Welcome to the International Emetophobia Society | The Web's Largest Meeting Place for People With Emetophobia.
Results 1 to 15 of 15
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    1,666

    Default



    Okay here's my theory. In the past, I don't know how many months, EVERY SINGLE RATED R HORROR MOVIE that I have SEEN IN THE THEATERS has had AT LEAST 1 kid under the age of 5 in there. The Hills Have Eyes, there was a kid who was probably less then two years old sitting behind me!


    Does anyone else see that STUPID PEOPLE are bringing their kids to these violent movies and then are surprised when they grow up and go out shooting or stealing or raping people? I can't BELIEVE people! I talked to one of the people with the 2 year old and they were like, "Oh he doesn't understand it" and I'm thinking, "He may not understand it but what he SEES is VIOLENCE and that's NOT GOOD" I didn't tell that to the man but I wanted to scream it at him.


    Does anyone else think this is a problem? Also I would like to mention that when I go to the high class theater that serves wine and beer and isn't in down town cleveland, I NEVER see little babies in rated R movies. I guess people think that it won't KILL their kids to shove blood and gore into their brains! If you CAN'T get a sitter then DON'T FREAKIN bring your KIDS to an R movie!


    Comments?


    ~Monica
    David Duchovny I want you to love me
    To kiss and to hug me, debrief and debug me
    David Duchovny I know you could love me
    I\'m sweet and I\'m cuddly-I\'m gonna kill Scully!

  2. #2
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    1,344

    Default



    I agree with the little kids in films concepts as a bad idea, because it can inconvenience people and I don't think its fair to expose them to really violent stuff.


    On the other hand, I don't think kids who see violence in films once or twice are more inclined to commit violent acts. I saw clockwork orange at a friend's house when I was something like 8 years old, and although I found intensely disturbing, it didn't fill me with any urges to run out and rape or attack people.


    I think it's a case of having violent personalities and films can't change a person's personality.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    England
    Posts
    1,852

    Default



    It's not just films, it's violent computer/play station games too. I also think other factors come into it like poor diet (eating junk food all the time with loads of additives and artificial stuff in has been seen to make a child hyperactive and more prone to bad behaviour) andlack of disipline in schools. Kids are also more spolit these days,a lotof them get what they want when they want it.


    I agree, it's true the underlying temperment and personality has to be there in the first place, not all kids who grow up watching and playing violent movies/games and eating the wrong foods will be a menace to society. It certainly doesn't help though. The terrible murder over here several years ago of an innocent toddler, Jamie Bulger, at the hands of two twelve year old boys, reported that the boys were obsessed with the Chuckiemovie Child's Play. What those two boys did to that poor wee lad are incomprehensible, they didn't just kill him but tortured him before hand. Now those murderers are out in society again with new identities, it doesn't bare thinking about. Don't even get me started on the softly-softly way criminals are treated in this country [img]smileys/smilies_07.gif[/img]- there really is no big deterrent to comitting crimes over here, and we wonder why it is on the increase.
    .•:*¨¨*:•.Tracey.•:*¨¨*:•.

    Fall seven times, stand up eight.
    - Japanese proverb


  4. #4
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    1,866

    Default



    Actually- deterrence doesn't work. It has been touted since the 1700's as the way to stop people from committing crime, and since it's inception has been an abysmal failure. Take the US for example- you would think that the states that still practice the death penalty would have lower crime rates than those who don't, because the citizens would be 'deterred' from committing crime because it may end in their deaths. WRONG- the death penalty states actually have higher crime rates- people aren't deterred from the penalty, because that is not what they think about when they are actually committing the crime. Crimes aren't necessarily rational.


    Detterence doesn't work- making the penalties harsher will likely lead to a rise in incarceration rates, but no real effect on the crime rate. If you really wanted to decrease the crime rate, you would have to start addressing some of the inequities and social conditionsin your country which make it prone to crime. That, and I am very suspect when I hear the media say "crime is on the rise"- because they can be talking about one 'specific' type of crime, be lumping breaches of parole conditions in with that, etc. Unless I saw the actual numbers, and how they were crunched, I would take declarations such as that with a grain of salt.


