American cinephiles will soon be able to enjoy their movies without sex, violence, swearing - indeed, without any of the interesting bits.

Wal-Mart, the country's mightiest retailer, is preparing to ship a $79 DVD player that automatically strips out potentially offensive content.

The gadget, made by French-owned RCA, aims to tap into mounting concern in the US about media standards.

But the self-censoring technology has run into protests from Hollywood. By producing - without permission - altered versions of intellectual property, censors are effectively pirating directors' and studios' work, the lawsuit argues.

Clearplay hopes to escape through a loophole: instead of making new versions of films, it argues, its technology is simply another way of playing the existing movie - no more an abuse than a viewer fast-forwarding a tape in his own home.

From the BBC

Censoring films without our consent?

This had better be an April Fool's joke.

I've officially renamed them:
they are now..
The Great Wall of China*Mart

NO ONE WILL BUY THAT except the Christian right wingers.

Irrespective of the issues of content and "censorship," I personally find it offensive that the Hollyweird elites would stoop so low as to use the DMCA and the piracy issue as shields for their persistent foisting of sex, violence, profanity, and overall amorality and decadence down the throats of families who have been raising their strongest objections to the stuff -- which reinforces the stereotype of the Tinseltown establishment being somehow anti-family. I know that for years the more libertine filmmakers in the Hollyweird community have been hiding behind the First Amendment . . . now this . . .

Mind you, I'm as against the "guv-mint" laying down "decency" standards as the next guy (or gal), for the simple reason that in the future, a left-wing President could go after conservative voices whose views they object to, with the same aplomb as the current . . . er, regime is (allegedly) going after the likes of Howard Stern. (Just as if BushCo seeks to outlaw abortion today, a left-wing President could mandate the procedure tomorrow.) But still . . .

new mission make stickers alerting buyers in wally world about this crappy dvd player.

the reason being is it could potentionaly block out cus words in music rendering it a total joke if you bought a uncencored version to listen to, It will play CDs too right?

Someone's going to accidentally buy that and not be allowed to return it. Wal-Mart assholes never run the business the right way. They're destined to fail just by looking at their management...

Heh, "The Great Fire-Wal|of America|Mart. I can hear it now:


David Glass: "We need to keep those naughty-phrase-speaking, music stealing, downright poopy philanderers out of our illustrious country! With the help of RCA, Wal-Mart can--"

Robson Walton: "Uh... Dave, I believe they're already here."

David Glass: Oh, they're... um... oh. Shucks.

Thats bullshit, there just sorry they arent shareholders.

You guys do know that the feature is only like the vchip right? It can be disabled/enabled with the users own free will.

This is great for parents with kids that dont have to watch what content which may be on DVD's they bring into their home.

You guys are all acting like this is a forced thing upon people that buys the player.

Sheesh it isnt as bad as you think.

I too think it is a great thing for parents. Too many kids see too much crap today, and this will be a responsible parent's "friend". It's not like everyone will be required to own one, so don't buy one if you don't want one, but don't bitch about the people who do!

The last two miss the point entirely.... if you don't want your kids to watch sex and violence, then as a responsible parent, it's YOUR job to filter out offensive content...not Walmart's. I'm sick of idiots whining about smutty and violent movies, music and TV and then go home and turn it on or go to the theater anyway. There is a ton of family oriented programs and movies so why are you complaining about what comes out of Hollywood? Besides, who do think will show mom and dad how to turn off the stupid ass censoring anyway?

I just think it comes down to the training or lack of training of a child.
All you can do is try to develop a reasonable and consistent approach to informing your kids on what you believe is acceptable or not. If you don't want them to smoke, you have to educate them on WHY it's bad to smoke...but ultimately, they will decide for themselves.

Forbidden fruit is always the most tempting to kids,and the rebelliousness of youth tends to be drawn toward something that is kept away from them, if there is no good reason given them why not.

I think it's good for ANY consumer to be forewarned about content...much like if you are allergic to peanuts...it's good to know if peanuts are in a food.

If your kids adopt your values, based on them thinking they make sense, and they incorporate them as their own...then you don't have to be the all seeing eye, or, demand others be that for you.

The Amish kids have a period during which they have to decide whether they want to stay in the Amish way of life, and some of them experiment with drugs, smoke, engage in premarital sex, etc.. The majority, I believe, even after the experimentation, decide to opt for the traditional Amish ways...not all do though.

What I think is that you cannot enforce your views on kids...because, they will find a way to access things they want to, regardless of the safeguards.

