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
"So I could be alone with my, you know...sweaty...shirtless...shame."
11944 members | you are not logged in | 01 September 2014




Tweet







March 28 2005

Buffy has one of the worst video clips of the last three years! NSFW, this of course is deemed by the PTC, so you can take as many grains of salt as needed. It would also be a really good idea not to watch the video clip at work or school(or around children)

I have a horrible connection and can't watch it. What's the clip of?
It's a collage of clips deemed inappropriate. The only Buffy clips is from S7. Gnarl slicing off the skin from Willow's stomach. The rest of the clips are from various shows, on various channels.
To tell you the truth, out of all the stuff buffy(and angel for that matter) has produced, I don't get how they consider that the most inappropriate from the verse.
um, when my download thingie got to over nine hours time, i didn't bother. i mean, the last joss vid took a few minutes to download, but i have a phone connection. how the heck long could it be, and now that i know it's Gnarl i'm not especially interested, because i've seen far more "controversial" scenes in Buffy.
I do have trouble watching that one and it is one I tell my son to cover his eyes for, but we are pretty wimpy about that stuff. Anyway, I'll pass on watching the video. Thanks for telling the gist of it.
Yeesh. The violence and sexual violence was almost all from one thing (I don't watch TV, so whatdoes the FX thing stand for?). Otherwise, it just mostly made me want to watch more tv. I hate PTC So much. What utter crap. This was the best they could cull from this year?

[ edited by pixxelpuss on 2005-03-30 21:21 ]
Hey, that was the best promo clip I have seen in ages. Now I know all the cool shows to watch! Thanks PTC!

What? It wasn't a promo clip?
At least they were cool enough to recognize the gloriously addictive nip/tuck. Exquiste smut. i am a rabid nip/tuck fiend. it's extreme tv and probably (to me) the most stimulating show after buffy or angel.
Oh come on, Buffy had far more controversial stuff on it than the Gnarl demon! How about balcony sex? House crumbling sex? *That's* the good stuff! The Gnarl demon...piffle...
I'm surprised they didn't go with Xander's eye getting poked out by Caleb (which they kept repeating on the "previouslys", just in case we all missed it!)

And is it wrong that I got turned on by some of the sexy clips? (No, none of the "sick" stuff, though I suppose that's in the eye of the beholder, too.)

The point is that most of this stuff is from cable, albeit basic cable, or was supposed to have been bleeped. It's time for people to use their #$@#$@# v-chips and take some degree of personal responsibility for this.
Holy crap! I had no idea television occasionally reveals fictitious depictions based on actual sexual and violent actions caused by human beings towards one another since Cain slew Abel! How appalling! Isn't TV supposed to be only Teletubbies and reruns of I Love Lucy? Thank you PTC for showing me the error of my ways. I will henceforth vow to only watch the local news on television, where they depict and describe with wondrously gory detail who killed whom this week, with what, where and whether or not they're on their way to my house. No more fictitious television for me, no siree!

Can't let children see this. They might learn what it really means to be genetically predisposed towards sexual gratification and that survivalistic "fight or flight" feral instinct. We don't want them to learn about this in a conscious manner. Better that it sneaks up on them by surprise, preferably early in puberty in a public place, with complete strangers nearby to tutor them. Oh yeah that's more sensible. Children should never see this on television. They should only be exposed to it in the real world by accident.

I can't believe out of seven years of Buffy, five years of Angel, and half a season of Firefly, the only graphic content clip that made it into this thing was Gnarl! Effin' GNARL!?? You've gotta be kidding me! Buffy screws two vampires, a military officer, a college doodoohead and she even once almost had that black voodoo magick gunk try to get up in her ass! Xander got boinked by a slayer, a vengeance demon and a gigantic praying mantis. We can do better than this, PTC!!! I demand equal time!

How many times did we see someone get tied up and tortured in Whedon's works? Not one second of that! I mean really! Come on!

Does this mean the PTC just glazes over lesbians doing it? Like the "I'll be in my bunk" routine in "War Stories"? What about Tara floating over her bed after Willow goes down on her in Once More With Feeling? Oh, that was just 'suggested' and we don't actually see anything. Big deal. I want more screen time for Whedon's works when the PTC is whining about graphic sex and violence! Didn't they cut off Lorne's head that one time in Angel? What about that, huh? What about Wesley cutting up the body of his dead sex partner? That's worth a few seconds of disdain from the PTC isn't it??? CORDY GAVE BIRTH TO A DEMON! For crying out loud, what does Whedon have to do to get some gorram respect?!

Or all those "sessions" Inara had with multiple partners for money? How about that? Hell, there was a shot in that video from The Shield that looked like a blatant rip off of the scene where Niska's first bodyguard threw a knife and hit Mal in the chest. And what about kicking that bodyguard into Serenity's engine, huh? That was pretty damn graphic! Or when Niska tortured Mal and Wash, then cut off Mal's ear and gave it to Zoe! This complete lack of disdain for the sexual and violently graphic nature of Whedon's works is pissing me off!

If you're gonna start showing examples of whatever it is you don't wanna see, ALL such depictions deserve equal time. You can't say it sucks when Michael Chiklis pushes someone's head onto a frying grill, but completely ignore Eliza Dushku slamming a wooden stake into that Mayor's assistant guy. If these religious zealots had their way, television would be nothing but a hundred channels twenty-four hours a day of old men sitting behind desks reading the Bible to us and telling us what they think it means. Well, I got some obscene, graphic and violent gestures for them, my own damn self. There. And yes. I do feel much better. Thank you.
....applause....

I would've ranted, but now I don't need to. ;-D
Why didn't they include Kennedy and Willow licking each other in bed in Touched? Come on..Gnarl? They must have hit the fast forward button too much when looking for inappropiate scenes in tv shows.
Wow, I think we all feel much better after that ZachsMind! The joys of vicarious (although elegant and very focussed) ranting!
And i almost didn't submit this, I so second that applause Reequeen. Bravo Zachsmind, Bra-friggin-vo.
Isn't TV supposed to be only Teletubbies and reruns of I Love Lucy?

Hey now! Remember one of those Teletubbies is gay! Not nice for the kiddies ;)
I agree with Rogue Slayer---I'm thinking we were gonna get to see some Spuffy smut and all we get is gnarl. jeez. How lame was that?
I too was hoping for some Spuffy and was actually excited that it said you could download the clip until I read here it was Gnarl! How boring! ZachsMind, it was a pleasure reading that very entertaining post of yours and now I too feel insulted that they ignored all those goodies you mentioned!

I actually wonder though if people who watch that clip see something they like and start watching these evil shows!
This is kinda old news. Buffy was one of the first on their list of "bad" show campaigns.

But viagra-like ads during Superbowl, daytime and evening hours are perfectly okay eh? LoL!

What's really interesting though is that there is no way they are providing these clips with permission - they have to be illegal, so where is the DMCA and C&D's against them?
No naked Spike in handcuffs? No hot lesbian tongue action? No eye gouging? No stitching of peoples lips and flaying them alive? No f*cking fully-clothed next to a dumpster in an alley? No magikal crack dens, bathroom rape scenes, orgasms via blood drinking or psychotic evil preachers? *tsk* Lame.

I wanna take the PTC out for a night on the town.
I can take the Bible out of context and make it say some pretty disgusting things too...maybe we should ban the Bible.
I can't believe you all think the sex scenes would make it over the Gnarl. I gotta tell you, if I were worried about what would scar a child, a scene of someone helpless with her skin being peeled off and eaten would make it over non-explicit sex in a falling building or women licking each other any day. Personally, I found the Gnarl needlessly grotesque. Gore has zero appeal for me. Guess I lack the inner sadist as well as the inner masochist, at least when it comes to being flayed alive. Revulsion is not really the emotion I want from television.

"Can't let children see this. They might learn what it really means to be genetically predisposed towards sexual gratification and that survivalistic "fight or flight" feral instinct." Actually, I would rather NOT have children learn about extreme torture, and why you think this is an example of "Survivalist fight-or-flight instinct" is beyond me. It's actually an example of the most hideous form of evil imaginable. I guess we differ on whether children should see that. I would say reasonable people can disagree on the issue, but I don't actually believe that for a second. If you sincerely believe the Gnarl scene could ever be shown to children, you are horribly mistaken.