    As for the case of the two twelve year old boys in England- I am astounded at the public reaction. People are calling for vengeance, saying that they should never be allowed back in society, etc- when they were children themselves when this act was committed. I think that, that is as much of a tragedy.


    Something very similar to the Bulger case happened in the Netherlands at around the same time- two boys who were obsessed with this particular violent cartoon decided to 'practice' their moves on a little girl, and effectively killed her. Instead of the community calling for these boys' blood, they wanted to know what they could do and to offer support, because in their view, the tragedy wasn't just that a small child was killed, but that it was at the hands of other children. Their view was these children also need support, and help, as they now have to live for the rest of their lives knowing that they caused someone elses' death. Even the deceased child's mother didn't lay blame, call for these children to be incarcerated for life, etc- she was shocked and saddened by her child's murder, but said that it was an all around tragedy. Also, that as a mother she could sympathize with the children's parents, and what they must be feeling.


    But I digress......back to the original topic.


    As for violent media causing kids to become more violent- studies have been done repeatedly about this, and the results are always the same. There is some correlation between the two- however, as any good researcher will tell you, correlation does NOT equal causation. It could be a completely unrelated coincidence- or it could be that in order for video games/movies to be a factor, other circumstances must be present as well- unstable home life, history of emotional problems/mental illness, problems relating socially to others, etc.


    I think that violent movies/video gamesmay fan the fire IF IT IS ALREADY PRESENT- if there are already or are going to be circumstances which will make this child more likely to act out violently.BUT that, in general, it is pretty harmless, and will likely only result in the child having nightmares.


    I have been watching rated R horror movies with my grandmother since about 4 or 5; we would make an evening of it- make popcorn, I would get to stay up late.....I just had to cover my eyes for the sex scenes. I basically grew up with Night of the CReeps, Salem's Lot, A Nightmare on Elm Street, FRiday the 13th, etc. All it really did was make me want to study criminology, lol.


    *amber*

    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.



  5. #5
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    1,666

    Default



    Well I guess you are right Amber, cause I've been watching R horror movies since I was little too and the most violent thing I've done was kick a girls ass for talking crap about me, oh and I kicked a football players ass for putting gum in my hair. Although I have thought about strangling people I would never do it, but I'm sure everyone has had those thoughts about someone. I guess it's just my opinion that a 2 year old shouldn't be allowed in a rated R movie no matter how quiet and well behaved they are.


    ~Monica
    David Duchovny I want you to love me
    To kiss and to hug me, debrief and debug me
    David Duchovny I know you could love me
    I\'m sweet and I\'m cuddly-I\'m gonna kill Scully!

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    660

    Default

    Hi there!

    Monica, I do agree with you that really young children should not be allowed in R rated movies but not because of the violence and so forth. I've been to many movie theaters later at night and seen parents bringing in kids wearing pajamas. I actually saw one in just a diaper and t-shirt! They act like it's their own living room or something! Bringing children in because they WANT to see the movie is one thing, but too many parents drag their kids along when THEY want to see something and have no babysitter. I guess they figure they'll sleep or something (trust me, they DON'T!). I think there is no 2 year old alive that will tell their mom or dad that they really want to see a movie that doesn't have Blue's Clues or something in it.
    R rated movies are rated that way because they have situations in it that aren't suitable for children. Plus, they will not like and/or understand it. So why subject them to it???? To me it's not because of the violence or sex or anything, but what enjoyment will my child get from it?? Not much!
    I do let my son watch R rated movies--he LOVES action/military movies and many of them are rated R--but I'm not going to drag him to see the new "Texas Chainsaw Massacre" because only I want to see it. Edited by: christianne

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    England
    Posts
    1,852

    Default



    Amber we shall have to agree to disagree here. I've seenand read about criminals such as shoplifters andburglers who say they carry on doing it because they know even if they get caught they will probably only be given a warning, and that if thedeterrent was bigger they would stop. Andpeoplewho are given life in prison over here can be out after serving barely a decade. Life should mean life.