My two cents.

This is somewhat strange in regards to the movie industry. The DVD player cannot guess at what content is bad, it takes advantage of a feature coded into the DVD itself. Lots of DVDs have this feature, where with a push of a button, you can make a R-rated DVD a PG-rated DVD. The player only does it automatically. You got to wonder the real reason Hollywood is making a fuss.

Too many parents expect the machine to do their work. (Electronic babysitting and all that). Know what your kids are watching or listening to. Put in the time and effort. As a dad of three girls, I can guarantee you that the payoff is worth it.

So parents could put a movie "without sex, violence, swearing" in this particular machine and think that their work is done for them? Why let them watch it at all. My 16-year old daughter hasn't seen "The Silence of the Lambs" or "The Green Mile", for example. I've told her that they are good films but she would get freaked out. When she wants to see them or any other films, she'll ask me, we'll watch together, and I'll answer her questions. It's the content, not just the language or the gore. This DVD player would censor Romeo and Juliet.
BTW, Code. Amish pass by our house. In the summer I heard music outside my window. It gradually got louder and louder. It was a boom box in the back of the buggy. The horse was not in step.

"The last two miss the point entirely.... if you don't want your kids to watch sex and violence, then as a responsible parent, it's YOUR job to filter out offensive content...not Walmart's."

no, it's you who is missing the point.. if i were a parent and didn't want my kids watching sex and violence, then choosing to purchase a DVD player that automaticly removes that content would be one step i can take. one of many.

i fully expect that wal-mart will continue selling DVD players without such a self-censorship feature. it almost seems like everyone wants to jump on the anti-walmart bandwagon even when the news story is about something the MPAA is doing. sheesh.

Ashleighj, I'm not bashing Walmart. I just think the machine is worthless in most cases. Give me an example of an R-rated movie suitable for children.
The BBC article features Benjamin (Dustin Hoffman) in bed with Mrs. Robinson. Forget the language (if any) and the nudity. It's the content. It's about seduction. Not appropriate for kids and a false sense of security for parents.

i dunno i think it's a great idea.
like, people who want to censor movies can censor them on their own, in their own house.
and everyone else can watch as they want.
stops them from censoring the actual movie.

"There is a ton of family oriented programs and movies so why are you complaining about what comes out of Hollywood?"

Because all of those movies and programs suck!

"censors are effectively pirating directors' and studios' work"

Did I miss something? I didn't notice any murder or robbery on the high seas...

****NO ONE WILL BUY THAT except the Christian right wingers.****


Why the attack? This would be like a Christain saying that only violent porn lovers would not buy it. Face it. Not everyone likes to watch a sex scene when it is not neccessary for the story of the movie.

It may be an unfair generalization, deleriou5 -- but that doesn't mean that it's not accurate. I think it says a lot that the company behind the technology (Clearplay) is based out of Utah. In fact, this is the same company that was originally offering to provide edited versions of their customers' DVDs. In this case, at least, the company and technology are definitely coming from a religiously conservative background.

As far as I understand, the technology is currently able to recognize "unsanitary" parts of 500 movies. I think it may identify the code of the movie, and then have a program of timestamps that need to be "avoided". I'm not sure how this will be updated in the future...

As long as I am not forced to use this device or any v chip thing, I see no problem with it. If YOU don't want to see the naughty bits in a movie, YOU should not have to endure them... It is when you tell me that I can't watch the naughty bits because YOU would be offended that I get pissed off.

And, when you tell me I MUST watch the parts I don't want to watch, (ads) same damn thing.

AMERICA, WAKE UP! YOUR FREEDOMS ARE IN DANGER!

hmm, now i know why me and my friend called then Nazi-mart

There have been devices out for years that let you "edit out" the swear words in movies, cable programming and the like. This is just the next step.
There's a word that in these posts that's being used, yet the same word is actualy forgotten most of the time.
Choice.
I've always said that it's choice that makes things good or bad, and I stand by that. If you choose not to watch or let you kids watch movies that have a lot of sex and/or violence in them *shrug* who am I to stop you? If you choose NOT to, then the same question applies. This device (and others like it) just make it easier.
I have to agree with w-B about how it really is offensive that the MPAA is using the DMCA to stop this. They one of the groups the ones that pushed for the DMCA in the first place! Classic case of wanting everything or nothing at all. I'd like to see what happens when they start trying to pursue that line of reasoning. I bet the DMCA lets em down, and I for one would be happy to see it. I bet that if this thing DOES play cds, if it edits out swear words, the RIAA jumps in. If not, then they will prove to the rest of the world what we already know.. they are hyprocites and double talkers, and don't deserve to continue.
ttmmm

Ashleighj, are you aware of the general purpose of this website? It is the consumer's responsibility to filter what comes into his/her house, not the government and certainly not some small town destroying mega crap store. If you can't handle the job of parenting, then why did you have kids in the first place? Jeez, I'm fed up with parents today, so self centered on their cell phone conversations
not to keep an eye on their kids.

I don't know what you feed the little kids around you, corvette guy, but those cable channels just for family and kids are actually pretty good. Last time I went to a Video store (soon they'll have to start calling them DVD stores) there was a huge selection of kids films.

So the argument that we need machines to automatically censor what we watch and that everything out of Hollywood is evil just doesn't wash.

You are right, Remye and independentm...
It does come down to choice and FREEDOM to choose. As long as the device is clearly marked as a censoring player, fine. If you want to buy it, buy it. Sorry, I got off on a tangent when the real issue is the right of the consumers to determine how the movie that they paid for is viewed.

I just saw a report last evening about toddlers, the amount of TV that they watch, and the possible long-term negative effects on them. To me, it's just the old "throw 'em in front of the tube to keep them quiet". So, yeah, I just want individuals to take responsibility for their children instead of asking legislators to create more laws that censor broadcasts and DVD players that censor content for them.

People in general (myself included) are conditioned that when something goes wrong blame someone else. We have to take responsibility for what our kids see, not walmart. do I need to buy two DVD players? one so my kids can watch a movie and one for me to see the whole thing? A friend of ours wouldn't let their kids watch anything but Disney type movies. I on the other hand let me kids watch a great deal of things many parents would cringe at. my kids are about grown and they are good honest and responsible just like the others. It's a parents responsibility, If you don't want your kids watching it, turn it off. simple. myself, I would never buy that piece of garbage

Lachatte, good point. I've seen reports like that since the 60's. I don't buy it though. the Jitterbug, the radio all were supposed to destroy our childrens minds. Remember the Music man? He created panic in the town because a pool table was brought in and would destroy our childrens morals. I think we need to stop reacting and start thinking.

Compmore, off topic, MUSIC INDUSTRY MAFIA. My son watched it on his computer and had other kids in his dorm watch it. He downloaded a bunch of divx codecs (I don't know what I'm talking about) like mpc2kxp6482, but it won't play after the first two images - just sound. He wants to know what specific one I need because he doesn't want to put a particular thing on my computer.

To everyone who loves the idea behind this player, have you ever heard of this thing called freedom of choice? It's this nice little freedom that allows you to decide what you think is most suitable for you and your children. It allows you to choose what your child or yourself eats or watches on TV. This freedom is natural and can never be taken away, except in countries with no rights to begin with. Here, no one is putting a gun to your head saying you have to watch a hyper violent movie with lots of sex, nor are they telling you to eat a McDonald's triple cheeseburger on pain of death. They certainly don't do this to me and if they did, I'd take the bullet before submitting.

But let's examine it this way. You supporters say the feature is optional. Do you know this for certain? Are you certain it only censors out violence, sex and swearing?

Consider this. The movie Armageddon was produced before the attacks of 9-11 and the Columbia disaster. If you were to watch this movie on broadcast TV right now, at least before the Columbia disaster, you'll notice that the shots of asteroids slamming into the WTC and the aftermath are gone. Of course we'll probably never see this movie on network again since the Atlantis destruction scene at the beginning of the movie is pivotal to the plot, at least at the beginning.

The point of that digression is what if this DVD player edits those very scenes out of the DVD version? What if, everytime something bad happens involving a famous landmark, a scene involving that landmark is edited out of a DVD by this player. It's what we've been fearing with the whole broadcast flag technology the MPAA is trying to get placed in digital TVs.

You may say, well, how would the player know that the DVD being played featured these scenes. It's called read-ahead. While we're viewing one part of a movie, the player is probably going over scenes ten, twenty minutes ahead, weeding out potentially offensive or disturbing scenes. Then, once you get to them, they're gone, at least on this player. How would it keep updated? Well, it's internal programming would naturally come pre-installed with a list of inappropriate words (at least in the eyes of Wal-Mart), and scenes (again, at least by Wal-Mart). All it needs is a tiny satellite or wi-fi receiver and you have an automatic update feature.

There was a movie released a few years before the attacks of 9-11. It was called Earthquake in New York. Now while this wasn't a hyper violent, sex filled swearfest, it did feature numerous scenes of buildings collapsing (this was New York, afterall, and we all know that there is no Earthquake Code there like in California), most notably, the WTC and the Statue of Liberty. Now, while this movie probably isn't now or will ever be available on DVD (or even VHS, it was produced by the old FOX Family Channel), the point of the lesson is, the movie would be virtually unwatchable were this player to edit out disturbing scenes. In fact, it would probably last only until the earthquake hits and then jump straight to the end.

On that note, I should point out that NBC is producing a mini-series to come out this May called 10.5. From what I've seen, it's supposed to be about this monster earthquake (hence the name) that causes the entire West Coast, from Seattle to San Diego to slide into the ocean. The trailer I saw shows a shot of the Space Needle in Seattle toppling over and destroying some buildings. Obviously the technology in this player would edit it out, even though the Space Needle is doing just fine, but only because RCA (and Wal-Mart) would feel that watching the Space Needle fall over would invoke memories of 9-11.

To make another aside at this point, the trailer to this movie that I saw showed the Hollywood sign falling over, which means Hollywood (and hence the studios and record labels) will fall into the ocean in this movie, which is why I plan to watch. Now if the movie were simply about that, it would be the best thing ever produced by NBC. But, unfortunately, the good people would have to pay just so the bad people would fall into the ocean.

Oh, and to the person who says Wal-Mart won't take it back. That's only on software, movies and CDs. Stuff than can be copies, in other words. Electronics can be returned. I once returned a video card.

"Ashleighj, are you aware of the general purpose of this website? It is the consumer's responsibility to filter what comes into his/her house, not the government and certainly not some small town destroying mega crap store."

pinemikey, you make my point for me, but you fail to see it.

yes, it is the consumer's responsibility. absolutely. and now a company (RCA) is making a device which a consumer can choose to buy (but is not forced to buy) which will assist him or her in fulfilling this responsibility if the consumer chooses to filter things out.

the government has nothing to do with this DVD player. wal-mart is simply buying a product from a manufacturer and making it available to consumers if they choose to buy it. as long as wal-mart continues selling DVD players without censoring features, why should anyone care? they're giving consumers another choice. cool.

(wal-mart has done a lot of things wrong, granted. but in _this_ news story, they haven't.)

you talk about "the purpose of this website" while you blindly overlook the MPAA's use of the DMCA to attempt to stop RCA from making this particular model. how ironic.

lachatte go here. http://www.divx.com/divx/?src=toptab_divx_from_/software/index.php it's divx5.11 the free download is ad supported which means he gets adware popups but that's what I used to encode it. If you still have problems email me at rgf57@yahoo.com and I can arriange to get you the MPG file. it's larger and takes longer to download

The U.S. is censorship happy no matter what. We're the only country with 24/7 bleeps. Even our neighbor Canada cuts off the censorship at night. Sheesh

hey compmore, I want the mpg file too. adware supported files are a NO GO on my computer and as bad as I want to see your work I don't want to download those kinda codecs. (But I am still sharing the file you droploaded to me.)

I have found that avi files are almost like DRM. Sure, it saves a little space to compress to such formats, but those formats require too much in the way of adware and stuff which is only a step away from (and sometimes ends up actually being) DRM.

This is going to sound strange at first, but I completely SUPPORT this player and the concept of this player as a whole. YOU SHOULD TOO!

This player downloads an edit list from a web site and uses it to control the playing of a DVD. It does not change the original or make a copy of it. It simply plays it using someone elses vision. This is a creative act that MUST NOT BE OUTLAWED.

The side that Hollywood is taking on this is EXACTLY the same side that the RIAA is taking. "It is our property, whether you have purchased it legally or not. You MUST only do with it what WE SAY.

Suppose you had a player like this and the Beatles White Album. It theoretically would be possible to play the Beatles White Album as DJ Danger Mouse's Grey Album. No sampling necessary, just an appropriate outside cut list. It would have been much more difficult for EMI to defend their C&D position. Given no copy's were made and people were playing their personally owned media in a fashion they personally prefer it is difficult to argue that people should not have that right.

This is an important piece of technology. It has huge possibilities for creating satires of movies by using the existing movie. It also could be used to make political statements as well.

Creativity is taking what is around you and adding value to it. This is an act that MUST be preserved. If you don't respect people's right to do what they want with their own media in the privacy of their own home, you should revisit the definition of censorship.

Hi Cap.

As long as the DVD is "normal", whatever that is, you should still be able to play it in a normal DVD player and see all the naughty bits.

But make the kids use one of the censoring players.

As a parent, I have to go with the choice aspect, although I have severe problems with WalMart's tendency to actually censor the content of the products.

Hi Indie.

And nice read on the tech ashleighj!

MPAA bad. Technology good.

Independent, my son went to the Divx 5.11 website, downloaded, and then when he read the ad stuff said "no". He didn't want to put all that stuff on my computer. So I will e-mail and request the mpg file of Music Industry Mafia.

CaptainMorgan, I read your post a couple of times and I still don't understand it. I thought that we were talking about a DVD player used with a TV, not a computer. And I have absolutely no understanding of "mixing" music (Beatles) just with that DVD player.
This I do understand: freedom to choose what you want to buy and freedom to mix or burn at will in the privacy of your own home.

Again, some people insist that a machine is a better device for "helping" protect children from harmful content. The argument is just a poor excuse for not doing your job.

The irony of the MPAA's use of the DMCA is not lost to anyone who follows the news these days. After all, do you really think the purpose of the DMCA is to extort 2000 or 3000 bucks out of people like you and me? No, that's just a little sideline. The DMCA was designed for RIAA, MPAA and the other congolemerate PA's to bash and attack other big conglomerates who are trying to muscle in on what Hollywood and the music industry consider their exclusive terroritories. Let's hope this is the start of big useless lawsuits against huge companies that will garner boatloads( the real pirate reference) of cash for the lawyers so they won't feel the need to worry about us...the lowly consumer. We could just go about our way, buying and sharing....like we've been doing for generations.

Yes Lachatte,

That article is about a DVD player that attaches to your TV. But the DVD player gets its cut list (script) from an external server. The cut list is not created by the creator of the DVD. It is created by a third party.

The core issue is that the MPAA is trying to imply that the "cut list" creates a type of derivative work. Under copyright law, nobody is allowed to create a derivative work without permission from the copyright holder. I maintain that is a perversion of copyright law.

The idea of being able to script your media players is an extreme powerful one. If you take this scripting concept and make it accessable to everyone, you have indeed created a new type of musical or video instrument. Consider it a video version of the record scratching that early rap DJs used.

I don't mind this too bad, as long as they don't try to legislate that people can only use that type of player. Hollywood lobbying against this doesn't really surprise me, though. I'm convinced they'd outlaw the fast-forward function on a DVD player if they could. Does anyone know if they were successful making it illegal to skip unskippable commercials?

By the way, has anyone ever wanted to go back and play Pulp Fiction in the correct order just to see what it would be like?

Basically the MPAA is arguing that creating a script to do that would be illegal without their permission.

RCA is a piece of junk anyway!!

RCA is a piece of junk anyway!!

Okay, here we go again..
"It's for the children"
BULLSHIT
It's going to be adults buying this thing. The tech I mentioned in an earlier post were things I saw at (of all places) my mechanics shop. He's an avid Christian, and felt that while some parts of a movie were integral to the entertainment value, swear words and "excessive" sex/violence were not, so he was using one, and endorsed them.
I am SO SICK of hearing "it's for the children". I don't have any kids, don't know when I will (if ever*shrug*) but I hope I never come across as self serving and self righteous as some of the people I hear spout that crap.
I realise that kids are the future. I realise that we have to protect them, to the extent that they can't protect themselves or make proper moral/ethical decisions. But to make a politicial/technological movement out of it just really burns my ass.
If parents take an active role(imho however small) in their kids, then a lot of this crap will go away. In this age of cell phone babysitting, pagers, emails and pda's, we've forgotten that it's not the kids that have the problems. To put it another way, it behooves parents to take an active stance in raising and educating their kids, instead of handing them a list of phone numbers/email addresses to get in touch with them, or setting them in front of a televison for a few hours. I personally grew up watching Spiderman, The Incredible Hulk, Puff N Stuff (Sid and Marty Kroft ROCK!!), and all that did was foster in me a love of all things comic. I have friends who grew up watching movies like "10", Best Little Whorehouse in Texas and the entire collection of Freddy/Jason movies, and believe it or not, they are pretty well adjusted.
Okay, enough of a rant here, I've probably said WAY too much. Just wanted to get my opinion out here. If I offended anyone, *shrug* that's your right. CHOOSE to ignore me then. I"m actually cool with that. But do NOT put your own moral or ethical idea of child rearing on me or the technology of the world. That's just irresponsible.
ttmmm

"By producing - without permission - altered versions of intellectual property, censors are effectively pirating directors' and studios' work,"


uhh.. this is in the privacy of one's home, and it does not mass produce altered versions..

in addition if the version is altered enough.. say the movie was rated X or a severe R.. then it could be classified as a completely different work and copywritten as such.

hehe.. this is just hilarious.. tinseltown against drm.

I just have to add my 2 cents to this discussion. Many of the posters who are against this product keep saying that parents shouldn't be using this to do their job for them. That is a very closed-minded way to look at it. Let me tell you why I would love to have one of these.

I own quite a few movies on DVD that I rarely get to watch because I can't stay up 2 or 3 hours after the kids go to bed at night. Hey, I gotta get up early to go to work. Many of my favorites are movies that have nice, non-violent storylines and are generally kid friendly. Unfortunately, the creators chose to include a few instances of swear words that I would prefer my 4 and 6 year old kids not hear. I would love to be able to watch these movies, while the kids are awake and playing in the room, without having to dive for the remote everytime a swear word comes up. Quite often I am cleaning or washing dishes while the movie is on and it makes remote-censoring a challenge.

I'm not talking about watching Pulp Fiction or Freddy vs. Jason. Those are not worth watching if they are censored. What I would like is the option of watching an "almost G" movie while my kids are present.

Everyone who keeps condemning this as a "substitute parent" device is assuming that it would be used to babysit the kids while the parents are out of the room. I'm just a parent who is tired of watching the same Disney movies over and over. Most of the time the kids are playing and not even watching TV anyway. I'd just like the option of watching something for ME without have to do it through bleary eyes at midnight.

Put me down for "choice," thank you very much.

deletethispost, I know what you mean about deciding to insert just a few words to make something un-kid-friendly. This was lampooned in a low budget horror parody, "Student Bodies", around 1980. In the middle of the movie, a guy in a suit appears and says, [paraphrased]"You will note that this movie has recieved an MPAA rating of 'R', yet nothing in this movie has been deserving of an 'R' rating. Therefore, at this time, the producers of this movie have authorized me to say, "Fuck You"." Then he's gone, and that was the only reason the movie got its 'R' rating.

Jefrystube, I remember that -- that movie was very funny, in a stupid kind of way...or was it very stupid, in a funny kind of way. Either way, it's a classic.

Why don't you watch them with your kids around? It's funny that the same people taking a stand against censorship are the ones covering their children's eyes in the theatres. Don't you agree that if sex, violence, etc. are approached without a nervous and dirty mind, that kids will outgrow their interests, and move onto new topics? It's the restriction that makes sex so interesting for kids.

I have no problem with sex, "explicit language" and limited violence (in movies.) It is America and it's collective citizens that have put these things in a "no-no" category. Most small children are not capable of fully understanding how to filter their language and behavior in "polite company," or even why they should. Society will cause them problems if they start using these words at school, in public, etc. If our society were more reasonable, we wouldn't need these machines.

I personally believe that there should be no such thing as "dirty" words. Language should not be limited and I agree with George Carlin that there is no real legitimate reason to separate out the "bad words" from the rest of them.

I do believe that small children should not be exposed to ultra-violent movies. Not all, but most young children are not capable of dealing with material like that without the possibility of causing some level of psychological problems. Also, I kind of like the fact that my kids sleep in their own beds and don't have many nightmares. They've got plenty of time to learn what a nightmare reality and our society can be when they get older.

I don't plan on censoring everything they watch until they graduate from college, but until our society lightens up on certain things (don't hold your breath), limiting their exposure to certain content helps make it easier for them to interact with their peers, teachers, etc. without being shunned as potty-mouthed heathens.

Damn society...

I reviewed the violence issue, and I'm drawing a blank. I don't see them developing psychological problems EXCEPT being desensitized to violence (though that goes for adults to). Is that bad enough? Hmmm... if you're desensitized, that doesn't necessarily mean you're violent yourself... I don't know.

I DO know, however that our backward society will place sex in a worse light than death, which is wrong. I remember my mother, after telling her about a movie that I saw with my father, asking me, "Was it rated 'R' for violence, or sex?" with OBVIOUS emphasis on the latter.

Bah,
Matt

It was the same for me. I think the motto for our parents generation should have been, "Make war, not love!"

In Carlin's infamous "dirty words" bit, (can you tell I'm a fan?) he mentions that he remembers hearing someone say they would rather their kids see a movie with two people making love, than two people trying to kill one another.