8 year old. I can remember watching an awful zombie movie when I was around 10 with an older friend. I hated it. I hate horror movies now.
I think your parenting is lapse at best, at worse it could be very damaging if you subject your child to material they are not emotionally ready for and able to process properly. They might seem fine at the time, but scary images can stay with a child for a long time. However grown up and mature you mistakenly
believe your children are.

RunRabbit Sat 06-Oct-12 23:32:58


There has been a lot on this thread about you and how you parent your children but what about the other children in the class/year/school?

There are other children in the school who may be sensitive to such graphic material. The teacher is there to take the needs of all children into account, not just yours.

OP there was no need for you to point out the most objectional parts. why do that?

You won't allow them to watch rape scenes because YOU aren't ok with it but you don't give a shiny shit about what is appropriate for them.

As far as I can see, either you are getting your kicks out of this or you are creating a very worrying and possibly abusive home environment for your children.

Lara2 Sat 06-Oct-12 23:36:11

OP, I'm totally at a loss to why you posted in the first place - was it just to have a fight? You aren't willing to listen to one single thing that's been said to you.
FWIW, I would also have done the same, and flagged your children up to our CP officer at school. I've done it this term for a 4 year old already.
I can't believe you're surprised at the reactions you've received.

Quadrangle Sat 06-Oct-12 23:38:12

YABU. I totally agree with the teacher about the importance of ratings and the problems with desensitising children to violence and sex.

Flojo1979 Sat 06-Oct-12 23:39:46

Just read the thread.
OP what do u do jobwise?

FairPhyllis Sat 06-Oct-12 23:44:38

I do think Buffy is a fantastic, feminist-informed show that is really good for girls to watch. But not when they are as young as 10 - it can wait, and they can watch the Sarah Jane Adventures in the meantime.

OP, you said that rape scenes are triggering for you and you avoid them - do you watch the attempted rape scene in Buffy season 6 with your DC? How do you explain it to them if you do?

I think what many people are trying to get across to you is that you wouldn't necessarily know if your children were really disturbed by something you watched with them. I was very disturbed by watching Outbreak (15 rating) at a sleepover when I was 12. And children can be really upset even by things that are supposedly an OK rating for them. I was utterly petrified by ET. Perhaps I was a delicate flower, but you can't predict what will upset small children.

Felicitywascold Sat 06-Oct-12 23:51:47

One thing that we avoid is rape-situations but that's because they trigger me.

In light of this discussion so far this is an extraordinarily inflammatory comment to make. hmm

NoNoNora Sat 06-Oct-12 23:55:14

Lara2- I posted because I thought it was ridiculous that the teacher felt the need to give me a lecture about what I should and should not allow my children to watch. (I mistakenly thought that everyone else on here would agree)
Flojo1979- I'm a SAHM but before the children (over 20 years ago, now) I was a PA/unofficial office manager in a publishing firm.
FairPhyllis- They have seen the attempted rape scene (they've seen each episode but have favourites) and though I do find it hard to watch, it almost feels cathartic to see a strong character go through what I went through. They understood that he was trying to make her do something she didn't want to do and we spoke (in very child-friendly terms) about no meaning no and to speak out if something like that (god forbid) was to happen to them or someone they knew.

NoNoNora Sat 06-Oct-12 23:57:20

Felicitywascold- I don't see how it was, we also avoid diet programmes because they trigger DD2 (a recovered anorexic)... I don't see how avoiding personal triggers equates to censorship.

EmBOOsa Sun 07-Oct-12 00:02:48

So with Carnivale were you planning on explaining the hootchie cootch, the blow off and Dora-Mae's murder to your 10 year old?

Flojo1979 Sun 07-Oct-12 00:04:30

Message deleted by Mumsnet for breaking our Talk Guidelines. Replies may also be deleted.

OP the thing I find worst about your first post is that you allow your younger DD to have "the run of DD2s room" as she is away at university. shock

So she is allowed to go into her sisters room whilst her sister is not there and take stuff which doesn't belong to her into school. You allow her to have full reign over herr sister's private space??

I can't comment on the Buffy situation as I have never watched it.

I do think it's entirely inappropriate to not monitor what your DDs watch and if a younger DD was frightened or scared of what was on the TV she would leave the room? shock again. OR you could put TV shows on which are family friendly and not scare the poor child out of the room.

NoNoNora Sun 07-Oct-12 00:13:30

Flojo1979- So my daughter being anorexic was my fault? I just can't... I just can't see how you can link watching television to an eating disorder. And yes, at this point in time she is very happy, thriving at university and leading her amazing recovery.

NoNoNora Sun 07-Oct-12 00:18:53

GoldPlatedNineDoors- They were top trump cards, DD2 lets her (and DD4) play with them... It's a pack of cards that's easily replaceable. I have four children and two bedrooms for them (though DD1 has moved out) and DD2 is completely aware that her sister is staying in her room, they are very close and I'm sure that DD2 had a talk about belongings and the 'consequences' for damaging any of her stuff.

I do monitor what my children are watching, but I don't stop them watching things... I do feel that certain programmes and themes need to be discussed during and after viewing.

NoNoNora Sun 07-Oct-12 00:21:23

Also, they won't sit in the hallway alone if they leave the room, an adult will go with them and start a different activity.

FairPhyllis Sun 07-Oct-12 00:34:22

I think that rape scene in Buffy is a prime example of something a 10 year old should not see. Quite apart from the sexual violence, I think it's just too emotionally complex for a 10 year old to deal with, because Spike by that point has been in a sexual relationship with Buffy and is one of the characters we are meant to like.

Even the actors said they found it incredibly distressing to film - James Marsters has said in interviews they were very unhappy about doing it and he will never film a scene like that again.

birthdaypanic Sun 07-Oct-12 00:34:24

I can't believe what I have read, I wish I knew the OP in RL so I could report her to SS immediately.

"Flojo1979- So my daughter being anorexic was my fault?"
I do not think that is what Flojo was doing, rather that she was pointing out to you that you had previously asserted that your children were "HAPPY. Not traumatised, not violent. Normal, questioning, secure children" who were "supported and secure and have been nurtured enough to ask questions and voice concerns when they are unsure/scared." By and large, anorexia suggests unhappiness and insecurity.

"Lara2- I posted because I thought it was ridiculous that the teacher felt the need to give me a lecture about what I should and should not allow my children to watch. (I mistakenly thought that everyone else on here would agree)"
SO you thought people would agree with you. What do you think about the fact that we don't?

Might I refer you to the Children Act 2004....

You may think your choices are perfectly fine - but according to the above act, and a myriad of other Safeguarding Children legislation they are not fine - they are far enough from fine to be considered a Safeguarding issue. You are placing your children "at RISK of emotional harm". That's all it takes to be in breach of the law. You don't have to cause actual harm - just behave in a way which MAY cause harm.... which you are doing.

If you don't watch things first you have no way of knowing whether or not they might be worried or frightened by what they see - so by allowing them to watch without checking first you are placing them "at risk of emotional harm". The ratings are there to tell you whether something has the potential or is highly likely to cause emotional harm to someone below the age specified. It's one thing to ignore it - it's another to not even check first.

So you are clearly placing them "at risk" - and should they be scared or worried or desensitised then you have actually caused emotional HARM. Obviously if they are scared/worried/uncomfortable enough to "leave the room" then they HAVE been subjected to emotional harm - because leaving is a reaction to what you have allowed them to see, and a reaction has a cause...

Many children who are exposed to inappropriate material do not demonstrate behavioural issues until long after the fact, and it's only through psychological help that the cause becomes apparent.

You're storing up potential mental health time bombs for your children by letting them have access to material they are emotionally incapable of processing. They can be as intelligent as you like, but you cannot speed up emotional maturity.

But then if the balloon does burst in your face and one another of your children develops a mental health issue will you also then be saying it's not your fault as per your daughter's anorexia??? Probably.

There is a saying... "Parents...they fuck you up". Sounds like you're doing a grand job on your children.

Shoddy parenting, very very shoddy.

squeakytoy Sun 07-Oct-12 00:50:20

I can only 100% agree with almost everyone else has said.

You may think you are the "cool parents", but your children are children, not mini adults.

You are supposed to be their parents, not their best mates.

FairPhyllis Sun 07-Oct-12 00:53:42

And in fact, I don't think Joss Whedon's shows are all that when it comes to portraying sexuality. He does write great, complex female characters with lots of personal agency, but sex is consistently presented in the Buffy and Firefly universes as something that women give men to reward them for being Nice Guys. Mal and Inara's relationship in Firefly is utterly fucked-up yet presented as one of the central romantic relationships of the show. I wouldn't want someone who's not mature enough to unpack and be critical of that message to see the shows.

Skellig Sun 07-Oct-12 01:01:32

You are definitely not being unreasonable.

My husband and I are both teachers (primary and secondary) and he recently introduced me to the Buffy series. I believe it's actually very good at exploring moral dilemmas and contemporary issues in a safe and often metaphorical way.

If the school have an issue with the trump cards, fair enough - don't take them in. But to say that watching this programme is a CP issue is ridiculous and belittles genuine CP cases, in my opinion.

Read the thread!

birthdaypanic Sun 07-Oct-12 01:10:39

Agree read the whole thread Buffy not the issue

Skellig - did you read the whole thread?

The OP has also allowed her younger DD's (10 and 6) to watch Carnivale and Firefly..... And they are NOT Buffy. They are adult programmes with adult themes. You could argue that Buffy is for kids (15 cert so personally wouldn't be allowing a six year old to watch it, nor a 10 year old) but Carnivale is a different thing entirely. She also said that on occasion they have watched Silent Witness and Waking the Dead. Again - not exactly Buffy.

The OP also said if her children (remember - 10 and 6) wanted to watch Saw and could explain why she would LET them.

So whilst Buffy is a bit "grey area" - the other things they are being allowed to view/would be allowed to view are not.

I cannot for the life of me figure why anyone would think that Silent Witness, Waking the Dead, Carnivale or Firefly are in any way appropriate for children of 6 and 10 to watch.

I'm hoping as a teacher you agree - or that you have an upcoming Safeguarding Children course.....

Why do you view protecting your children from material that is too adult for them to fully understand or process and may cause them distress (even if that distress is not immediately apparent) as censorship. Why do you seem to want to push them into growing up and being exposed to adult material? They are young for such a short time and have a whole lifetime as an adult to watch more challenging material. It doesn't show they are brighter, cooler, more mature than their peers because they have watched something too old for them, it just means they are less well protected.