    The Jamie Bulger killers shouldn't ever be allowed back in society. True, they were only children themselves when they murdered, but at twelve years old kids know right from wrong. Why should they be given a second chance at normal life, will Jamie be given that chance, or his family whose lives were ruined and who will live with that pain for the rest of their days?Some of the things those twokillers did to the toddler were so disturbing much of it couldnot be reported in the media, and now they are out living in society, and who isto say they won't kill again.
    .•:*¨¨*:•.Tracey.•:*¨¨*:•.

    Fall seven times, stand up eight.
    - Japanese proverb


  8. #8
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    1,061

    Default


    Just to clarify a point here, the killers of Jamie Bulger were both 10 years old when they committed that horrific crime, and both were released back into society when they were 18. I think this is a very emotive issue, and one which I don't want to get drawn into. Both these boys came themselves from quite violent/dysfunctional backgrounds and though I can fully understand those who feel they should never be let back into society, most children aren't born evil and we need to place their crime in the context of their own upbringing. I have a 10 year old son and I don't think anyone can say that he should be punished in the same way as an adult, because he is just a child - sometimes he knows what he is doing is wrong but he just doesn't have the maturity of thought to realise the full consequences of his actions.

    Anyway, as I said, I don't want to get drawn into this as I can certainly see both sides, perhaps we need to accept that we all have different views here.

    Not sure what an R rated movie is, we have different classifications in the UK. However, if they are not suitable for kids, how on earth to they manage to get into the cinema? Isn't someone checking? There's just no way you could take a young kid into an adult film in the UK, you'd get stopped at the ticket desk.

    My view on whether films and games breed violence, I don't think so, for the majority of people. I saw a documentary here recently in which Ted Bundy blamed porn for his killings, but so many men enjoy pornography with no violent consequences. I think for a tiny minority, violence/horror/porn might trigger something, but on the whole I think there are no lasting bad effects.

    One view I have about violence in the US, and I know this might trigger (no pun intended!) a debate, is your gun laws. It may be naive of me, but if it wasn't so easy to buy guns out there or for kids to have access to their parents' weapons, then there might be fewer killings.

    As I said, I might be naive on this point, but it does seem way too easy to get your hands on something that can have extremely destructive and tragic consequences.
    Edited by: suze

  9. #9
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    1,344

    Default

    I have to echo everything Suze said, I think she's totally right.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    England
    Posts
    1,852

    Default



    My mistake I'msorry about that, but even at ten you know right from wrong especially if it is something so horrific. It is a sadfact that thousands of children are brought up in a violent/dysfunctional atmosphere, but how many do you hear of committing such evil acts? Children shouldn't be punished in the same way as adults but to let those boys out into society after just eight years doesn't seem right to me.


    That's the lastI'm saying on the matter as I can see this thread turning out like the argumentative ones from the recent past and none of us come here for that. This is a very emotive subject for me, but I respect your views andaccept we are all never going to see eye to eye all of the time.Edited by: tcsarah
    .•:*¨¨*:•.Tracey.•:*¨¨*:•.

    Fall seven times, stand up eight.
    - Japanese proverb


  11. #11
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    1,866

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tcsarah


    Amber we shall have to agree to disagree here. I've seenand read about criminals such as shoplifters andburglers who say they carry on doing it because they know even if they get caught they will probably only be given a warning, and that if thedeterrent was bigger they would stop. Andpeoplewho are given life in prison over here can be out after serving barely a decade. Life should mean life.


    I have to again disagree with you here about a few things. I can understand why certain things can make you think this way, and I used to think this way as well. In fact, I started studying criminology with the intent of going into law enforcement....but then after seeing the research that is being done, the historical analysis, and starting to conduct my own research, I have found a massive disconnect between what the public thinks is going on and their perceptions of crime and 'criminals', and what is actually happening/has happened.


    If you are talking about shiplifting and petty crime, then in some instances higher penalties may deter- however, a lot of this is also due higher penalties being done in conjunction with ‘target hardening’- which means putting things in place which make it harder to actually get away with the deviant act (deadbolts, surveillance cameras, etc).


