Censorship and DD3's teacher... AIBU?

[NoNoNora]

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".

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.

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.

It's sorta pathetic don't you think?

"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

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.

'"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?'

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.

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.

Let's not forget either that James bulged was murdered by two boys who had been watching chucky. OP your a negligent parent

Pictish

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.

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.

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.

Fakebook

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.

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!

Oh, that's alright then

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.

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?

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!)

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.

Mmmmnotsure Apparantly not, others have had their posts deleted for such a suggestion. Keep your head down, HQ are watching

I've reported students who have seen that film, quad. At 11 it is far too young.