Perhaps you should respect their need and right to be a child instead of ignoring their needs in your desperate urge to pat yourself on the back for your right on liberal parenting.

Skellig Sun 07-Oct-12 01:28:21

I have indeed read the while thread, although I have to admit I skimmed through some of the more irate rants.

Coola, my safeguarding training is not only up to date, but I have recently voluntarily done some extra training in this area for a qualification I was pursuing. I got 100% in my final exam.

I confess that I haven't watched every programme/film that has been discussed, but I think it is legitimate to reply to the original post and the original issue. My overriding impression of this thread is that this has got clouded and people are taking hypothetical situations as actual examples of child abuse.

The OP stating that her 6 & 10 year old DDs watched Carnivale (graphic violence), Firefly, Silent Witness and Waking the Dead is not hypothetical.

Buffy for me is, as I said, a grey area. I wouldn't let kids that age watch it, but if people do, then I'm not going to bang a drum about it. I do believe teachers have a right to confiscate items they deem unsuitable - and as Buffy has a 15 certificate and the child in question was 10 in a class of 10 year olds, then I think the teacher did the right thing. If I knew a teacher was aware that a child was showing others images from an age inappropriate programme and didn't do anything about it I wouldn't be happy.

But the original post evolved - and other things the OP said, and programmes she stated she let's her children watch or would let them watch, became more adult and more serious. And then things do head into the realms of risk of harm as defined in law.

Certificates and watersheds exist for a reason - to protect children from seeing things that are deemed not suitable by professionals. I appreciate that there has to be some parental leeway there, but to allow children of 6 and 10 to choose what they watch with no pre-viewing, on the understanding they can leave the room if they get frightened/uncomfortable etc is putting the children at risk of emotional harm. Once they have seen something that makes them want to leave the room they can't unsee it, it's too late - the harm has been done.

If you haven't seen them - IMDB/Google them. Then you might have a better understanding of why people are responding in the way they are.

SomersetONeil Sun 07-Oct-12 02:05:22

Skellig - you're welcome to just respond to the original issue in the original post and ignore all that's been revealed since.

However, as with so many of these types of threads - an original question is posed, and then a pandora's box of issues is unleashed and the thread moves on. This is what everyone else is also responding to.

I do think that the OP is arguing herself into a corner, contradicting herself left, right and centre, going on the defensive and digging her heels in, in the face of an obviously very unexpected reaction to her original question. The fact that one DD does have a mental health issue is problematic - I almost wish the OP hadn't revealed that (kept it private for herself; regardless of this being anonymous), because it just makes this thread even more uncomfortable reading. And this being AIBU - some less-than-sensitive posters may use it against her. smile

SomersetONeil Sun 07-Oct-12 02:07:02

God, sorry - that smiley face was meant to be a sad - as in, I really hope people don't do that.

Tenacity Sun 07-Oct-12 02:48:16

Long term lurker here but I had to say something..
OP, you sound like you want to do right with your kids, and you sound sincere, but can you accept that you might just be wrong on this?
Why don't you at least do your own research into the effects this might have on your children?
I am struggling with your very firm assertion that you are right, and everyone else is wrong. Can't you accept that you might just be wrong on this issue?

LadyWidmerpool Sun 07-Oct-12 04:37:06

I certainly wouldn't let a ten year old watch Waking the Dead or Silent Witness.

I wouldn't have Human Centipede in my house.

There are episodes of Buffy/Angel that I found emotionally challenging to watch as an adult. How did your children respond to the last episode with Joyce in it (not wanting to spoil) or the first post-Glory episode?

It would be interesting to know how much TV your children watch in a week and how much of it is aimed at their age group.

OpheliasWeepingWillow Sun 07-Oct-12 05:03:59

Wow OP. You sound negligent at best.

And you come across as being very self satisfied and immature.

sad for your DC based on your posts.

sashh Sun 07-Oct-12 05:28:13

Buffy was origionally shown on Sky at or after 9pm. The 6pm version was edited / cut.

There is an episode where Anya creates an alternative universe. In it Willow is a vampire who plays with 'the puppy' which is actually Angel.

In the unedited version you see her lighting matches and dropping them on Angel who is chained up.

Themes in Buffy are quite adult, death - lots of death and violence, torture, dark magic, planning of mass murder at a high school and a sprinkling of sex.

I think the teacher is right to be concerned.

You are not being a responsible parent and your husband sounds like a fool. Find your nearest CAMHS service and ask them what your actions will do to your kids.

WofflingOn Sun 07-Oct-12 06:32:27

OP, you are free to ignore all the comments here, and the opinion of the teacher.
That is your perogative as parents.
However, your children need to know not to discuss inappropriate material with their peers, or as a teacher I would have to get involved to prevent the contamination spreading and the consequent child and parental distress amongst other families.
In the same way that some children and parents swear continuously out of school and it's none of my fucking business, but using inappropriate language in school would trigger my duty of care for all the minors in my charge.
The teacher has had one conversation with you, voicing her concerns and opinions. Write to her telling her you will do as you please and she is not welcome to comment further, but also educate your daughters to not discuss or bring in age-inappropriate materials to school.
I think you are wrong too, but you are by no means my first or even my twentieth encounter with that attitude.

Oh and sometimes anorexia is a kick back, especially for girls, a rebellion against growing up. Maybe your daughter wanted to be a small child, cosseted and protected and stopped eating for this reason.
You need to speak to a forensic psychologist about the damaging effect on kids who have been allowed to watch this that their brain cannot begin to understand, doesn't matter how you sugar coat it, sit as a family and war h it and discuss afterwards, your children DO NOT HAVE THE MENTAL CAPACITY TO UNDERSTAND AND PROCESS ISSUES IN THE SAME WAT AS ADULTS.

Proudnscary Sun 07-Oct-12 07:09:45

Totally agree with Woffling, sashh, Ophellia and the many others saying you sound like a pair of self-satisfied eejits.

Teacher did the right thing.

I am, as I always say on these threads, Victorian about what my kids watch. All our tellies and devices have parental control restrictions on them.

No they don't live on a visual diet of Winnie the Pooh - we do watch films with older ratings with them. But only ones ones with swear words like for eg Planes, Trains and Automobiles (which has a big F-word scene), not ones with sex, violence, scariness etc.

Beaverfeaver Sun 07-Oct-12 07:10:39

Children do also have a choice not to watch something of its too scarey/violent for them.

For example: when I was about 6 years old I loved Thomas the tank engine, but Diesel scared me so much that everytime he was on screen I would go behind the sofa.

The Witches also scared me too, and Fantasia.

But I was 1 of 4 children and it wasn't always up to me what was put on. So I used to go and do something else.

What I'm trying to say, is you should try and protect your children from adult themes, but your never going to stop them from suffering with nightmares after watching things that are made for the right age. We can only do our best.

I have 2 older ds 18and 16 who both play CoD etc ( yes I'm aware that's it's 18 I think ) but that's my choice for ds2 and yes I pretty much allow ds2 to self regulate now have since 15 but he is aware things do not get discussed when younger children etc around

But both of them would coved the computer screen /block/mute it if dd age 10 and ds age 7 was to come in their room for something . They both can see and agree its not approaite for younger children

Same dd age 9 knows the full facts of life she asked so we got some books and read and discussed it but she knows she's not to discuss at school as other children might not be ready to learn

They seem have better understanding than you of what's approaite

GhostofMammaTJ Sun 07-Oct-12 07:23:46

They aspire to be strong, empowered women. Women who are respected and not cast as victims and damsels.

The Disney film Brave would do that!!

Oh and they feel same about 12/16/18 films would not let their younger siblings watch and would check about pg with me first and only if I viewed a pg first it would I then decide if it's approaite for the younger dc

LtEveDallas Sun 07-Oct-12 07:30:21

I'm a bit confused by the age ratings for the Buffy box sets. IIRC the first showings were on Sky. Buffy was on 8-9, Angel directly after at 9-10. We used to watch them in the Mess the rush to the club before the doors shut at 1015!

Isn't the watershed 9?

Anyway. I have the boxsets and have let DD (7) watch most of the first series. Some I have skipped because I am enough of a Buffy Geek to know what is coming up. Things I don't feel are suitable for DD.

I don't see the problem with the Top Trumps, really. There are scarier pictures posted in the windows of Game, and unless the other children in the class have seen Buffy, surely they wouldn't understand the write-ups?

I've read the thread and think the accusations of child abuse are a bit daft. If the OP was actually letting her children watch Saw and the like it would be different, but I think it's more just posturing on OPs part.

OP, I wouldn't condem you for allowing your DC to watch Buffy. I think the teacher overreacted to the TT Cards, I hope you really won't let your kids watch torture-porn etc and I think you have probably enjoyed this flaming a little too much smile

MummyPig24 Sun 07-Oct-12 07:34:02

I've never seen Buffy so I don't know what its like. I wouldn't let a 10yo watch Saw, its too graphic. My 4 and 2yo watch the first 4 Harry Potters (after that I feel the bad language and violence comes into it a bit) and Jurassic Park. I've also allowed my 4yo to watch One Born Every Minute, what's wrong with a child knowing how babies are born? And anyway there's no graphic shots. I think parents should exercise some censorship over their children's viewing but I suppose everybodys idea of appropriate viewing is different!

BlueSkySinking Sun 07-Oct-12 07:42:16

I've just read a few more of your posts and think you are a slack twisted neglectful parent. What person in their right mind allows a 7 and 10 year old child to watch such stuff? You might think your kids are dealing with all the adult themes really well on the surface but in fact they are being deeply influenced and effected by everything you show them. I expect the teacher has noticed DD general behavior with peers and has quickly realised that she has been de-sensulised. To make such a phone call she must be seriously concerned. Why would you choose to show them such grown up stuff when in fact they could be watching lovely warm and fun age appropriate things?

margerykemp Sun 07-Oct-12 08:10:08

My 4yo is allowed to watch buffy- she loves it.

I however don't allow her to watch the Disney channel.

IMO there are much more damaging programmes and images in the media that aren't 15s/18s.

redexpat Sun 07-Oct-12 08:23:43

YANBU for letting them watch Buffy. Fabulous female role models. But seasons 6 &7 are a bit more adult. And it is annoying and confusing when someone tries to raise an issue with you and you just dont see what the issue is.

But I don't agree with the other stuff you have said. But then I don't agree with a lot of what has been said on this thread.

I remember not being affected by films with older ratings. I just didn't understand why certain things were horrible. The violence didn't bother me because I knew it wasnt real. I think a lot of children are better at making that distinction than adults think. However, watching WW2 documentaries at school gave me nightmares a plenty because it was real.