    As an example, let’s take <st1:country-regi&#111;n w:st="&#111;n"><st1lace w:st="&#111;n">Canada</st1lace></st1:country-regi&#111;n>. Previously, shoplifters would get off with a slap on the wrist and a warning. Now, most stores automatically prosecute shoplifters- police automatically called, the person gets a record, etc. If anything, this further deters the people that wouldn't do it anyway- or that would do it once as a thrill or to see if they could, but now won't forfear of embarrassment,being charged, etc.Another factor which needs to be considered is the advent of security cameras and security personal working in larger stores, this also serves as a large deterrent, because it makes it more likely that the person is caught.


    What's left are the serious ones who have been doingthis for awhile and who A) don't think they are going to be caught because they are so good, or B) the people who do it on impulse, and/or who aren't thinking rationally about the penalty (or the factthat there is a camera in clear view directly above them). People who shoplift to get drugs/alcohol or while under the influence are also included in this group.


    With shoplifting as well-themajority of the loss in profitscomes fromemployee theft, not customer, and it is a lot harder to prove/discover. Employees know who goes on their breaks and when, where the security cameras are located, how inventory is taken, etc.


    As a side-note- do you know what has been shown to be in direct relationship with the reduction of crimes like shoplifting? An ageing population/decrease in youth. Most crimes are committed by 18-25 year olds; when there is a reduction in young people, there usually is a reduction in crime rates.


    <SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: black; FONT-FAMILY: Verdan

    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.



  12. #12
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    1,666

    Default



    Holy FUDGE!! I was just reading about the Jamie Bulger case, I found this long and very interesting article on it. Anyway, why/how would ten year old boys WANT to do this to a kid? WTF? They shouldn't be released! They should be locked up forever! If they are capeable of doing this AS LITTLE KIDS IMAGINE what they can do as adults!


    Also I want to add that I have shopliftedmore then a few times and was only caught once and never charged, they "Banned me for life" At the mall I did it at but since then I've been back to that mall like 1000 times. I have not stolen anything though since I was caught. I know people who shoplift and are good at it, and I'm not about to run off and tell anyone, yeah stealing is wrong but I mean from places like Target and Wal-mart? Who gives a fudge!


    Secondly, about guns being quick and impersonal. Now I will state that NO I WOULD NEVER KILL ANYONE, but my point is if youARE going to kill someone,wouldn't you want them to know who did it, why they were doing it, and whatever? There's really no point in killing someone if they don't know WHY they are being killed by you. Sorry I know that sounds horrible but that's how I feel about it. I don't get people who just shoot other people, it's stupid.


    ~MonicaEdited by: samara's on tv
    David Duchovny I want you to love me
    To kiss and to hug me, debrief and debug me
    David Duchovny I know you could love me
    I\'m sweet and I\'m cuddly-I\'m gonna kill Scully!

  13. #13
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    1,344

    Default

    Just one thought I had about Jamie Bulger's killers - What they did was horrific and terrible and nothing can undo it, but they were 10 at the time and I don't think these men deserve to be defined by one act they commited when they were children. I'm not the same person I was 8 years ago and I can't see that these boys are. They grew up in abusive families and anyone from a similar life situation will tell you that it warps your view of right and wrong.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Nova Scotia, Canada
    Posts
    1,969

    Default



    I agree that while these violent movies may not CAUSE violent behaviour... they do desensitize it. Anyone who sees violence every day, whether it be in movies, games, or in real life, may start to think that violence is a normal and acceptable way of lfe.


    I've read about the studies as well - how they are correlated but no one knows for sure what the cause is - it may be something entirely different, like the socioeconomical status of the parents ( maybe people who are poor orwealthy let their children watch more violent movies, etc).


    I think something that is different today then when we were kids is the amount of violence these kids see everyday. for us, it was a few movies - for them, its everywhere.


    Anyways, I think parents need to leave their kids at home. Its annoying trying to watch a movie with someones 3 year old kid with their hand in your popcorn or running around the theatre.. lol.
    ~*Jill*~ Teacher, Advanced BSc in Psychology

    "You can unlock any door as long as you have the right key". Mrs. Brisby, Secret of Nimh

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    1,563

    Default

    Absolutely.....regardless if it causes bad behavior or not...small kids should not be watching violent movies to start with.
    Kate
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


    \"I Wish I Was Still In Aruba\"

 

 

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •