This site will work and look better in a browser that supports web standards, but it is accessible to any browser or Internet device.

Whedonesque - a community weblog about Joss Whedon
"Vengeance is what I am."
11973 members | you are not logged in | 28 September 2020


May 14 2011

Buffy Coming to TeenNick. The show is coming to TeenNick in May.

A quick search of doesn't show airings for the next two weeks but hopefully they will begin soon enough.

I love the enthusiasm of the post. Although my heart breaks a little for the commenters that claim they have never heard of the Buffster.

Uh, what are they gonna do after season 3? It's not exactly kid friendly from 4 on.


Willowy: Gift horse. Mouth. :D
Uh, what are they gonna do after season 3? It's not exactly kid friendly from 4 on.

It's perfect teen programming, though. It is TEEN Nick, after all. :)
I doubt many parents are going to love, "I'm gonna make you feel it", but hey, I'm happy to hear that more folk will be exposed
Not after 3! Are you a parent? Have you SEEN 4? Young adult time.

My son is 15 and has seen through Season 5. With me riding shotgun. He'll see the rest when I decide. With me riding shotgun.

I'm having the same reaction to this as I did when I discovered Buffy books were in the kid's section in B&N. REALLY? Disbelief warring with liberal thinking and conflicting with my own LOVE for the show. Final thingy? Do what I want and don't stress.
Christopher Golden said he gave up trying to explain to big box bookstore staff that his B&A books weren't Young Adult. So when he went into bookstores like B&N he would just move the books out of YA and put them with the rest of the scifi/famtasy section

I think if they had been put in the correct section more would have sold.
Willowy, you can't shelter forever. Wouldn't it be better here under liked minds?
Agreed with Madhatter, when I was 15 I was watching far worse and I turned out okay.
Oooh, did Christopher Golden really move books around? Yeesh. Working in a bookstore, I can tell you that this undoubtedly resulted in fewer sales. Anyone who came in looking specifically for those books who asked a bookseller where they would be would have been led to, in this case, the Teen section. Not finding them there, it would have been assumed that either the computer was wrong, they were stolen, they were on hold for someone else behind the counter, or they were still in receiving, not yet fully processed, and the shopper would have been asked to come back later in the week. Never would another section be checked because, well, they belong in their predetermined section. Additionally, the store would have had to assume they were stolen, and would have reported it as shrink, and this possibly would have put them into a different shrink bracket than they actually should have been. Obviously that's an extreme consequence, but still, I cringe.

This TeenNick thing, on the other hand, makes me smile, so everything balances out. :)
Oooh, did Christopher Golden really move books around? Yeesh. Working in a bookstore, I can tell you that this undoubtedly resulted in fewer sales. Anyone who came in looking specifically for those books who asked a bookseller where they would be would have been led to, in this case, the Teen section. Not finding them there, it would have been assumed that either the computer was wrong, they were stolen, they were on hold for someone else behind the counter, or they were still in receiving, not yet fully processed, and the shopper would have been asked to come back later in the week. Never would another section be checked because, well, they belong in their predetermined section. Additionally, the store would have had to assume they were stolen, and would have reported it as shrink, and this possibly would have put them into a different shrink bracket than they actually should have been. Obviously that's an extreme consequence, but still, I cringe.

XanMan | May 15, 07:16 CET

As both the son of a librarian (and former bookstore employee) and a avid reader/bookstore visitor, I struggle between cringing at all the amateur shelving work done by Christopher Golden and understanding his frustration. The former mainly from being my mom's unpaid assistant and shelving monkey tasked with correctly fixing the haphazard manner the shelving got after various local lawyers went through her library (she was the Chief Librarian for the local law society).

And for the latter? I know I scratched my head for quite some time when I went to look for copies of Jasper Fforde's Thursday Next series of fantasy-humour novels in the Science Fiction & Fantasy section of my local Chapters Indigo (chain of Canuck bookstores similar to Barnes & Noble)...and couldn't find them. Turns out they're classified as mere General Fiction...which I would argue, since they feature things like an AU where the Crimean War didn't complete until the 1980s and Wales is a Socialist Republic. Not quite the same material as all the books by Tom Clancy, WEB Griffin and David Balducci novels that were on nearby shelves ;D
I was 7 when BtVS first aired and I watched it right up until it finished. I must have been 13 at the time S6 aired and I didn't really understand half of it (the complexities I mean) but, meh, I don't think it was too inappropriate for me. I believe parents do have to be responsible to some degree when deciding what their kids are allowed to watch but, honestly, I don't think they need to be sheltered too much. BtVS has really positive messages and I think at the end of the day it's far more beneficial to young viewers than it could ever be harmful.
Ahh, there you go. I can not imagine how "BtVS" can damage a young mind, but appearently, others disagree.

I issue a challenge to this!
I watched it as it aired in Ireland from 98 onward and I was 10/11(some issues with airings back then I believe). No harm, no foul. My mom watched part of season 3 with me, for the Angel/Buffy love story(she's such a sap!) but thought season 4 was out of her age bracket with all the sex and left me alone with it. Really it's not remotely harmful, in fact it actually helped me to develop a lot more during those years. I chart Dawson's Creek and Buffy as my main go to sources on how to develop the responsible teen mind. This is a good move for the show, gets teens away from watching 16 and pregnant and teen mom. Really, kids these days need something better than girls who are beating the baby daddy. To quote Ballard - "The world still needs heroes, kid".
The link redirected me to the UK Nickelodeon sight: no sign of Buffy there, we have to make do with "Summer in Transylvania"
Watched Buffy as it aired in the UK on BBC at the age of about 11. I was probably a year or two too young to appreciate all the themes, but I don't think there was anything really inappropriate in them for me. By the time season 4 came along, I would have been 14/15.

As all the DVDs of Buffy have a 15 certificate here*, I don't really see any problem with teenagers watching it. I wouldn't class it as strictly a teen show, but the target audience certainly includes them.

*One disc of Angel has an 18 rating, for reasons I've never really understood. On the whole, I would say season 1-3 of Buffy is suitable for young teens, whilst season 4-7 and Angel are suitable for older teens
Vandelay: a lot of the episodes are 12 rated, but it only needs one with a 15 rating to make the boxed set a 15. Also remember they were shown on the BBC before the watershed with just a few cuts (the (almost) uncut versions were shown late at night). You can check individual episodes on
The Angel episode which got an 18 rating was Five by Five, probably for the torture scene.
I do have one concern. Many parents will just put Nick on assuming it's ok for any child, even the very young. There are probably loads of clueless parents who at the end of a very long day will just put Nick on just for some sanity. Can you tell I have 2 young boys? Thankfully remotes work quickly--when you can find them.

My boys are 11 and 4 and bored, afraid of show. Even the music, sets my young one off. And he thinks every show I watch is Buffy.
I started watching the show in 1998, when I was 10 and didn't have any problems with it, but I can see how even younger folks could tune into the show, because most parents probably think "oh, it's TEEN NICk, they probably only air harmless comedies like Clarissa or Friends in the evening" and that's why they don't supervise what their kids are watching, so yeah, teen nick probably not the best choice.
Don't want my daughter exposed to all that sex just yet, and neither do I want to give her nightmares from The Gentlemen or Gnarl (sorry Camden). I was fully an adult through all of BtVS, and though my son is probably now able to handle it all, daughter Willow is 7 and watches Nick quite a bit.

Would rather see it on WE or TBS or somesuch. Season three is all I'll let her watch up to, with selected eps from other seasons, like OMWF (she sings all the songs!).
I started Buffy in 2007 when I was 14, and I watched the entire series in a month. I think that adults tend to underestimate what kids/teens are able to handle. My friend was only 11 when she started BTVS and she didn't have any issues with it. However, I do think 11 is a bit young for most children to start. It really just depends on level of maturity.

BTVS is much more intellectual, layered, and daring than anything else found on TeenNick. It's been quite a few years since I watched the channel, but I assume it's still things along the lines of "Victorious', 'Zoey 101', "Drake and Josh' etc. Correct me if I'm wrong, but most of those shows don't have much/any sex or violence in them. I can see why some parents might object to BTVS being on there with those more "appropriate" shows. Especially conservative parents, who will definitely take issue with Willow/Tara being on a kid's channel. Still, I feel that more kids/teens ought to watch Buffy. There's very little intelligent, honest entertainment out there for teens today. The only shows that my generation seem to enjoy are "Jersey Shore' and "16 and pregnant". IMO, Those shows are much more objectionable than Buffy.

I just thought of something. It's probable that we could be seeing edited versions of the episodes without much of the sex/violence. After all, it may be called TeenNick but in my experience that means most of the viewers are between 10 and 14. As a high schooler, I can say from experience that very few teenagers actually watch TeenNick.

Anyway, this is interesting news. I'll be watching to see how it all plays out. I wish that a channel like TNT would pick it up instead though, the way they did with Angel and Supernatural.
Though my daughter is still a lot of years from my having to decide whether she can watch what she wants (she's 1), season 6 is the only one that I wouldn't want a young teen to watch without parental supervision, as a general rule. Mostly because of the sex, but there are also episodes that feature in my rare nightmares. And yes, there's sex in other seasons, but what scenes compare to the Buffy/Spike ones?
XanMan: Are you former Borders, by chance?
fromthecrypt - We were recently issued a "Proper Social Media Usage" thingama-whatever telling us what we could and could not do or say about our work, blah, blah. As a result, I'm not sure if it's completely okay to state where I work online. Seriously. Blargh. However, I can say that, no, not Borders. We're still around. Thankfully. :)
Buffy is currently running on Syfy in the UK with episodes at noon and 6 pm. I don't know if it is censored.
I think all seasons of Buffy are fine for teens. I watched the show when I was 14-16. However, I don't think teens actually watch Teen Nick... kids and preteens do.
I realise it's a touchy subject but... is sex what bothers you as parents? Are rough sex scenes really that much worse than the gentlemen cutting people open or Buffy having to dig out from her own grave? Or the blood factory in "the wish"?

I personally find the violence much more disturbing, especially when most vampires take pleasure from it.
My daughter is in high school and she & her friends haven't watched TeenNick for years except for the occasional nostalgia visit. Maybe this is Nick's effort to make the programming more interesting for actual teenagers?
After reading all the posts re at what age people were when the first started watching Buffy, I'm suddenly feeling older than usual.
Isn't this the fourth cable network Buffy's been on? First FX, then Logo, and Chiller. Now TeenNick? Interesting that Angel has been an early morning TNT staple for quite some time.
As for whether Buffy is fit for Teen Nick, it's also the home for Degrassi, and its subjects are sometimes fairly adult. It'll be fine. It's also a chance for TeenNick to be part of ComicCon. Having our Slayer move to TeenNick, however, does make me feel even more old...and I've been a Buffy fan since I was 38.
Still, if only the WB was resurrected as a cable network....

[ edited by impalergeneral on 2011-05-15 20:17 ]

[ edited by impalergeneral on 2011-05-15 20:17 ]
Anyone know whatever happened to Buffy being on MTV?
I started watching the show when I was 7. Scratch that, when I was about 4/5, because I bought season one when I was 7, but had been watching with my sister since before that.

What's the problem? The most it ever shows you is a topless guy and Spike moving up and down on top of Buffy. The language isn't even that bad.

Also, Willowy, why aren't you letting your 15 year old watch past season 5? I'm not even 15 yet and I've seen every episode about 10 times.

[ edited by Chosen on 2011-05-15 21:52 ]
Chosen, you are my hero.
They also showed Buffy on Oxygen. Our slayer is multi-faceted.
That's right. Buffy was on MTV briefly, and I wasn't sure about Oxygen. Our Slayer is all things to all people. That's why people hope she can be her own twin this fall.
@Ragondux, I think the sex is the hardest part for me to be okay with being shown on a pre-teen station because it's the easiest to justify copying. I don't fear that my daughter will want to start a blood factory, but she might be curious about having sex on a balcony of a crowded building. It's not what's actually shown, really. It's Buffy having sex with someone she can't stand for reasons she doesn't even really understand, and she looks like she's having a good time doing it. Or maybe it's just Spike that makes it look that fun ;)
Ages ago I tweeted our Whedonesque followers, "at what age should children be allowed to watch Buffy?" I think around 12 was the general consensus but it really is up to the parent. Some people replied saying they let their 2 to 3 yr olds watch the show which left me a bit non-plussed to say the least.

When I did the same question for Dollhouse, the general consensus was that the show was suitable for 14/15 yr olds and over.
12 still seems a bit too old to me, at least for s1-s5. The only thing I'd give 12s for would be the sex scenes in s6 and s7.
I also kind of feel if you let your child learn about these things sooner, the less effect (affect?) they will have. If bad words weren't deemed so unacceptable and wrong at childhood, I can almost guarentee people wouldn't use them as much.

Also, I was able to learn about the reprecussions of sex from shows like Buffy, especially after the Buffy/Angel one. When I have children, I will use that episode to explain it to them as well.

Edit: it also helped me understand that society should be more accepting of homosexuals through the Willow storyline.

[ edited by Chosen on 2011-05-15 23:33 ]
I would imagine that not every tween is emotionally ready to deal with the murders, suicide, killings, beatings etc that Buffy seasons 1 to 5 contained.
Really the best solution with all TV is to watch it with your children and/or know exactly what they are watching. I watch Buffy with my nieces (ages 10 and 12) but they are not allowed to watch it by themselves. That way we can openly and honestly discuss any questions they may have and frame the different (good and bad) behaviors we see.
Buffy aired on free to air in the UK at 6.40pm. And, you know, on free to air on The WB at 8pm.
The "murders, suicide, killings, beatings, etc." that Buffy contains is NOTHING compared to what young people are already exposed to.
I started watching Buffy at 15-16. Though I've always been allowed to watch anything as long as it's not rated X. Didn't hurt me one bit. Though it's really up to the parent to gauge what their child can handle.

Anyone else amused that we're arguing about whether a show that was originally on the WB is age appropriate? Buffy was "just a silly teen show" all along right?

Ya'll stop TELLING me what's appropriate for my kids! I and I alone will decide that, and I am perfectly within my parental rights to dislike what I deem to be a young adult show shouldn't be on a disney-esque network that my kids frequent!

Do what you want, and I'll do same!
@IrrationalTV, you are absolutely right. We have to watch the shows with our children and know what our children can handle. I was watching soap operas by the time I was 10. I saw quite a bit of Luke and Laura. I knew the facts though and it didn't bother me in the least.

My son, who is 11, can barely watch two people kiss without cringing and begging for the station to be changed. He's also sensitive to violence on TV shows (difficulty falling asleep). So we need to know our kids and watch these shows with them.

My guess is that @jsc is right and this is Nick's attempt to get teens closer to their target age watching the station. Girls who aspire to be tweens probably beg and plead to record the shows on Teen Nick, while the true teenagers are off watching Vampire Diaries. They can advertise it as a Twilight where the protagnist gets it on!

My mommy brain also simply associates Nick with Spongebob, Planet Sheen, Drake and Joss, and Green Slime, not vampires, souls, and sex. Maybe Nick is looking to work the slime angle?
Yeah, I imagine Willowy knows her kids a bit better than any of us do. There's no single path to good parenting.

hann23 You may be onto something with the slime angle. :) I first let my daughter watch Buffy when she started getting interested in these gawdawful Goosebumps shows. I watched a couple with her & decided that if she was ready to watch a monster show, she might as well watch a good monster show.
Of course the age that someone is ready to watch the violence or sex on Buffy is mostly irrelevant as it really depends on the person. I know adults who aren't comfortable with the violence on the show. But considering nearly half of teens are sexually active, I don't see any reason why they can't watch it on the show, especially since there are often consequences for the characters as a result.
Willowy, no one is telling you how to parent. Everyone is simply sharing their opinions and experiences.
You know as someone in their 20's, it's not sex that's the trouble, it's the melding of sex and violence that we saw in s6. It seems to imply that sex and pain go hand in hand. I know on a more meta level that's the way it was for the character, her life was all about the violence and the pain and even in acts of pleasure she was suffering. But for me watching that in my teens it was difficult. At that age I guess i had clearly defined lines that they should be seperated, unless it was a fetish thing. Now I understand the ideas of the "moral masochist" and the "grotesque love" and all sorts of other ideologies intrinsically linked to our subconscious submissive roles, but at that time that relationship was difficult to understand. so I assume if Teen Nick take it to those seasons they will probably be heavily edited as they are during the day time screenings.
Aw, come on. Goosebumps was fantastic. But it was nowhere near as scary as Are You Afraid of the Dark... ::shiver:: That show still freaks me out sometimes. o__o;
Jeezum crow, I must say I've not considered this before not having kids and all but I started watching Buffy at 13 and never had any problem with it. It is kind of odd how uptight people get about sex. If you talk to kids about sex and make it normal to them then they won't be surprised that people are having sex on tv and they won't just run out and copy it.

And does anyone actually think kids do what they're told anyway? I mean if you're out the house they can watch what they want and if they have a computer or a tv in their room then they've probably seen way worse than Buffy. Not to mention adult books which are freely available in any public library.

Personally I'd say the X-files was more distrubing that Buffy and I watched that from an even younger age with no ill effects, but then I guess I've always loved horror!

In conclusion, I trust the BBCs years of experience in broadcasting and a 6.45pm airdate suggests suitable for anyone above the age of 10 or so IMO.
@crazygirlne: agreed, but teenagers are most likely to want to experiment sex anyway. BtVS consistently shows that sex has consequences and, except in the episode where Buffy turns invisible, it doesn't look like a very joyful experience. I have no problem with acknowledging that people sometimes have selfdestructing urges, as long as it's not pictured as something that should be pursued. I think it's much better than other shows with no sex but lots of "good" torture and violence.

I wouldn't want my (non-existing) 8 yo daughter to see those season 6 sex scences because she couldn't get the meaning and could understand a "sex is bad (but fun)" message instead. But I wouldn't want her to hear Angel or Spike talking about the joys of torture either, because of a possible "it's bad but it's fun" reading too.
In conclusion, I trust the BBCs years of experience in broadcasting and a 6.45pm airdate suggests suitable for anyone above the age of 10 or so IMO.

Except the 6.45 BBC showings were cut for violence (maybe 'scenes of a sexual nature' too) and swearing, particularly swearing that's non-swearing in the US but fairly serious in the UK e.g. 'wanker', which cropped up more than once (or memorably for me, in 'Chosen', Amanda - probably my favourite Potential - totally survived until I saw the uncut version a day or two later where her bloodied face falls into shot. Boo).

In general, as someone without kids, i'd say there're many worse shows out there since Buffy always showed the consequences/complexities of violence, sex etc. and I personally have far less trouble with the tame, limited sex on display in the show than with the violence (particularly since it's often a solution to problems and as a first resort at that). That said, I doubt i'd let my hypothetical kids watch it until they were at least 10 or 12 but I also doubt I could stop them if they really wanted to (having been a non-hypothetical kid myself once ;) and the most important thing is that parents make an informed decision for their children, since we're all different, even at the ankle-biter stage.
@ragondux With me watching with my daughter, my age limits would come way down, and I do plan to follow my parents' path on handling that; aside from Disney movies we'd already seen, and a few PBS shows, my brother and I were allowed to watch pretty much what we wanted but one or both of them needed to be in the same room. This was until I left for college, but I was young for that, so it probably would've stopped around 16. Also, she can have her own computer, but neither computer nor TV in her bedroom.

There are definitely much worse shows, and I dislike violent ones even for myself in general, and yes, kids will find a way to do something if they're determined. But I like saying "not alone" better than "no," so I'm not worried about what shows are on what channels for my own family, but for the families that don't monitor what their children watch or that assume Nickelodeon is going to be kid-friendly.
Except the 6.45 BBC showings were cut for violence (maybe 'scenes of a sexual nature' too) and swearing, particularly swearing that's non-swearing in the US but fairly serious in the UK"

"spaz" was edited out of those early evening broadcasts (link) as well as moments from "scenes of a sexual nature" from S6 (link).

For my son, there was a whole load of stuff in S6 that was inappropriate for him to see when he was 12 and I don't think it has anything to do with being "uptight".
Actually S6 isn't the most egregious example of mixing violence and sex.
Doesn't anyone remember the first Buffy/Riley sex scene? They LITERALLY interspersed their first sex together with fight scenes. To me, it was bizarre and icky.
Totally agree with you, Xane, a thoroughly unpleasant juxtaposition.
Can't remember if it was the BBC or Sky (or both) but I remember a showing of 'The Gift' where they'd cut 'buggered' from the Giles/Spike "We few, we happy few..." exchange. Bit much that one IMO, very tame word and it ruined one of my favourite lines from the show.

(trying to remember any head-butts in BtVS cos they'd surely have been cut too, those're one of the big no-noes on pre-watershed UK TV)
Channel 5 definitely edited out the head-butt from "The Harvest" when they broadcast the first season in 2005 because when I realised that had happened, I sought out a VHS box-set and that was the beginning of my interest in all things Whedonesque.
moley75 I wasn't saying that people are uptight for finding some of BtVS content unsuitable for young teenagers, just that a lot of people are uptight about sex and sexuality depicted on tv even when there is no violence involved.
This thread has evolved into a very interesting topic to me, given the last 2 months of my life: "How old should a person be to safely watch BtVS?"

I don't know the answer myself. I know a lot depends on the individual person--but then how can a parent know decisively what is going on in a child's brain? And how can a person know when something is too much for themselves? There are no guarantees. I would suggest erring on the side of caution.

Please be careful with what you allow to enter your children's minds and also your own. I say this because I have been the primary care giver/babysitter/lifeline for 8 weeks for a person suffering from PTSD.

There are it turns out three different kinds of PTSD:

1. Event PTSD--just what it sounds like, a trauma around a single event
2. Compound PTSD--repeated "like" events over varying amounts of time that grow larger with reinforcement
3. Developmental PTSD--shit that goes back to how you grew up

(And guess what? You can have all three at once! Intertwined, even! Yay. The kind of fun that is sooo NOT.)

Children's brains are NOT the same as adults. Children's brains spend more of their time in the Theta State until around the age of say, 6-7. Theta is the dreaming, imagination, learning state. (It makes sense, no?) But one of the repercussions of this prolonged developmental period in Theta is that children are less well-equipped to tell the difference between reality and fiction and are therefore effected more profoundly than their adult counterparts. A parent has no way to truly know how all the words and images that bombard our children every day will effect them int the long run as this is the work of the unconscious.

Even older people can be effected by things they see and hear. I just spent 10 weeks with someone whose PTSD was initially triggered by a normal death but then ended up in a state of not really wanting to live due to a repressed trauma that was eventually traced back to watching the 1983 made for tv movie, "The Day After." There is nothing like the agony of the heart that comes from hearing day after day that your loved one feels like they should be dead, that they should never have been born, all the while threatening to kill themselves-- and then then also knowing that you are the only thing in the world that is keeping your loved one in it from moment to moment. My loved one was fifteen when he watched the movie and although he repressed the trauma, it subconsciously drove his subsequent life choices until it forcefully and way too dramatically surfaced.

Be careful what you put into your mind.

Two more things:

1. EMDR is the cutting edge treatment for PTSD and it REALLY works! (How bad was it? Never getting more than two hours of sleep at a time, sitting next to one's naked loved one who's lying on the floor of the closet for hours, driving actively screaming loved one in the car to the therapist, one horrible night in a crisis center with drugs due to serious suicide fantasies, etc...BUT NOW he is back to his normal life and work with just some collateral damage to clean up with the therapist. Go EMDR! *dances jig*)If you know anyone suffering from PTSD, have them find a traumatologist that is using EMDR. (They are now trying to teach therapists to use EMDR to help US soldiers and vets.)

2. War SUCKS! (In case anyone didn't, like, already know that.) Fucking Governments have no fucking clue what they are doing to all these soldier's brains.

This thread has been closed for new comments.

You need to log in to be able to post comments.
About membership.

joss speaks back home back home back home back home back home