I think that the teacher is doing what I would probably do in her situation. She is erring on the side of caution because that's her job. And everything that Dallas said.

I used to love Buffy still do not entirely suitable for small children but a group of teens saving the world is mOre preferable to the nonsense spouted and brattish behaviour shown on many god awful shows aimed at children. Cbeebies is banned from my house for that very reason. Grandpa in my pocket is far creepier than Buffy. I dont think that anyone needed to make such a big deal out of it. It's some cards.

GhouliaYelps Sun 07-Oct-12 08:54:42

You sound like my DSC mum - watching Sex and the city with DSD at 11 and thinking it was v sophisticated. DSD also developed an eating disorder and finds it impossible to form intimate relationships.

You are doing them a lot of harm. I suspect the teacher ( who was spot on) felt the need to talk to you in person as your child has been displaying certain behaviour. You are on v shaky ground here and you need to wise up to the reality of what you are doing. Your children are clearly not the happy, content emotionally stable people you say they are. They will be emotionally disturbed.
You will be the house the other parents write on here about; "DD has been allowed to watch hostel at a sleepover at X house , they are 11! " But I suspect that you and your DP will love that reputation. ESP your DP as I feel he is dominant here and has introduced this way of thinking.
Also your whole life seems to revolve around TV shows. Weird.

bakingaddict Sun 07-Oct-12 09:05:06

I think it's naive to say that a 10yr old can watch anything as long as you sit down and discuss the film afterwards

A 10yr old doesn't have the emotional capacity to process things like rape and torture in the way an adult does and all the explaining in the world wont make them understand precisely because they are so young and not emotionally ready for it, it's like trying to explain the laws of realitivity to a 5yr old.

LFCisTarkaDahl Sun 07-Oct-12 09:06:47

So you have let your 7 and 10 year old watch the rape scene in series 6 sad

That is monumentally depressing to read and incredibly damaging for them. It's too complicated a relationship for them to understand.

What you have done is very wrong and I suggest you refer to Camhs or a good psychologist to get some help to undo some of this harm.

bochead Sun 07-Oct-12 09:12:56

Teacher right

Parents epic fail. It's not fair on all those parents who don't want their own kids damaged by your laziness & inability to set boundaries.

Teachers have to consider the welfare of the whole class. Home education is an option for you if you want to pursue your pysch experiment on your own children.

MainlyMaynie Sun 07-Oct-12 09:18:29

Wow, you and your DH are just So Cool. I'm mighty impressed with how wonderfully liberal and thoughtful your parenting is. You go get those fascists child protection fools, trying to, err, protect children.

Bunbaker Sun 07-Oct-12 09:22:17

"Yes, I do believe I'm right (for my situation, for my childrens' maturity and intelligence levels) and the teacher is wrong. I'm very surprised at the reaction this thread has gotten."

I'm speechless at your naivety shock

Doesn't it occur to you that perhaps you might be wrong or are you one of those people who dig their heels in the more someone says no?

DD had a child in her class at primary school who was allowed to stay up until all hours and watch inappropriate TV. It caused raised eyebrows among the teachers and other parents. This child is considered odd because of some of the things he comes out with (from watching inappropriate TV). Some children weren't allowed to play at his house because they didn't trust the parents.

Do you want this for your children? Also, do you want your family to be known as the "troublesome" family to the school? Do you want to be the talk of the staffroom because of your parenting?

You need to be realistic because this will label your children whether you like it or not.

Fairyjen Sun 07-Oct-12 09:22:29

I've just googled the plot to the Serbian film as had not heard of it. Your fucking sick if you would consider even watching this yourself never mind your children!

WMittens Sun 07-Oct-12 09:28:50

Good on you, OP. Your kids, your rules; the school can confiscate the cards if they are against the school rules, but I'd be proper pissed off if I got a lecture from the teacher.

Yabu. Not about buffy, but about saw and hostel (although I cannot see how these are torture porn, that's been bugging me all thread....)

I was allowed to watch pretty much what I wanted when I was younger. I had years of sleep terrors and a pretty fucked up view of sex. The sex was just from BBC dramas my mum watched, but they really did Fuck me up a bit.

Do try to be more responsible, eh?

Oh and you can't have heard of a Serbian film, nobody sane would even have that near their house, the thought if children watching it makes me want to faint

pictish Sun 07-Oct-12 09:31:06

Maynie grin

I am laughing because OP I agree with her. You think you're so cutting edge and sussed doncha? You and dp - the 'thinking' parents.
This varied cross selection of society says no. You're wrong.
This doesn't make you unique and special or anything either, you rebels you...it's not political...it's just a parenting issue, and we all share that in common here.

Be glad the teacher noticed. You can be assured she is looking out for all your kids. She did the right thing.

You have got to speak to your social warrior partner and tell him you have been misguided.
Stick it to the man all you like - I'll come too, but don't view your kids as the army. They're just kids. Let them have their innocence.

GhouliaYelps Sun 07-Oct-12 09:47:59

"Do you want this for your children? Also, do you want your family to be known as the "troublesome" family to the school? Do you want to be the talk of the staffroom because of your parenting? "

Sadly I think they do, yes.

Fairyjen Sun 07-Oct-12 09:48:52

The buffy stuff I would let slide if was edited. Erosion but for god sakes Siberian film?!?!? I felt suck just reading the write up!

ByTheWay1 Sun 07-Oct-12 09:50:08

I work as a mid-day at our nice middle class school - they do a Y6 yearbook - each child's entry has their fave TV show as well as other stuff - you would be surprised how many put CSI or Russell Howard's good News as their fave.

I've had 6 and 7 year olds come up and talk about watching SawIV with their brother/sister - watching Futurama and other more adult based shows too - I do think it is sad.....

when can kids be kids - mine was teased mercilessly for putting Phineas and Ferb and Blue Peter as favourite cartoon and TV show... instead of Beavis and Butthead and CSI Miami.....

You have turned your disagreement with authorities and "censorship" into a psychological experiment with your own children.

You WILL try expand the boundaries, BECAUSE these ratings are there, and you so hate others giving recommendations you see it as censorship and your childrens civil liberties being impinged upon. To regain control, and to feel that you as parents, as people have control, you subject your own little children to highly inappropriate viewing, and you justify it. Because NO authority can tell YOU what to do. Your husband hates his job, hates others having authoritiy over him, so he plain and simple go let his children watch Silent Witness and Buffy to rebel.

Really mature. Really adult. Really Good thinking.

You simply will not let your children watch age appropriate films because that would be like your husband bowing to the authorities in the work place.
Or, it means you yourself would be bored stiff watching Tracy Beaker, or E.T type films and programs and you wont do that, when YOU want to watch Silent Witness, ER, Human Centiped, Blair Witch Project.

You children dont know any better.
In fact you have turned THEM into an employee bowing to authority. YOUR authority, in that they have to watch your taste of movies.

Good luck. wink

OrangeandGoldMrsDeVere Sun 07-Oct-12 09:53:33

My mum was told off for letting me read Enid Blyton by a teacher.
Is this the same thing?

lionheart Sun 07-Oct-12 09:55:49

I think the teacher was doing her job and it's worked insofar as she has made you think about these issues (although obviously you had done so already).

I think there is a big difference between censorship (or non-censorship) and controlled viewing (making decisions based on ratings, checking stuff out for yourself first).

I have found www.kids-in-mind.com/ to be very useful in helping me decide whether or not stuff is suitable or absolutely out of the question. Sometimes it depends on age, sometimes it's the child.

Later series of Buffy were cut to ribbons for the 6pm showing, to the extent that some episodes were several minutes shorter than the uncut version. OP says the children "grew up" watching Buffy, so presumably saw it for the first time at a much younger age than 10.

Still, if these emotionally well adjusted kids can find the Master funny after watching a graphic close up of him breaking Buffy's neck (slow motion - alternative universe) and be completely unaffected by attempted rape, a recurring character being graphically flayed alive by "one of the good guys", another main character having an eye gouged out, shots of Buffy's decomposing corpse in her grave, two harrowing episodes dealing with the sudden deaths of main characters (one a parent), all on top of the weekly scenes of vampires / monsters killing people - well, that's OK, isn't it?


yousankmybattleship Sun 07-Oct-12 10:00:50

OP, I am genuinely shocked at your idiotic approach to parenting. OK, you may not agree with censorship, but allowing your children to watch completely inappropriate material just to prove a point is irresposible. Your teacher has a duty to discuss this with you and he/she also has a duty to report it. I am astonished that you think that just because your children are intelligent that they will not be damaged by seeing such images. Very very poor parenting choices.

I think the teacher was more concerned with the influence your children have on the other children in the class, and to protect her own position. Frankly, if my 7 year old came home having swapped Buffy cards in school, I would not be impressed and would go see the teacher. The teacher needed to ensure she protects other children whose parents are NOT subjecting their children to sex and graphic violence (which vampire slaying after all is), coupled with giving children ideas of hell mouths, and vampires and demon they may not be able to rationalize.

I doubt the teacher were really concerned with OPs children, but the other children in the class and what their parents would say. The teacher knows fully well that if a parent is letting a child watch whatever they want on tv, the teacher is unlikely to have any influence on these children, but must take steps to protect the other children.

pictish Sun 07-Oct-12 10:14:56

Oh and OP - don't listen to your husband's waffle as the gospel truth either.

This is a very nearly 50 yr old man, who's idea of enlightening another to his measured, thought out plight, as a professional man and father, is to write a note to his child's teacher citing fascism, and attaching it to a Top Trumps card featuring the dark anti-hero Angel off the TV. grin

It's sorta pathetic don't you think?

Bunbaker Sun 07-Oct-12 10:26:46

"I think the teacher was more concerned with the influence your children have on the other children in the class, and to protect her own position...The teacher needed to ensure she protects other children whose parents are NOT subjecting their children to sex and graphic violence.."

Spot on Quintessential

yousankmybattleship Sun 07-Oct-12 10:28:41

I agree, your DP sounds very childish. Such a shame for an allegedly intelligent man to behave in such a petulant way. The teacher is trying to do her best for the children in her class and does not deserve to be subjected to your DP's idiotic outbursts.

But I think it is also important to remember though that many cartoons r just as graphic. Take scooby doo- full of ghosts ghouls skeletons vampires etc with two characters constantly with the munches. And Ben ten too. There r always fight scenes monsters blood etc . These things r allowed in school , lunch boxes, back packs, books etc. I can understand concern but at least be consistent. U can't ban Buffy then allow an equally violent/graphic program merchandise in Its place.

