About graphic violence: The beheading scene in A MAN FOR ALL SEASONS (Starring Paul Scofield, SPOILERS)is perhaps one of the most powerful I have ever seen, but no blood is shown. In fact, this is the scene: an axe is raised in the air. Asit lowers, the screen goes black and you hear a thud, like an axe hitting wood. The camera doesn’t tilt down. The axe drops from midair, black screen, thud. You know what has happened. It is sudden and violent. But no blood. The head doesn’t roll across the ground with the eyes staring at the camera. Just a black screen and a thud. The speech right beforehand also makes it powerful.

No, actually a FAMILY comes from a Man and Woman who commit themselves to one another for life. They get married because they have carefully chosen a partner that has the kind of values and morals that they have, partners that will make good parents, and are most likely to be faithful and loving and selfless. Then this Married couple prepare their homes for children, making sure that they are stable and able to provide. When the children are born, this couple is even more bonded, and they commit themselves to raising children with character, principles and values. They teach these children self reliance and personal responsibility, and the clear difference between right and wrong.

THAT is where FAMILIES come from. Sex for Sex’s sake leads to diseases, unwanted pregnancies, poverty, crime, low self esteem, depression, and a good time for a few minutes.

Whenever I hear about the need for “reality” for teens, Such as the whole idea that Sex education should not include Abstinence, since that is just so “unrealistic”, I cringe. I cringe because I know that since the passage of Roe vs Wade, which was sold on the idea of PREVENTING “unwanted pregnancy” that the number of out of wedlock birth has increased more than FOUR TIMES what it was before that case of unconstitutional judicial activism. I cringe because I know that “reality” just means shoving the idea of sex with no consequences, of sex as a means for demonstrating “equality”, and sex as something everyone should be doing as early as possible and as often as possible, is what results. And that what REALLY happens is that there are LESS families out there as a result of that, and MORE single parents, MORE disenfranchised and depressed young people, MORE diseases, and MORE people who can never experience the joy of REAL sex in the context of committed and loving marriages.

I can’t trust the purveyors of the throwaway culture to provide my children with a useful portrayal of reality when it comes to sex, they have already shown that they have absolutely no scruples, no true values, and NO WISDOM. So I will have to oppose the idea of calling for more REALITY from them. I dont want it, nor need it, but more to the point, my kids are far better off without it.

You make a good point, and so does Ms. Flynn when she say’s, “If we don’t tailor realistic programming for preteens and teenagers, they will inevitably graduate to more adult programming too soon – and adult programs needn’t have any message at all, subtle, complex or otherwise.” Engaging our kids in programming that entertains and teaches in real life scenarios is necessary, but difficult. Showing them the dangers of illegal activities, sex, and such without glamorizing them is almost impossible. Most teenagers think their life is horrible because mom and dad don’t want to buy them a car. That kid may think the dangers exposed on the TV, no matter how lethal, are cool. We don’t know the mind of the individual. I knew a kid that grew up in a wealthy home that was trafficking guns in the bathrooms of one of the best public schools in Manhattan. He did it because of the thrill, maybe his parents didn’t want to buy him a car. I knew other kids who dealt with these dangers every day at home and they worked hard to remove themselves from them.

Picking subject matter and producing content for the broad audience is already a difficult process. Ideas are thrown out more often than produced, and even when produced they’re in constant change. I can’t count the amount of times I’ve seen whole scenes re-written by producers, directors, and actors during crew rehearsals, let alone private rehearsals and script readings. What I read on a set of sides is always subject to change, including story line and frequency of actors being included or excluded form scenes. You may tailor a show that seems perfect in it’s depiction of the real life effects of whatever, and by the time you watch the first set of dailies the whole thing is changed depending upon how the actor felt, or whoever. Real life is subjective, unfortunately, and I think too many people in the creative process have been given the power to alter things depending upon their “experience”. I worked on a show about drug trafficking and one of the cast (played a young thug, real nice kid) would make changes in certain parts of the story based on experience, but this kid was born into extreme wealth. Nice kid, but he had virtually no real “experience” with the streets.

Who are we trying to mold with the content that is being produced. I certainly don’t want my kids to become mindless and self indulgent. Nor do I want my kids to think illegal activities are cool. As a parent, I want my kids to know of the dangers without having to experience them first hand. They will in time but by that time it’s my responsibility to explain these things to them so they’d respond well. My hopes may be altered also. Who knows? Are we going to “experience” a change in the content of what we consume through media? I hope so. I’m not the only person working in this industry who wants persuasions to change.

One problem we face is that the human mind is never satisfied naturally. In movies, we’re so accustomed to more realistic disasters being produced with great special effects that, to a certain degree, we’ve lost the desire for normal. The bigger the bang the better, especially if a realistic amount of people were mangled in the process. I went to ground zero 5 weeks after the events took place as part of a relief effort. I had a rare look at the reality of disaster while searching for bodies in a huge hole in the ground where one of the towers once stood over a bookstore frequented by mommy’s and their young children. Real disaster is not cool. The “Anti-Hero”, as someone wrote, is the new cool and edgy character to be emulated, so he/she gets the role whenever possible. I worked on another show that had a character who cursed profusely, was a huge pervert, used drugs often, and used people to the point of destroying their souls. Everyone on the show said, “I love this character”, yet in real life if they knew this guy he wouldn’t be in their “my circle”.

I may not be making any point at all, but It’s obvious that we get what we want. I’m hoping that what we want can possibly change toward a better light. I have no power as a crew member to change the mind of the media mogul who authorizes funding for production. I’m dispensable, but some of you reading this thread have the authority to guide the process of elimination. I worked on a show that was going to be the next big thing. It showcased pornography, extortion, local government corruption, etc. as normal everyday things. The public showed their support and it tanked. No one but the producers thought of it as the next best thing.

How are you as a producer going to plan your next approach to entertain the public?

Decades ago, I recall reading an article in TV Guide, written by an emergency room doctor. The doctor said he often heard people complaining that television is too violent. He then proceeded to make the opposite argument: that television wasn’t NEARLY violent enough!

For example, back in the Seventies, how many times did we adolescent boys see Joe Mannix or Dave Starsky take a bullet? Dozens of times. But at the end of every episode, our hero was fit as a fiddle. Sure, he’d have his arm in a sling, but it was always “just a flesh wound,” and there’d be no sign of any injury in next week’s episode. There was never any heavy bleeding, never any screaming or crying, never any genuine pain, never any long term consequences.

Now, perhaps some parents thought that the absence of blood was a GOOD thing… but really, what was the lesson kids like me took away from a “Mannix” episode like that? Well, among other things, we learned that getting shot was really no big deal. That it was kinda cool, even.

Is that REALLY the lesson you want your kids to learn?

NOW let’s think about sex. A movie like “Pretty Woman” can appear on prime time television with practically nothing cut, because it has no nudity, no graphic sex, and no gore. A movie like “Boogie Nights” has plenty of all three. But which of those movies has a more objectionable message? I’d argue that “Pretty Woman” is a more morally repulsive movie, because it suggests that prostitution is a glamorous life in which you’ll get to shop on Rodeo Drive, stay at fancy hotels, and marry Donald Trump. “Boogoe Nights,” by contrast, shows BOTH why the sex industry is attractive AND why it’s destructive.

Now, I wouldn’t want an 8 year old watching EITHER film. But if a 16 year old was going to watch a movie about the sex trade, I’d rather he or she saw “Boogie Nights.”

And I THINK Maura Flynn is saying something similar. She’s NOT saying that 8 year olds should watch TV shows about teenage sluts smoking, screwing and having abortions. But she IS saying that, if a show aimed at teenagers is PURPORTING to “tell it like it is” and show what adolescent life in American suburbia is really like, it HAS to live up to that promise. SOMETIMES, that will require such a show to present kids doing ugly, disgusting or immoral things.

Remember, Jesus said “You must be as gentle as doves AND as sly as serpents.” We are not called upon to be IGNORANT of evil. Rather, we’re supposed to be able to look evil squarely in the eye and recognize it.

There’s a HUGE difference between saying “This movie or TV show is immoral” and saying “This is not for kids.” A PG movie can be far more morally corrupt than an NC-17 movie.

I’m just an on-call crew member that supports my family with an unstable career in show business. I have no say in the content of every film I work on, and I arrive to set early every day to do my job thoroughly, because I have to, whether I agree with it’s agenda or not. I recently had the opportunity to leave a couple shows early because of content. Fortunately I’ve made friends and there were other shows in production with open positions; not always so lucky. My kids are 5 and 3 and too young for most of the programming aired these days. My wife and I are still able to control much of the TV viewing in our home, but we know this control is inevitably in decline as the kids grow. I’d also like more realistic views of life produced for kids in every age, but I’d like to see goodness, integrity, respect, self restraint, loyalty, modesty, and the like portrayed as great values kids can live by and succeed with.

I have the good fortune to personally know the affect of alcohol, drugs and “Safe” sex on life. I’ve seen multiple marriages crumble, teens become parents or convicts, pre-teens murdered (or abused, becoming drug addicts), I’ve had a family member burned alive (bad drug deal), heard stories of old friends committing suicide, their parents going to prison or being murdered by friends or other family, one brother’s life threatened by friends, been a part of three abortions, two of which I was supposedly the cause of (asked her to marry me twice, once when it was mine, once when I wasn’t sure if it was mine; both times she said no and aborted) before the age of 20, and witnessed my mother abused. Guess what, my life was considered very tame and normal. I’ve spent all of my adult life climbing hurdles from the past that caused me many problems. I’ve done alright so far, but the majority of my peers have not.

Do you want your kids to be exposed to the same on prime time TV as being normal, every day life? Something that can’t be avoided? The effects of these things causes uncontrolled behavior, unpredictable harms, and unsafe living conditions. I’d like for my kids to think in terms far from these. I can’t shelter them completely because they’ll face these things at some point in life, and I want them to have enough of an understanding to respond well. But I do think that we have a responsibility to safeguard our children, and their peers (our future adults).

The “Bottom Line” really doesn’t increase with increased sexuality in the box office or digital transmission. The public is waiting for a fresh, clean agenda.

My first hand expression.

Look, I’m all for showing more realistic shows/moveis to young teens. I think “13″ should be viewed uncut to every child when they go to junior high. But what’s the difference between what I”m saying and what the author is saying? “13″ shows sluttyness, drug use, and going “bi” in clearly negative lights. It showed that once the character turned into what many libs and big “L” libertarians would call a “normal teen”, her life went to hell.

Besides, what’s wrong with shows like “The Cosby Show”, “Home Improvement”, “7th Heaven”, or even the corny “Saved By the Bell”?

Come on, Bob. We all know you wouldn’t recognize reason, intelligence, respect or tradition if you were hit over the head with them. Heaven knows I’ve tried often enough.