WofflingOn Sun 07-Oct-12 10:36:20

'"Do you want this for your children? Also, do you want your family to be known as the "troublesome" family to the school? Do you want to be the talk of the staffroom because of your parenting? '

They won't be the talk of the staffroom, this sort of parenting is positively mundane and predictable now.
Well, perhaps not the pseudo-woffle of in-depth discussion of challenging issues and careful monitoring of reactions and wotnot.
Most parents are more honest and say 'What the fuck is it to do with you?'

Quadrangle Sun 07-Oct-12 10:38:25

Very very lazy parenting. Imagine being too lazy to get up and turn the TV off if something inappropriate comes on and then claiming it is a parenting philosophy.

Fakebook Sun 07-Oct-12 10:45:36

I haven't read the whole thread, but I'm missing the part where OP has said she shows her children torture porn. Did she actually admit that?

I watched Buffy throughout my teenage years, aged 13-19. I grew up with Buffy and weirdly experienced alot of non paranormal things that happened in her life the same time (parent dying etc). For me, it was sometimes a very emotional and sad programme, because ultimately, it was just a teen drama like Dawson's Creek. Blood, gore and vampires aside, I don't think a young child should be exposed to teenagers losing their virginity, losing parents, sleeping around, death. The series became darker and darker as they went on, so I wouldn't let my DD watch it before aged 13-14.

Fairyjen Sun 07-Oct-12 10:46:00

Let's not forget either that James bulged was murdered by two boys who had been watching chucky. OP your a negligent parent

Mmmnotsure Sun 07-Oct-12 10:46:03

Pictish grin

Fairyjen Sun 07-Oct-12 10:46:34

Message deleted by Mumsnet for breaking our Talk Guidelines. Replies may also be deleted.

Fairenuff Sun 07-Oct-12 10:50:58

the part where OP has said she shows her children torture porn. Did she actually admit that

No, she said she would let them watch it if they wanted to and could give a really good reason for it. She would watch with them and if they show signs of distress she would then deem it inappropriate and take the child out of the room.

JustSpiro Sun 07-Oct-12 10:54:25

I think the violence and effects in Scooby Doo are a bit different from the likes of Buffy, Angel & Saw tbh (although I must admit I got the shudders at The Trickster on the Sarah Jane Adventures when watching it with 8yo DD yesterday). As for the characters having the munchies, I very much doubt any child would 'get' the significance of that.

I agree that the teacher calling you is probably about protection of the other children in her class and covering her own back. I haven't seen the Buffy cards so just Googled them and didn't find anything too horrific, but children at that age have a varying range of sensitivity to all things gory/scary and just because you have chosen to 'desensitize' your children, does not make that appropriate for other other people's.

As for allowing them to watch stuff like Saw if they asked, I am utterly 'shock'. TBH I'm not that comfortable with the fact that my 40-something DH likes watching that kind of thing, and wouldn't be thrilled about DD taking an interest in that 'genre' even when she was a grown up as I find 'slasher flicks' completely abhorrent.

Fairyjen Sun 07-Oct-12 10:54:56

The issue I have is she said they could if they had a good reason. Can anyone on here tell me what would constitute a good enough reason?

My point was that it's still something many parents would t want their child watching yet is freely allowed in schools. No one would take any notice of it exposing children to all sorts. In things where parents know there r parts the kids shouldn't be seeing they will be there with them making sure they don't. Whereas a children's channel would just be left on with no concern at all.

Fairenuff Sun 07-Oct-12 11:00:38


Here it is. It was on page 1 in response to whether op thought torture porn was suitable for 6 and 10 year olds to watch if they asked:

NoNoNora Sat 06-Oct-12 20:30:28
LFC- I would ask why and start a dialogue about the torture-porn aspect of that side of the horror genre but if they still wanted to watch then we'd watch as a family, discussing what we were seeing and ensuring that the children knew to speak up if it was too much for them

This is why people have said it is a child protection issue. Nothing to do with Buffy or Scooby Doo.

Fairenuff Sun 07-Oct-12 11:06:29

I think when op reads back she will realise that, of course films like Saw and Hostel are not going to be suitable for her 6 and 10 year olds. Of course, they shouldn't watch them.

And she will just feel a little silly for digging her heels in and claiming her children won't be emotionally scarred because they are intelligent enough to watch torture and handle it. What nonsense!

Feenie Sun 07-Oct-12 11:10:36

Oh, that's alright then hmm

StepAwayFromTheORANGECakes Sun 07-Oct-12 11:10:40

We would then watch them in controlled conditions while watching them to see if they were at all distressed and switch off the moment that became apparent. but once seen things cannot be unseen. I am a big believer that one of the reasons society is as fucked up as it is with kids inflicting violence with hardly a thought is precisely that many people have become desensitised, I have worked with kids who have no concept that hurting someone enough to draw blood is wring because they see it on tv and video games all the time. It really worries me, it comes as a shock to some when the person they have just beaten does not just get up and walk away. why the fuck would you want to let kids look at / play such violent / bloody games / films etc. let them be kids for as long as possible, protect them from the shit in the world, they will have years ahead to witness it all first hand. stop with the desensitising the poor little buggers, kids should be kids and not have to have in depth discussions about every horror in the world.

Mmmnotsure Sun 07-Oct-12 11:10:41

NoNoNora Sat 06-Oct-12 20:30:28
LFC- I would ask why and start a dialogue about the torture-porn aspect of that side of the horror genre but if they still wanted to watch then we'd watch as a family, discussing what we were seeing and ensuring that the children knew to speak up if it was too much for them

This is a (very unfunny) joke, isn't it? Or, given the OP and her dh's awareness of their intellectual standing, simply an example of reductio ad absurdum?

Quadrangle Sun 07-Oct-12 11:14:17

Someone on this thread mentioned a horror film called the Human Centipede. I thought I'd look it up on Wikipedia as i'd never heard of it and wondered what it could be about. Why oh why oh why did I do that? I'd have preferred to have gone to my grave in blissful ignorance of what it was all about. How on earth do people dream up these ideas! (Bleuugh!)

StepAwayFromTheORANGECakes Sun 07-Oct-12 11:15:55

they dream them up because they have been desensitised to violence and porn so don't see shocking people with the contents of their sick minds as an issue, no boundaries.

Fairenuff Sun 07-Oct-12 11:20:40

Mmmmnotsure Apparantly not, others have had their posts deleted for such a suggestion. Keep your head down, HQ are watching grin

Funnylittleturkishdelight Sun 07-Oct-12 11:20:56

I've reported students who have seen that film, quad. At 11 it is far too young.

Fairyjen Sun 07-Oct-12 11:23:59

quad DO NOT google Siberian film. I did sad

Mmmnotsure Sun 07-Oct-12 11:24:49

Faire Thanks. confused

FairPhyllis Sun 07-Oct-12 11:27:09

I don't think you can compare Buffy to something like Scooby Doo though. The violence and monsters in Buffy aren't cartoonish - Buffy and her friends suffer real, sometimes hospitalising, injuries when they fight, and although Buffy heals fast, it doesn't stop her from being bloodied and sustaining serious injuries. She drowns at the end of the first season, nearly dies when Angel drains her blood, nearly breaks her arm in a fight at the beginning of season 4, has her neck snapped in an alternate universe episode, is shot in season 6 ... She is traumatised by her resurrection experience and after she is first called as the Slayer.

Sympathetic characters are murdered, one by having her neck snapped, one by having her throat slashed and another by being shot. There are a couple of torture scenes. A friend has his eye gouged out, etc. etc.

Now sometimes the violence is played for grim laughs, like when Angelus tortures Giles, but sometimes it is genuinely shocking. There's an episode in a later season where Anya has got her vengeance demon job back and slaughters an entire house full of innocent college students. There's the aforementioned attempted rape, and other misogynistic violence in 6 and 7. Lots of it happens in everyday settings like a school.

I think the thing with Buffy is that because the dialogue is funny, and the monsters are a bit hokey in the first couple of seasons, and it sends up teen/pop culture, you can slip into thinking that it's a lot less emotionally challenging than it actually is. And I'm not saying this to bash the show or single it out for particular criticism - as you can probably tell, I really really love it. But it's a good example of having themes that are really quite adult and best appreciated by older teens and above.

JustSpiro Sun 07-Oct-12 11:29:57

How on earth do people dream up these ideas!

That's what always plays on my mind rather than seeing the violence itself.

Wheresmy - I see where you're coming from now. When DD had to start going to breakfast club 1 term into Reception year I was a bit surprised to discover they were watching Scooby Doo DVD's - mainly because she had always been scared of it at home, and she is one of the oldest in the year!

Watching it with a group of other children soon cured her of that hmm.

EmBOOsa Sun 07-Oct-12 11:33:15

"I haven't read the whole thread, but I'm missing the part where OP has said she shows her children torture porn. Did she actually admit that?"

She said she would show them it if they asked. But she admitted to showing them a lot of TV shows that are much more adult than Buffy.

lljkk Sun 07-Oct-12 11:42:33

Problem is it's often only hours or days after they've seen something disturbing on TV that they get hit by it, and maybe hit hard. We've had lots of this with Dr. Who: they beg to watch it, they seem only a little nervous while it's on & soon after, but then we'll have several nights of "I can't sleep!!" complaints because they can't get the scary parts out of their minds. Sometimes weeks later the fears come out.

And I have no patience to deal with their issues because I'm just very grumpy at bedtimes.

I get fed up of having to say to DC "I don't care what stupidity other parents get up to, YOU aren't allowed to do/watch that." Would be nice if even just a few parents would get up to less stupidity.

Quietvoiceofreason Sun 07-Oct-12 11:49:25

Wow - I think a lot of posters need to revisit the 'Mumsnet's Talk Guidelines' and stop being so aggressive; whatever you're watching is clearly not having a good impact on you.
The suggestion that the OP is abusing or neglecting her children is ignorant and offensive and the idea that her choice of parenting style has caused a complex health disorder is abhorrent (I see that many of these posts were late last night and I hope that in the cold light of day and when the Saturday night vino has worn off you feel ashamed of yourselves). As many of the more rational voices on this thread have expressed there are a myriad of scary things out there from the 'Horror Porn' (which I'm surprised so many are experts in) to shadows in the corner of the nursery. Soap operas are packed with more disturbing and adult themes than Buffy et al deals with; constant story-lines of rape, murder, abuse, et cetra - yet many parents will allow their children to watch these unsupervised. Music videos can be very damaging (IMHO) to girls' self-image and yet we allow their heads to be pumped full of them. Shakespeare is packed with black-magic, rape, murder, sex and debauchery and yet is often taught at primary. SO lets all grow up and realise that we all hold different opinions on how to raise children and just because someone's is different to your's it does not make them a child abuser.
NoNoNora (OP) - keep doing what you're doing and if it's done with love you'll not be going far wrong.

AgentZigzag Sun 07-Oct-12 11:52:53

My DD used to go to school with at least two children whose parents had the same distorted thinking as you OP, and intelligence and maturity weren't their defining features.

Saying their behaviour was disturbing would be an understatement.

Sorry I can't find who said it, but I agree it's similar to showing children graphic violence to groom them into being desensitised to their impending abuse (and I'm not talking about Buffy).

You taking what your children see so lightly is sinister, it's as though you're having a teenage strop against the safeguards put there for your children's benefit regardless of the risks to them.

The safeguards are there to protect children from parents like you.

Condemning another parent doesn't make me feel comfortable, but you and your husbands crusade against the big brother state is worryingly misplaced.

Fairenuff Sun 07-Oct-12 12:01:06

Quiet I would agree with your points about all the various images in the media and the potential harm to children exposed to them. However, I think you are missing the point.

OP does not censor her childrens' viewing. She will allow them to watch whatever they like and when (or indeed if) they show signs of distress, she will take measures to protect them.

Posters are pointing out that this is too late. The censoring is important to protect children from those images in the first place.

The fact that her daughter has a mental health issue has only been mentioned because OP herself insisted that it was perfectly harmless and could have no emotional impact on the children. Her dd's eating disorder could be as a result of emotional damage at a young age but OP does not seem to be able to understand this.

OP has said that she would let her 6 and 10 year old watch torture porn. This is abuse and/or neglect. By law.

In view of this, do you still think this is good advice:

NoNoNora (OP) - keep doing what you're doing and if it's done with love you'll not be going far wrong

AgentZigzag Sun 07-Oct-12 12:09:10

Calling posters ignorant and offensive for telling the truth is ignorant and offensive Quietvoice.

I've just posted so not a drop of vino in sight, and I can't see any reason for posters to be ashamed of telling the OP she's wrong when she is.

Children being naturally worried about what's under the bed in the dark, Shakespeare and music videos are a world away from saying you'd let children watch the film Saw, and if you'd ever seen any of the series of films, you'd agree.

Have you seen it Quietvoice? Would you show it to your 10 YO child if they asked?

I want to believe the OP hasn't seen it, because that's the only valid reason anyone could have for arguing the toss about letting a child see such revolting images.

CookingFunt Sun 07-Oct-12 12:13:23

You say your children are desensitized like its a good thing OP. Do you honestly not realise the damage you have already done?

GhouliaYelps Sun 07-Oct-12 12:13:57

Sitting down to "The Human Centepede" as a family. Hmm
"Dad why is he pooing in that Woman's mouth?"
"Ah great I know let's spark a discussion about scat play" I really live how these movies generate debate for our family!

yousankmybattleship Sun 07-Oct-12 12:15:58

Quietvoice I have said that I think the OP's parenting is dangerous and irresponsible and I haven't posted anything under the influence of alcohol. It is ignorant and insulting of you to suggest that genuinely held opinions are just drunken rants. I think your advice for her to carry on doing what she's doing is very poor advice.

Quietvoiceofreason Sun 07-Oct-12 12:17:58

Fairenuff - exposing children to 'torture porn' would be abuse but I think OP's point (which was made after a torrent of abuse and when she had been somewhat backed into a corner) was that, while she hasn't allowed her children to watch this, she believes that, rather than banning them from watching it, they should have a discussion about it and that the children would decide to censor themselves.
Keeping a child wrapped in cotton wool does not stop him hurting himself, allowing him to fall over in a relatively controlled environment, does.
So, yes, I stand by my advice.

Fairenuff Sun 07-Oct-12 12:20:39

Quiet children cannot censor themselves! That's the point. It is the parents' responsibility to keep them safe from harmful images.

How can a 6 year old know what porn is, or torture, or horror, or rape?

How can adults like you not understand this?

MrsWolowitz Sun 07-Oct-12 12:23:41

YABU. Of course you are!

Your DH sounds very immature and silly.

It is unacceptable and irresponsible to show your children upsetting, violent, graphic and/or sexual images.

I am 100% in agreement with the teacher and think your DH and you need to grow up and behave like responsible patents not careless babysitters.

AgentZigzag Sun 07-Oct-12 12:29:02

Message deleted by Mumsnet for breaking our Talk Guidelines. Replies may also be deleted.

Quietvoiceofreason Sun 07-Oct-12 12:30:35

Battleship, ZigZag, et al.
I respect and would defend to the hilt your right to have different parenting styles and opinions to my own.
Your attacks on her and those who support her are, however, unnecessary. If you genuinely feel that anyone is acting illegally (be it be abuse, neglect or grooming) then this should be reported to Mumsnet who would, I'm sure, report it to the relevant authorities and remove the thread. If, hover, you are simply saying that you disagree with people then that's great; that's what this forum is for but let's keep accusations of abuse, et cetra off the table.
Thanks all!

CookingFunt Sun 07-Oct-12 12:32:40

Quiet the children cannot censor themselves as they lack the emotional skills at ten and six regardless of intelligence.

jamdonut Sun 07-Oct-12 12:32:58

Several years ago,when DS2 was about 7 we watched Jurassic Park on video as a family. I thought he would love it as he loved dinosaurs, at the time. A few days later he admitted that it had left him petrified, but he said nothing at the time.
It left him unable to watch the BBC's walking with Dinosaurs whe that was on. He's 12 now. He still can't bring himself to watch Jurassic Park ever again. I feel really bad that I exposed him to something that left him traumatised.

MrsWolowitz Sun 07-Oct-12 12:35:41

Quiet showing children graphic violent and/or sexual images is piss poor parenting at best.

At worst it is neglectful and abusive.

Lets not pretend its not. It's not a matter of different styles if parenting. It is irresponsible and potentially damaging.

AgentZigzag Sun 07-Oct-12 12:37:27

If the OP let a 6 or 10 YO watch a film like Saw, it would be abusive Quietvoice.

Are you saying it would be alright for the OP to do that?

Have you seen the film?

Quiet who is ignorant here? There are child protection laws in place to stop people like OP being able to make stupid and dangerous decisions like discussing torture porn and whether or not they should watch it. FFS! I cannot believe that even requires spelling out!

<mind boggles>

HiHowAreYou Sun 07-Oct-12 12:40:34

Why not let your children be children OP? They'll be adults for so long, they can talk about the grown-up issues raised in these sorts of shows when they're 15, 21, and when they're 30, 40. You've got ages and ages for that sort of thing.

I just don't understand the need. The rush.

And if you're going to be patronising at least make sure you're well informed. Like those posters you're disagreeing with!

4ducks Sun 07-Oct-12 12:55:00

Again.....I doubt very much that the teacher's main concern was that of the op's children, although it is sad, op has demonstrated that this is how she chooses to parent. The teacher called because she was concerned for the other children under her care imo.

Never mind the pictures on the card what about the trading and almost gambling that goes on with these cards. It's not the harmless game people think it is!!!! Kids loose valuable cards, are bullied or forced to hand them over, they r ripped off during "swapsies" . Ban them altogether .

BoneyBackJefferson Sun 07-Oct-12 13:38:53


Whether or not posters on this thread are "ignorant" is one thing but the OP is removing parenting choices from other parents.

It starts like this and ends up with movies on mobile phones.

Would you want your child to be subjected to the human catapilar on an iphone because the OP had had a discussion with her child and it was ok with her?

TheBigJessie Sun 07-Oct-12 13:47:59


You are very "desensitised" yourself. If you like horror so much, borrow a couple of history books from the library and find out what that word really means.

For the record, my mother let me watch 18 rated horror films when I was under 10. I would be okay while I was watching because my mother was there. I trouble with nightmares nights and weeks later, though.

Nanny0gg Sun 07-Oct-12 13:56:44

Out of curiosity, OP, what do you're RL life friends think of your choices?

EasilyBored Sun 07-Oct-12 14:02:53

I don't know if I'm being naive or even PFB but I don't want DS to even knowfms like the himan centipede exists, for as long as possible. I do not beleive it's possible for a 10 year old to fully understand what is wrong with that film, or to understand properly what is going on. They're children. They don't need to see shit like that.

As for Buffy; I'm a huge fan, but I still wouldn't want DS watching it till he's at least on his early teens. Some of it is quite frightening, and there are some verydark episodes.

catwomanlikesmeatballs Sun 07-Oct-12 14:03:26

We used to watch Buffy every week as a family when I was a younger, my youngest siblings would have been 4/5 at the time. My parents were very strict on programmes that could have a negative influence, Buffy's a family show and it has very positive messages of courage, fighting evil, protecting innocent people and female equality. The teacher is an idiot and I'm shocked at how many people are in agreement with her.

Ignore the loonies, some people will look for inappropriateness in anything, tell the teacher that you know better than she does, if she wants to raise children in a prissy bubble that would make Mary Whitehouse proud, she is entitled to breed, you'll raise your kids for the 21 century.

Don't give in, I had a teacher as a kid who tried to raise hell because I had written a story in class about my parents taking me to a gay rights march. My parents were accused of exposing us to the evils of sodomy and sin... the usual nonsense. My father charged in and told her that she could do whatever she likes with her own but he would raise us properly and to mind her own narrow minded business.

You are the parent here, you're in the right, stick up for yourself and continue raising your children in an open manner. They'll be much better, braver, nicer and happier people for it.

EasilyBored Sun 07-Oct-12 14:10:06

Letting your child watch 18 rated films is now the same at taking them on a gay rights march?

That is priceless.

And kot wanting your child exposed to the themes in horror films, and the grim images, does not make me 'living in a prissy bubble'. How fucking rude.

Dominodonkey Sun 07-Oct-12 14:10:20

cat 'family' shows do not have eyes gouged out, rape, murder and demonic possession.

AgentZigzag Sun 07-Oct-12 14:11:34

You are not being naive or PFB EasilyBored.

I'm not a loon looking for offence, and I don't have prissy children catwoman.

Young children watching graphic violence (and the OP isn't just talking about Buffy) won't make them into better, braver, nicer or happier adults.

Do you let your young children watch violent adult films?

SaskiaRembrandtWasFramed Sun 07-Oct-12 14:15:56

OP - you do realise that parents like you and your DH actually play into the hands of those who campaign for more censorship? Any day now, one of them will stumble across this thread and use it as more evidence for why adult viewing should be more tightly restricted.

You are also deeply unpopular amongst film makers because if they wish to make a film for mainstream release, they have to consider not just their target audience, but also the naive and neglectful who are willing to let 10 year olds watch material that is totally unsuitable for them.

You are not unreasonable to let your child watch some episodes of Buffy, but suggesting that you'd let your child watch Hostel, Saw etc. suggests you either haven't seen these films, or are so busy trying to be the cool kids that you've forgotten you are first and foremost parents.

CookingFunt Sun 07-Oct-12 14:16:11

They cannot be braver,nicer,better or anything that requires depth of emotion because by the op's own admission she has rid them of it and is proud of that fact.

yousankmybattleship Sun 07-Oct-12 14:18:48

Yes, catwoman watching graphic violence for no other reason than to support some half baked anti censorship ideal is exactly the same as taking children on a gay rights march. <Raises eyes to heaven>.

Oh and my children are not in the least "prissy" because I have ommited to expose them to violence and porn.

I'm with your DD' s teacher, your parenting sounds misguided.

BoneyBackJefferson Sun 07-Oct-12 14:22:01


The TV version of buffy (as has been stysted several times) was heavily edited. If the OP wants to bring her children up this way then fine, be she should not be taking away the choices of other parents.

Fairenuff Sun 07-Oct-12 14:23:24

Hmm, although these parents are in a minority, there are clearly quite a few of them out there. It does explain some of the sick things that happen in our world.

Some adults think it is their 'right' as a parent to expose their children to graphic images of violence. There is no way to protect children in those environments and presumably they will parent their own children the same way.

These parents are not willing, or perhaps are unable, to open their minds to the possibility that it could be damaging. After all, there has been plenty of research on this subject and information is easy to find if you look for it.

OP (and others with the same opinion) why not ask someone like Childline, Oxfam, Save the Children, etc. whether they think it is appropriate to let a 6 or 10 year old watch images of human torture and see what they say. Don't take our word for it, find out for yourselves.

Fakebook Sun 07-Oct-12 14:29:06

I watched films like Nightmare on Elm Street and The Poltergeist with my brothers and sister when I was younger, probably aged 4 or 5. They were all much older than me so I had easy access. I was absolutely terrified of Freddy Kruger, and still am to this day, so I don't believe you get desensitised to gore. I do however love horror films like The Ring or The Grudge.

FWIW, I turned out ok even though I'd seen quite a few horror films before I was 18. I have also watched The Human Centipede (everyone was talking about it at work, so decided to see what it was about). I thought it was absolutely disgusting and really shocked that someone could have such a warped mind to fathom such a story/concept.

youarewinning Sun 07-Oct-12 14:32:19

My DS (8yo) watches The Big Bang Theory and recently the Red Dwarf countdown which was on Dave during the day. He aldi watches Top Gear. I was surprised to find some BBT and Red Dwarf are rated 15 on the DVDs. I'm sure some of the TG ones are too.

For this reason I wouldn't allow him to watch it with friends over but would be annoyed if the school told me he shouldn't be watching it. He has TG trump cards and has had them for years.

I am just as surprised that Buffy is also a 15 as its on at 6pm. Im not convinced its any worse than Dr Who - which incidentally scares DS!!!

SecretCermonials Sun 07-Oct-12 14:47:05

I was allowed to watch (with an older friend) nightmare on elm street, the chucky doll (childsplay?)films, IT (about the clown) and jaws all at age 5-6. The nightmare on elm street films and "freddys nightmares" the tv series, i was allowed to Watch much like my own DS watches roary! As a parent i find my own mothers choices in this matter absolutely lazy and bloody ridiculous.

At the time child's play scared me so much I couldn't have any dolls anywhere near me, and the IT film instilled a lifelong fear of clowns. im with seeley booth on clowns, shoot the feckers!

Nightmare on elm street was ok until i suddenly realised what it was about, then had violent nightmares for months. Jaws I only watched once so I dont think it affected me as much, and I do have to confess its one of my favourites as an adult.

I do think my mum was a bit of a twat about it given the nature of the films, however that said I wouldnt stop my own child watching jurrassic park when he is a bit older / shows an interest as i feel that is natural history, murder based horror films are entirely unnatural and therefore reserved for adulthood.
I still get the creeps when i hear "one two freddys coming for you" sad

I think in the OPs case it depends exactly what the children are permitted to view and with whom. I do agree that things are rated for a reason. DS is almost three I would let him watch jurrassic park but not jaws, and i can safely say films like
The ring, and the human centipede, hostel etc (true gory horror) I wouldnt let him watch until late teens as they genuinely scared me! Its about the levels of violence and understanding!

For example DP and I settled down to watch "legend" which is a PG film from our yoof with tom cruise about unicorns etc, as it was a pg and we both thought we remembered the plot we let DS start to watch... Thankfully he fell asleep! The plot is darker than either of us remembered and the main baddys helper BLIX (google him) is one scary fecker!! Just hows how we remember things!

As for taking material / items relating to a home experience to school Id be a bit pissed off if my child was shown something I considered inappropriate as my child may be more sensitive than the OPs, and shouldn't be at risk of exposure to materials I may not agree with in a safe environment, it shouldnt be something I as a parent have to worry about, so I think the teacher was not at all unreasonable.

The Buffy that is on at 6pm is heavily edited to make it suitable pre-watershed. The DVDs are not edited and have a higher rating.

EasilyBored Sun 07-Oct-12 14:54:01

If you let your children watch violent horror films, or other adult material, how do you explain it?I mean; there is so much on the news at the minute - violence in the middle east, missing children, governments being prosecuted for torture - how do you explain all the goings on in the world, and how wrong they are, but then 'oh, but it's OK to watch similar fictional events for entertainment'? It just doesn't make sense to me.

fuzzpig Sun 07-Oct-12 14:58:54

I was allowed to watch anything at all, allowed to stay up late, had no routine at all. Can't comment for anyone else, but in my case it was just a symptom of the fact that my parents never saw me as a child, a person who has different needs to an adult. That has damaged me irreparably.

MrsWolowitz Sun 07-Oct-12 15:08:41

Catwonan wow. Just wow. You sound incredibly naive and immature.

Fakebook Sun 07-Oct-12 15:09:49

secretceremonials I still get creeped out by the "one two freddys coming for you" tune. I hate singing one two buckle my shoe to dd.

DelhiCalling Sun 07-Oct-12 15:20:51

Yabu. You sound ridiculous and are stealing your children's innocence with these films, as well as other parents kids.

I don't know what human centipede is, I wouldn't watch any of these horrible sounding films and I'm an adult.

BoneyBackJefferson Sun 07-Oct-12 15:23:50

Very seriously. Do not google it, you are better off not knowing.

DelhiCalling Sun 07-Oct-12 15:25:39

Boney, I just did. I feel sick, it is appalling.it terrifies me that films like this could exist, I think I'll move myself and kids to a remote island sad

Op yabvvvu.

EmBOOsa Sun 07-Oct-12 15:26:09

For those saying "Buffy isn't that bad" RTFT. Buffy is just one of the shows this OP feels is appropriate viewing for a 10 year old. In fact the OP has said herself that there is basically no TV show/film that she wouldn't allow them to watch if they asked.

BitOutOfPractice Sun 07-Oct-12 15:27:44

My nearly 13 yo year 8 dd came rushing in last week all excited that Madagasgar 3 is out soon.

Am I doing something wrong? blush

SecretCermonials Sun 07-Oct-12 15:29:03

Fakebook glad it isnt just me!

DelhiCalling Sun 07-Oct-12 15:31:13

Bit - no you're doing great - I was excited when toy story three came out and I'm much older than 13 smile

"... im with seeley booth on clowns, shoot the feckers! "

" I was allowed to watch anything at all, allowed to stay up late, had no routine at all. Can't comment for anyone else, but in my case it was just a symptom of the fact that my parents never saw me as a child, a person who has different needs to an adult. That has damaged me irreparably."
sad I think that is a very good point, fuzzpig. It does bother me that the OP believes that 6 and 10 year olds are competent to have a dialogue about, and request to see, media that many adults would find challenging (Saw, Hostel etc.). As if they are adults, albeit miniature ones. Children do have different needs. It is not in their interests to be desensitised to violence/perversity, and I hope the OP can rethink her approach to this matter.

Fairyjen Sun 07-Oct-12 15:45:00

I was horror struck at toy story 3 when they were in furnace. Tears and everything. I was 26 yrs old at time!!

CookingFunt Sun 07-Oct-12 15:45:48

Bit my DD is ten and has been looking forward to *Good luck Charlie so if that makes her prissy that's fine. I don't see why prostitution or peep shows need any place in her knowledge at ten.

CookingFunt Sun 07-Oct-12 15:47:34

Sorry not a dig at Bit, I was agreeing with you.

Fakebook Sun 07-Oct-12 15:58:05

bit forget your 13 year old, I'm excited about Madagascar 3 too blush (I'm a grown woman)

Asmywhimsytakesme Sun 07-Oct-12 16:17:10

Right so this explains how my contemporaries were talking about really graphic horror at primary school.

You really are a foolish mother op sad

Fishwife1949 Sun 07-Oct-12 16:28:48

Message deleted by Mumsnet for breaking our Talk Guidelines. Replies may also be deleted.

Fishwife1949 Sun 07-Oct-12 16:33:13

fuzzpig thats soooooo touching thanks for sharing

catsrus Sun 07-Oct-12 16:52:03

people are responding to the OP as though she was leaving a pile of horror/porn DVDs next to a TV in her child's bedroom and closing the door confused

She's made it clear that her children watch TV in a family area, that the amount of TV they watch is restricted and that anything beyond "normal family viewing" that they want to watch would be talked about first. She has said that theoretically there is nothing she would stop them watching but it would be under her close supervision. That's a theoretical stance based on what she has already said about detailed discussions with her dcs first. I would expect a responsible parent to steer the dcs away from some of the films mentioned, but I suspect, like a lot of us on here, the OP is not fully aware of just how horrific some of these films are. I would expect a responsible parent to do a bit of research on this and steer the dcs accordingly. The OP seems to me to be a responsible parent trying to educate her dcs to make choices about what is appropriate for them and not just dictating to them.

The reality is that if they want to watch a horror/porn film then there is always someone's older sibling who is able to get it for them. By talking to the children and giving them sensible views on why something might not be age appropriate (or even appropriate for any age!) then you are giving them agency in their own lives and they are more likely to decline any invitations to watch.

Fishwife1949 Sun 07-Oct-12 16:57:52

Thats is not what op said At all you might want to re read the post

BoneyBackJefferson Sun 07-Oct-12 17:43:03


That may well be what the OP is putting forward but what some of us are saying is that the teacher is responsible for 25+ children whose parents may not want their children to find out about Saw, The human catapilar, buffy, Angel and firefly.

The OP may not like her choices questioned but (as has been said upthread) she is also taking choices away from other parents.

Just as an FYI I had to get parental permission to show the last five minutes of the last episode of Blackadder goes forth to secondary school children for rememberance day.

And yes there where several parents who said no.

EmBOOsa Sun 07-Oct-12 18:01:31

"and that anything beyond "normal family viewing" that they want to watch would be talked about first"

Actually she said "torture porn" would be talked about first, things that are beyond "normal family viewing" are already being watched.

BasicallySFB Sun 07-Oct-12 18:03:54

I guess - like most posters - I think it's really not good parenting to expose children as young as OP's to scenes of rape (in Buffy) and prostitution (Firefly and Carnivale), both of which OP has explicitly said her children watch/have watch. 'Torture porn' aside (and I accept OP is saying she hasn't yet had a conversation where her SC have asked to watch films like that) - scenes of rape and prostitution are ok for kids? Really?

Floggingmolly Sun 07-Oct-12 18:09:13

they've been desensitised. And you seem to think this is a good thing? hmm

It's a pity the OP hasn't come back, I would really like to hear what she thinks about so many of us disagreeing with her when she had pretty much assumed that we would agree.

Oddly enough, her not coming back has made me think about another current thread where many MNers have mentioned that they feel differently, or at least better informed, about some topics since coming to MN; through hearing other viewpoints that they weren't exposed to in their real lives. Perhaps NoNoNora will ponder this matter over the next few days, having heard opinions other than her husband's; I hope so.

EmBOOsa Sun 07-Oct-12 18:25:00

"I would really like to hear what she thinks about so many of us disagreeing with her when she had pretty much assumed that we would agree."

Apparently us disagreeing with her just proves to her she is right hmm

MrsWolowitz Sun 07-Oct-12 18:31:47

EmBOOsa I agree. I bet the OP will not take advice and critisim on board.

We are obviously all fascists with Molly-coddled naive kids. hmm I rarely feel this way but I actually do feel genuinely sorry and concerned for the OPs kids. They need protection and guidance which they clearly aren't getting sad

MrsWolowitz Sun 07-Oct-12 18:32:30

Excuse the typos - I'm on my phone!

That's the difference between me and the OP, I'm happy that by 5 and 9 year old are still a bit molly-coddled and naive.

Real life imposes on childhood soon enough - I was a bit upset the other day when I had to explain to my 9 year old why our train was delayed due to a person under a train further along the track.

MrsWolowitz Sun 07-Oct-12 19:03:13

Chazs I agree. I'm in no rush to take my children's innocence and naivity away from them. Theres plenty of horrid, evil activity in the world, I'm sure they'll become aware of it all too soon however, its my job as parent to protect them from it as much as reasonable and possible.

Showing them violence/porn is unreasonable and irresponsible (Yes OP, even if you're having a discussion throughout!)

I can just imagine a family viewing of Saw: "mummy, why is that woman with a cage on her head cutting open that man who is screaming?"
"Well dear, he has a key in his guts and if she doesn't get it, her head will be ripped in half"

Nice hmm

Strawhatpirate Sun 07-Oct-12 19:57:08

I've just googled a serbian film and I feel physicaly sick

FryOneGhoulishGhostlyManic Sun 07-Oct-12 19:57:09

catsrus I can see that you have read the OP as a mother who is discussing programmes with her children, but she has argued that she and her DH consider their children intelligent and mature enough to be able to deal with the themes and especially the visual imagery in what I would consider programmes unsuitable for family viewing.

While her children may be intellectually intelligent, I would bet a hefty amount that their emotional intelligence is nowhere near the level she thinks it is, and that they are on a par with the other children in their classes.

Other posters, especially those who work in areas associated with child protection have expressed concern that in allowing the children to see these programmes that the children have already been harmed.

The fact that so many posters have expressed concern would normally get an OP to at least consider their point of view may need to be re-visited but not, apparently, this OP.

She has chosen not to take on board comments and opinions (and people citing research) about children's emotional well-being and that exposing children to unsuitable material can harm their emotional development. The OP is an adult; her brain has finished developing and she can make those adult decisions herself about suitable viewing. Her children are still developing and there are legitimate concerns that any unsuitable material now can de-sensitise them and cause mental health issues later.

My DD is 12 years old. I know her friends and quite a few of her classmates well enough to know that while DD is intelligent, she, her friends and her classmates are nowhere near mature enough to watch the likes of Carnivale, Firefly or the later seasons of Buffy; they are 12 years old, and the rating system is designed to protect children. I prefer to err on the side of caution as talking and discussing the themes in programmes in no way prepares children for the actuality of seeing those programmes bringing those themes graphically to life. I have ignored ratings on a few occasions but only when I have pre-watched the programme concerned and guaged the content.

This is NOT censorship; this is protecting my children. After all they'll have many years ahead to catch up TV if they want.

Fairyjen Sun 07-Oct-12 20:51:24

Seriously please do NOT be tempted to google Serbian film plot. My dp couldn't even read till the end. I'm not just postering here it is the sickest thing I have ever read. It makes human centipead look like a Disney film!


MrsWolowitz Sun 07-Oct-12 20:58:23

Fairy It really upset me sad Who thinks up this stuff and who wants to watch that crap?

I really think there must be something wrong with anyone whos mind came come up with a plot like that? Newborn rape? Shagging a headless body or your own son? FFS. Theres some sick people out there. angry angry

Entertainment my ass hmm

My BIL told me about it months ago and I still feel physically sick. I literally have to stop myself from thinking about it.

You will NEVER see/read about anything as disturbing. Never.

How whoever filmed it could even dream up something like that I don't know. I'm actually really upset now thinking about it again.

Fairyjen Sun 07-Oct-12 21:00:23

I just don't get it either. Worse than that, there were still images from the film on the review I read including of the newborn scene. Feel like bleaching my eyes!

DoMeDon Sun 07-Oct-12 21:02:48

I wish I had brain bleach for TSF description I read - truly disturbing. The people involved need serious help and should be locked up IMHO.

candr Sun 07-Oct-12 21:03:06

OP, are you any closer to maybe reconsidering your standpoint on this? You must by now see that your idea of healthy viewing is somewhat distorted and you and your DH need to sit down and make some sensible rules about viewing guidlines - if you actually give a damn about your childrens well being. They need you to do this!

Fairyjen Sun 07-Oct-12 21:05:11

OP maybe you SHOULD read plot to Serbian film. Might open your eyes a bit, that way you can discuss it with you dc?

Fairyjen Sun 07-Oct-12 21:05:52

(am joking btw)

FryOneGhoulishGhostlyManic Sun 07-Oct-12 21:06:22

It's just occured to me that in actuality the OP is abdicating her responsibility to her children.

By stating that she would allow them to see things that have a high rating, if they convince her by discussion, she is putting the onus on them to be sensible about what they watch, rather than actually being a parent and making that decision herself.

MrsWolowitz Sun 07-Oct-12 21:06:54

Absolutely Candr

This thread has actually got me mad. Honestly, the lack of common sense and responsibility on behalf of the OP and her DH (fascists FFS hmm ) is infuriating.

DeWe Sun 07-Oct-12 21:14:15

When I've done child protection in various (voluntary) roles, one thing that has always been an example is a child talking about things they watch which are inappropriate for their age.

anonacfr Sun 07-Oct-12 23:03:13

What is the point of showing a 6 and a 10 year old shows like Buffy anyway? Aside from being exposed to graphic violence (the OP was clear that she was showing them the DVDs rather than the TV version) most of the storylines and the character relationship would go over their head anyway.

What strikes me here is the amount of TV being watched. The OP states that her girls watch one hour each and then 'something' in the evening every day.
That seems an awful lot for children that age.
If they want to expose the kids to positive female role models and discuss 'themes' as a family, how about reading? There are plenty of great girl role models in kiddie literature.

TBH it feels like the parents want to watch what they want to watch and the kids happen to be around. For the record I love Buffy, Angel and Firefly. No way in hell would I let my 6 year old watch it.

EmBOOsa Mon 08-Oct-12 00:33:52

"By stating that she would allow them to see things that have a high rating, if they convince her by discussion, she is putting the onus on them to be sensible about what they watch, rather than actually being a parent and making that decision herself."


Strawhatpirate Mon 08-Oct-12 01:29:19

I stupidly did google that awful film and it makes me think that some things should be censored from everyone. Not just dcs but everyone, because one day the op will go to far and show her poor dds something that will scar them for life (if it hasn't happened alredy). You really can't unsee things. I've been shaky and weepy all night and all I did was read the plot line of that film! And I'm 26 ffs could you imagine what that would do to a child!

SomersetONeil Mon 08-Oct-12 01:55:25

Do not google!!

The human centipede came up on a thread a few months ago when a Mother was shocked to learn her 12 year old had watched it at a sleep-over. I googled it and was so shaken by it for months aftrwards. I won't be making the same mistake again. Ignorance truly is bliss.

I remember watching a Clockwork Orange when I was 17 and been utterly disturbed by it. I was with friends and basically had to watch the floor for the entire movie because it was too awful. I remember running thriuts through my head so a to block out the words being spoken. Up until that point I was unaware of the realities of gang-rape and gratuitous violence. What a waste of my childhood that I hadn't been exposed to either so much sooner hmm - I mean, it's not as if I haven't had the rest of my life to become acquainted with the themes...

I remember being about 15 or 16 and learning all about Stairway to Heaven being played backwards and the alleged Satanic messages in it. I found bed-time a complete and utter ordeal for months and months afterwards. I dreaded being alone in the dark with my thoughts. sad I kept thinking the devil was going to come for me. And I was a teenager as well...!

The reality is - unless you're a member of the Taliban, Nazi Party or a Communist, then it's pretty much a given that you're pro-free speech and wouldn't live anywhere other than in a democracy. But to prioritise that - something we all cherish and is in no genuine danger of being erdoed anyway - over the welfare of our own children is warped.

Given that 'intelligence' and 'maturity' are attributes applicable to both - give me a cossetted child with emotional intelligence over a de-sensitised one any day of the week.

Op is basically normalizing all kids of abuse to her children.

Even the "romantic" storylines of Buffy (I have seen all episodes, I am a great fan) has an emphasis of possible betrayal. Betrayal of trust, betrayal of friendship, betrayal of your love interest. Even worse,violence. The story line with Spike and Buffy, where the sex is explicit and bordering on SM, they kiss, punch, bite and shag. Buffy seem especially attracted to the coldness of Spike, his lack of emotion and empathy. When Willow is with Oz, even she is scared of what he might do to her when he turns into a werewolf.

On a more chilling level, the twists of reality, and how you perceive it.

The story line where Buffys mum gets cancer, and Buffy works her socks off in a burger joint. Buffys mum dies and she has to cope on her own. Highschool, slaying vampires, work to pay bills. And suddenly Buffys mum reappears, and Buffy is so glad to have her mum she does not really question it.
When Buffy one morning wakes up and finds she has a younger sister suddenly living there. Her mum does not understand Buffys surprise, it has always been the three of them!

As a grown up, or an older teen, you can see it for what it is. A gory teen soap with unrealistic fantastic story lines. Children dont have the same ability to question critically.

My sons would be scarred for life if they were to watch the human centipede. I saw a youtube clip. The very concept is sickening. I am against censorship, but some films really take the biscuit.

I think my question, and possibly the teacher, or a social worker might wonder why this couple wants their children desensitized to violence. Why normalize it? Unless it is deliberate? To show their children that THIS is what reality for most people is like? Punches and kisses go hand in hand?

Fishwife1949 Mon 08-Oct-12 09:15:23

I am still reeling from my dister 40 trying to sneek in my son and hers into a 15 he got cold feet and rang me ftom the cinema loo

He is 12 ffs

She has been told she wont be taking him out again

Fairyjen Mon 08-Oct-12 09:38:52

straw I know what you mean I kept thinking bout plot to sf but with my dc in it!!!! Has really fucked me up I tell you

ithinkimightbegoingmad Mon 08-Oct-12 10:25:54

Please OP reconsider your views on this; MN is a real cross-section of people, it is not a bunch of similarly minded conservative parents at all.. Everyone is telling you it is not ok that your children watch age-inappropriate material

It is NOT a censorship/ ‘freedom of expression/speech’ issue…it is a child protection issue

That your dh called the school fascists, speaks volumes IMO

HiHowAreYou Mon 08-Oct-12 14:37:57

When people were mentioning The Serbian Film, I thought they meant Irreversible (which I haven't seen but I remembered some friends being upset by it and they'd told me the plot summary).
I Googled to check if I was remembering what it was about and realised it was a different film.

I would seriously recommend people not Google TSF. I wanted to ask DH if he'd heard of it but I can't because there's no way I'd want to put that into someone's head if they didn't have to know it existed. Revolting.

ithinkimightbegoingmad Mon 08-Oct-12 15:17:42

it really is revolting isnt it hihow? like you havent sen it...just read review...that was too much already

I can only think that OP doesnt know what this film contains, to consider letting her dc watch it if they asked...she must be imagining that it is just a bog standard horror surely

HiHowAreYou Mon 08-Oct-12 15:55:16

The idea of a 7 year old watching it is just... a joke!

quoteunquote Mon 08-Oct-12 15:56:34

I have been sitting on my hands and reading this thread,

I do a lot of support work with teens and young people who are experiencing difficulties,

over the last 20 years I have been very interested in common denominators, the one thing that every single troubled youth that I have been involved with no matter what the background, is that they have all been exposed to footage that is rated higher than their age,at the time of watching, film, program, computer game,

I have never met a child in trouble that hadn't watched inappropriate images,I am known for asking other people who are involved with youth support what their clients experience are, I have yet to find anyone who when asked knows of any who have not been exposed,

not everyone who is exposed early to these type of images are going to have problems, but for so many reasons, those that do have problems will when asked tell you about watching or playing 18 rated, at an early age, will give you endless examples of what they saw at an early age.

anyone spoiling an innocent child's childhood by failure to protect,is stealing something non replaceable,

You get only one childhood, once it is over, it's over, no going back, and it is the foundation for your whole life, get it wrong and that impacts for ever.

It is the responsible adults that must do the right thing for every child, if you are unable to make the correct easy decisions for that child,such as those that have helpful guide lines such as ratings, please ask for help, there is plenty out there, you do not have the right to damage a child's peace of mind.

"I have never met a child in trouble that hadn't watched inappropriate images"

You know thinking back at my own childhood, I remember being invited for a "Film Birthday" at home at a boy in my class, I was 12. We were watching Amityville, Pet Cemetery, and Nightmare on Elmstreet.

I had been watching some 18 rated movies before, Superman for example. For some reason it was rated 18 in Norway, as was all the Bond movies.

But these films blew my mind. I was never scared of the dark, I had never considered zombies, or un-dead cats and dogs, ghosts or anything like this until that moment. I grew up with House on the Praire, ET, Astrid Lindgren tv programmes, reading Enid Blyton, etc. I can honestly say that the gruesome films mentioned above added no value to my life, rather the opposite. I am glad my parents had the sense to keep them from me.

I did not tell them what films I had seen, I did not want to put my class mate in trouble. However, he and his group of friends who were constantly watching movies such as this with very little parental control to their viewing, never "amounted to anything".
They were constantly getting into fights, started carrying knives, were excluded from school, one punched a teacher, and one threatened another teacher.

It may not be the films themselves having this influence, but growing up with parents who dont care about proper parenting, who teaches no boundaries, let the kids just get on with whatever.

youarewinning Mon 08-Oct-12 18:43:05

chaz thank you. I did not know that about editing and the DVDs. Is that the same for all programmes prewatershed with higher aged DVD ratings do you know?

FryOneGhoulishGhostlyManic Mon 08-Oct-12 19:41:27

I think there are a lot of programmes that get edited if shown pre-watershed. I like watching Stargate, saw it originally on Sky unedited and when it got to C4 at 6pm, they had made some cuts which ruined the plotline. May have been a little shocking but those scenes needed to be seen to understand the plot.

I remember meeting a girl during a placement who's depression and anorexia was thought to have been triggered by both cannabis use and viewing inappropriate films.

Fishwife1949 Mon 08-Oct-12 19:51:13

quoteunquote me too working with children in care one of the on going theams is lack of boundires and innaprotate viewing/ conversations

soverylucky Mon 08-Oct-12 19:55:22

All this crap about a "controlled way" and as a family is absolute tosh.

The op thinks she is being so liberal and so modern. That the rest of us are just a bunch of fuddy duddies with our aprons in a knot!

Why anyone would want to let their young children watch some of the things mentioned is beyond me. I am astounded that she would even consider some of the film titles mentioned.

Grow up OP and be the parent here. Parents are supposed to know better than their children. You have let your kids down. As a previous poster says - once your kids have seen this stuff - that's it. The innocence has gone for ever.

I am so cross reading this thread. You are what makes being a parent hard work. When anyone of us has a child that says "but so and so's mum lets him...." it's because of silly people like you!

Fishwife1949 Mon 08-Oct-12 19:58:36

Yeah i tell my son i dont care what so and so mums says there will always be some pratt who thinks there being hip with there kids

quoteunquote Mon 08-Oct-12 20:00:27

Thanks fishwife1949 honestly I since starting to ask some 20 years ago, have yet to find one that hasn't had high exposure to 18 plus images, I find it a very worrying.

Bunbaker Mon 08-Oct-12 20:00:56

"It may not be the films themselves having this influence, but growing up with parents who dont care about proper parenting, who teaches no boundaries, let the kids just get on with whatever."

I agree.

Claudiecat Mon 08-Oct-12 20:23:17

Have been lurking and reading the whole thread. I think the op would do well to read Toxic Childhood by Sue Palmer. She has a fair bit to say about children's inappropriate viewing habits.
I wish I could find the attitude of the op shocking bit I too encounter it and the effects it has on my pupils on a daily basis. It smacks to me of selfishness in the extreme. Why on earth children of that age are up watching post watershed stuff is beyond me. Seems to me the op wants 'adult' tv time but can't be bothered to put the children to bed.
Anyone else thinking op has gone suspiciously quiet??

I assume that is the case. Anything pre 9pm has to be suitable for children but DVDs can contain more adult material.

Nanny0gg Mon 08-Oct-12 21:23:09

Claudiecat I doubt she'll change her mind or her ways, so I expect she's tootled off.

I remember once, the number of Year 3 girls that said 'Pretty Woman' was their favourite film...

ithinkimightbegoingmad Mon 08-Oct-12 21:23:50

i think OP and her family watch too much tv, of any description! An hour each after school and then something in the evening?! confused

i also want to reiterate that film certification is not a censorship or freedom of speech issue, it is a child protection issue

OP has stated her reason for ignoring viewing age limits, is that her DH is passionate about censorship and freedom of speech hmm

really? a lawyer? <boggles>

anonacfr Mon 08-Oct-12 22:28:15

Yes, that's what I said as well. Seems like a hell of a lot of TV which is why I was wondering if it wasn't about the parents wanting to watch what they wanted, rather than letting their kids 'experience' mature TV in a controlled way.
You want to watch TV in a controlled way? Try turning it off.

A 6 year old should be watching Pixar and Miyazaki, not Buffy or Silent Witness.

Did you see BBC News today about restricting screen time for kids, due to damage to neurological pathways, and some such....

echt Tue 09-Oct-12 11:50:44

No, but I read the article in the Guardian which ended with...there is no causal link, but possibly an associated one.

Not the same thing at all.

anonacfr Tue 09-Oct-12 15:29:25

Yes, it's all inconclusive but it's common sense to realise that plonking a child in front of a screen for hours on end is not exactly going to be intellectually stimulating.

OP, you're just so far on the other side of wrong, I don't think right is even visible any more.

FWIW, my parents DID stick to ratings, pretty rigidly, and they knew I was (and still am) quite sensitive.

When I was in college, age 18, as part of A Level Media Studies, we had to watch Kill Bill, in order to do a comparison with another film as part of our coursework. I got through the first 40 minutes or so, which is what we were shown in the first lesson. I thought, "Hmm, bit gory for me, but I'm alright."

Later that evening I realized, actually I REALLY wasn't alright with watching it, and I looked up the plot online - it got a whole lot worse. The next day, I had a nice chat with the head of department, explained that I wasn't comfortable with the content, but I was worried about failing, or being seen as a bit of a wimp. You know what she said?

"LV, that's fine. We'd much rather you told us, than suffer. Different people process things differently, different people are scared by different things. It's fine, we can sort something out."

I really think you're setting your kids up for long term problems, by not controlling their viewing more.

exoticfruits Tue 09-Oct-12 19:24:30

Grow up OP and be the parent here.

And tell DP to stop being wet and trendy-listen to the teacher.

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now