But I partially agree about the sex aside from all the hyperbolic sarcasm, WHICH MIGHT BE WHY IT WASN'T IN THE CLIP. You can't rant about them censoring BtVS sex when they haven't censored BtVS sex.
Gnarl creeps me out. That whole scene gives me the wiggins. That's why I like it. I appreciate the creep factor. And I can see your point Andarcel, about Gnarl scaring, or scarring, a child more than the sex scenes. However, as to whether or not the scene should ever be shown to children, that's one of those things that should be left to each individual family to decide. Deciding that anyone who thinks that the Gnarl scene is okay to watch with their children is horribly mistaken, is doing the same thing the PTC does. Deciding for everyone.
"I can take the Bible out of context and make it say some pretty disgusting things too...maybe we should ban the Bible."


Do you really have to take it out of context? Sorry, back on topic.
*looks at Andarcel's post*

...

*blinks*

Andarcel? It's called SATIRE! Look it up. It may also help you to look into the story behind Johnathan Swift's A Modest Proposal so that you don't take whole world so literally in the future.

If you honestly believe that Barney the Dinosaur should have ever been shown to children, you are horribly mistaken.
As much as I hate sanctimonious watchdog groups like PTC, I gotta admit I thought the Gnarl scene went too far for me. I know there was a lot of violence on BUFFY but it was action. Slowly peeling off Willow's skin and having the blood sucked and licked up was sickening to me. That doesn't mean my opinion is the only one and that episode should be banned, etc., etc. I don't have children and I don't know what age I would feel would be the minimum for my child to start watching BUFFY. But I do think that scene is inappropriate for a child. Certainly any child whose age is 10 or younger. Maybe even 11 or 12. In which case if I had a kid, she or he probably wouldn't have been watching BUFFY in the first place.

I have a very clear memory of watching that scene when if first aired and feeling that it was atypical for BUFFY. There was the time Faith tortured Wes on ANGEL but it the individual moments of pain weren't quite as drawn out as with Gnarl and Willow.

I can see a place for a group that warns parents about content but what I hate about groups like PTC is that they judge it, proclaim it "wrong", seek to get it banned or censored, and of course deride anyone who disagrees with them as a liberal who wants to bring down the moral fiber of our nation--or some such rhetoric as that. Just because the Gnarl scene grosses me out doesn't mean you have to share that opinion or can't come to your own conclusion that there's a justification for it in its own context.

But you gotta admit it was really gross.
I remember a friend of mine stopping before before a hockey game. He came in just before the, uh, climactic scene in "Smashed." You know, with the zipper going down and all of that. I had to pick his jaw off of the floor. "This is network television?" He was fairly surprised.
Buffy is not made for kids.
Fact.
I did not let my kids watch it until I felt they were old enough, which was when they were teens. I watch everything that my kids watch,listen to what they listen to, and read what they read, however, and don't need some 'group' to tell me what I should do as a parent. I mean, it's not brain surgery to work that out.

I love watching Buff and Angel with them now; and many a time we have been able to have some deep conversations about life, love, fear, drugs, casual sex and pain thanx to it. Buffy has some great metaphors for real life situations, and is an awesome convo starter.
Use it don't abuse it.
(heh heh I just had to say that)

oh and Zachsmind, that Johnathon Swift's Modest Proposal is a truly horrifying concept! Geez, this propostion makes anything seen on Buffy like a Disney movie! Thank goodness he wasn't serious!

[ edited by nixygirl on 2005-03-28 11:32 ]
I'm afraid when it comes to small minded people like the PTC i really don't have a lot of time anymore. There was a time that i would be happy to hear somebody's alternate viewpoint to mine and debate it accordingly but with these kind of people i just can't be bothered.

It is Gnarl this week, a few weeks ago it was Spike and Harmony screwing on a desk, this time next week it will be the supposed homosexual undertones of Angel biting Hamilton in Not Fade Away. There will always be something for them to find fault with.

That is what will always work against them though. As long as there is a fresh complaint every week people will see them for what they are and they will never be taken seriously. They will continue to complain about anything and everything, ninety nine percent of said complaints will get immediately rejected and television will continue to offend them and entertain us normal people. Such is life.

As Nixygirl said though, Buffy and Angel, NOT for kids, at least not unsupervised anyway. The truth is though that, with the majority of what you see in the two series, i would have no problem with either of my nephews sitting and watching it with me as long as i was there to explain anything that bothered them. If the PTC would be willing to do the same with their individual kids and stop trying to control what everyone else's is watching they might have happier, more productive lives.
That's it Warlock, ya watch it with them and talk about it. There were obviously heaps of eps I watched with my girls before they were teens, but I never let them at the DVD's without me there. Now they can go for it.
I especially loved the ep where Buff is fighting that fear demon. That has been a great tool for my daughter in dealing with an awful lot of things in her life, from fear of friends/opinions, to fear of the dark.
I also thought Gnarl was disgusting, but then he was a demon, after all. Demons are, you know, Evil. With a capital "E". No mistaking what he was doing to Willow as being fun, or nice, or even A Good Thing to Try at Home on Your Little Brother When He Cheeses You Off.

I wasn't a genius at nine or ten years old, but I could certainly see something scary on TV (by the time I was seven, I was getting up at 6 a.m. to watch horror movies on Sunrise Theater every Saturday morning) and comprehend, without any adult explanation, that it wasn't supposed to be real life. It was compelling, but it wasn't meant to be 'good'. Nor did seeing the violence of monsters/aliens/mutant insects against humans make me want to do violence to anything. Quite the opposite, in fact.

I thought Gnarl's behavior was gross, but I also noted that the instance of violence against Willow -- while it went on longer than was strictly necessary to get the idea across -- contained no ambiguity about the act or Gnarl himself: He was bad, he did bad things, and there was no confusion on that score whatsoever.

No, it's the numbing frequency of offhanded human/human violence acts on TV I find more personally disturbing (i.e. the endless shootings, beatings, stabbings and brawling on most popular crime/procedural-influenced shows). And also the tendency of too many parents to rely on the TV as a babysitter, only to complain that it brings objectionable content into their homes. Most parents would agree, I think, that screening the sitter before issuing an invitation to spend time alone with the kids is a wise, responsible course of action. The 'power on/off' button performs that same function for the boob tube, and the V-chip enforces it.

If kids are watching shows that are inappropriate for them in their own homes, whose fault is that? Not the networks; they're just responding to those who pay their bills (advertisers), who in turn are responding to consumers (us). TV programming is conceived and generated by adults, so it makes sense that most programming reflects adult situations and address adult questions and fantasies. TV wasn't conceived to babysit; it's capable of inspiring and teaching, true, but unfortunately most shows that focus exclusively on those goals don't last long on the free broadcast networks. Parents who aren't watching what their kids are watching, or who aren't at least aware of what their kids are watching, aren't doing their part to make the system function as it's supposed to. It's up to Mom and Dad to get with the program.

Violence is generally too prevalent in our culture as a whole, and I think certain types of graphic violence (especially if excessively brutal, sadistic and depicted realistically, laced with sexual innuendo or combined with sex acts*, and/or merely gratuitous) should be voluntarily limited on network TV during certain hours. However, no one group of individuals, least of all a religiously-focused private organization, should be able to make that determination for everyone across the country.

Like it or not, living in a free society means the burden falls on us, the watchers of the media we've helped to create, to decide for ourselves where those individual lines of demarcation fall. It's up to each one of us to disengage from the culture when that threshhold has been reached. We have the power to turn our media off at will in our homes. We just have to stop making excuses for not using it.

(*To be fair, I can see how the Gnarl scene might have been perceived by some to have overtly sexual overtones, and on that basis I do think it was more objectionable than most other acts of violence ever seen on BtVS.)
Buffy and Angel were rated TV 14 always(why does no one use the V chip in their tv?). If one is letting their kids watch a show rated for teenagers and up then they shouldn't be surprised when the show actually shows mature material(not speaking about anyone here, I'm speaking of the PTC and its minions). Not every tv show should be made to appeal to every demographic available, that leads to bland crapfests like 7th heaven and Touched by a Angel.
*sigh* People are so sensitive, it's depressing really.
Hmmmm when it comes to Gnarl and ratings. In Britain, the video with "Same Time, Same Place" on it, was rated a '12' in the UK, as oppose to the majority of Buffy/Angel episodes rated at a '15', (with one Angel episode getting an '18' rating, "Five by Five" i believe). The BBFC obviously thought that this scene was not as disturbing or as bad as the Buffy/Spike sex scenes etc.

I tend to agree with the BBFC on this. I've always thought that sex was a much more contreversial thing to air on television, more than violence or swearing, mainly because you grow up seeing and hearing people using violence, and shouting out obscenities these all the time, rather than sex (Unless I'm wrong, and several Whedonesque members see people gettin' jiggy wiv it every time they walk down their road). The Gnarl incident was pretty bad, but i can think of worse things that have been shown on Buffy/Angel in regards to violence: Spike and Angel in "Destiny", Buffy and Spike in the alley in "Dead Things"

So theres my very confusing and not at all strucured take on things. Mt view of the people in the PTC: The Teacher in Donnie Darko, who Donnie asks her to "forcibly insert the lifeline card up my anus!" She is what i imagine the PTC to be.

Angel thought he had it bad when he had to face the Senior Partners. We have to face a force much worse

And come on! Who listens to the people who gave Friends a Red Light Rating for showing a condom wrapper! On television none the less!
The long, drawn out warning at the very beginning made me think it was a parody. That was the best part of the video.

I have to admit, some of the scenes were disturbing to me. (the first South Park clip made me the most uncomfortable). I don't watch much TV, but I did recognize clips from The Shield and Nip/Tuck, which I rented on DVD.

And of course the Buffy scene, which was probably the tamest of all of them. Those skin strips don't even look real in my opinion. That part wasn't creepy to me. The part that was creepy was when Gnarl was taunting Willow in his spooky sing-song voice. Eek. But I like the creep-factor on Buffy. A lot.

I did get to see a nice big spoiler for a season of The Shield on here I haven't seen yet. The one at the very end. That was almost painful to watch. I have to say that a lot of these shows they have on there, I wouldn't care to watch.

I think that's the point. Because I don't want to watch them, I just don't. But apparently the PTC want to see them, since they spend so much time viewing them just for the graphic parts. That's pretty funny actually.

And I'm also disappointed there was no Spuffy smut.
thanks Zachsmind!

Really, they were not thinking of us at all, obviously. No bdsm references, no blatant homoerotic references (between MEN, too!)
teee heeeeee! :)
One of the main problems with shows like Buffy that tries to meld different genres is that they are hard to define both for parents and programming executives, the first time Buffy was shown around here it was shown as 1630 (later 1700) afterschool TV. Although it was the UK 'cut' version and the full version was shown at midnight, most people missed out on a good TV show. For the TV planners obviously the title and the description highschool girl fighting vampires meant that it must be a kids show, as we know it really is not but no one was willing to try a primetime slot.
Still better than Babylon 5 though, the last season was shown on Sunday afternoons 1300, sci-fi around here have a limited audience.
Good valid points everyone.
I loved what you said here Electricspacegirl:

I think that's the point. Because I don't want to watch them, I just don't. But apparently the PTC want to see them, since they spend so much time viewing them just for the graphic parts. That's pretty funny actually.

That is very funny actually. Do these people have anything better to do with their time? I also thought it was a parody, until I saw Cartman and the girls in the jacuzzi, at which point I turned it off cause my teens came in and wanted to look over my shoulder, typical!!! They can sniff the smut out from a mile away!

And to Wiseblood's comment :

Parents who aren't watching what their kids are watching, or who aren't at least aware of what their kids are watching, aren't doing their part to make the system function as it's supposed to. It's up to Mom and Dad to get with the program.

I would like to see a video of them getting a good smack from the Morality Justice League!
The long, drawn out warning at the very beginning made me think it was a parody. That was the best part of the video.

Must say I thought the same thing. But the long cautionary intro also called attention, I thought, to the form (as opposed to the content) of the presentation. That is, the way in which the clips were montaged to elicit the greatest anger from the average PTC member. Everything, of course, was taken out of context, and the few seconds of television that the clips actually represent, out of the hours and hours of broadcasting, suggest by implication that these clips represent the tip of the proverbial iceberg. And, of course, for such minds, that tip of the TV iceberg also represents the degradation of all of culture -- hence the need for their "watchdog" organization. Taking the idea of selecting excerpts from the Bible, as mentioned above, I would love to see a montage of "reenacted" scenes from the Bible and present it in the same fashion, and see how much anger one might generate in the PTC members -- both from those susceptible to the content, and those members who might recognize the biblical source and be outraged that the same tactics could be used against them.
Agreed, palehorse...wonder how PTC would react to a graphic film rendition of The Rape of Dinah (Genesis 34).

Let's see...unmarried sex...mandated self-mutilation, treachery, deceit, and wanton slaughter of innocents.
I felt the same way, they kept warning about the videos
to the point that it seemed like a Monty Python bit.

And I agree palehorse, they might have been happier if there was film about someone getting stoned to death,
or cruxified (oh, wait, Mel Gibson made that movie and they all loved it!).
ZachsMind: You satirically mocked PTC for their view that children shouldn't see these things on TV. This was obvious from your comments about how they should find them out in real-life, because THAT would be more healthy, sure, uh-huh, yeah. But, in satirically mocking them for that, the implication was that you believed the opposite. It appeared that you felt children SHOULD see these things on TV, because these things exist and they're going to find out sooner or later.

I can understand Andarcel's comments, or potential confusion. Because even if violence and sex does exist in real life, and even if people do have those basic instincts of hump/eat/kill, it doesn't mean that children should be seeing it. I mean, sure, children are going to find out about sex sooner or later. Hopefully in a situation where I, or a teacher, can put it into context and explain it to them. I'd hope it wasn't from witnessing rape in real life, and I'd hope it wasn't from watching it on TV. I'm not saying these things don't happen, I'm not saying they should be banned from TV - I'm just saying that children shouldn't see them. This would seem obvious, and a point I'm sure we all agree on.

And there in lies the problem with the PTC. The PTC rants against these things for merely existing, under the guise of "Oh won't somebody please think of the children". They seem to ignore the fact that none of those shows are FOR children, that all of those shows are shown fairly late at NIGHT, and that I'd bet 95% of them came with a warning at the start about their graphic content. If a child sees these things it's because the parents are inept. Cars exist, but we wouldn't blame Ford if a nine year old drove a car off a cliff. TV exists, so why do we blame Fox for when our kids see something we don't want them to on TV? I have no idea.

As for your other comments, Zach, I get lost about what point you're trying to make. You continue with the sarcastic tone, saying that there were worse things in Buffy, like all the sex stuff, but... were you being literal? There WERE worse things in Buffy than Gnarl, other people have said this literally. I guess you were mocking PTCs usual stance of lesbian sex being teh ev3l, but they weren't saying that today.

I guess you have to look at the fact they split the series of clips into categories. Buffy was there under "Violence" and nothing else. While there might be potentially more offensive things in Buffy, everything in the show, even the stuff worse than Gnarl, wasn't nearly as bad as the other clips shown. I mean, sure, Buffy had lots of torture and vampire sex. But it didn't have stuff close to the very graphic things the PTC showed. But again, it's all taken out of context.

So, let's recap my own position:
-Buffy is not for kids.
-All the others shows in that clip reel are clearly not for kids.
-All these shows would be clearly marked as NOT BEING FOR KIDS.
-Parents should raise their own kids.
-Gnarl was awesome, and creepy. Violent, sure, but not too gratuitously, and Buffy is not for kids.
-I dislike the PTC for trying to foist their beliefs on other people.
-If you dislike what is on TV, turn it off.
The majority of these clips are from cable stations, and all television shows are rated. PTC, shut up. You just want to make television a babysitter for your children and not take any responsibility for their upbringing and wellbeing.

Really, no really, take the advice of your early-90s peers. Watch TV with your kids. Or at least try to be better parents.
I like the easy to download format so that all these outraged PTC'ers can watch the video in the privacy of their home (or their bunk - hello Jayne!) And be all outraged and moral. Or not.
::sarcasm::
Buffy removed the head of an Ubervamp with a cheesewire and THAT doesn't rate a clip? ZM did a perfect rant, so I won't compete, but honestly, they really do exasperate. If they want to upset people they should choose more carefully. (That is what they want, right?)
Getting criticized by the PTC is like a badge of honor and in some cases can result in higher ratings - I know there were lots of complaints when Desperate Housewives first aired. The publicity got more people watching! LOL!
It is fascinating to watch the reaction to these clips by people on boards like Whedonesque. It's almost like saying that you find them repulsive marks you as an anti-free speech advocate. How about this, I'm for free speech and that doesn't mean exposing children to this type of material at an early age. Young minds ARE affected by what they see. So correct labeling is not some fascist notion, just a help for parents. Will children see this kind of thing anyway ? Possibly. Should parents be more responsible for what they expose their children too ? Most definitely. Would I let my 6 year old watch every BTVS and AtS episode ? NO. Have I watched and enjoyed and in point of fact own the DVDs of every season ? Yes.
I don't see where anyone here has suggested that finding any of these clips repulsive marks that person as an "anti-free speech adovocate".

The PTC put these clips together. If that's *all* the PTC did - warn parents what they might find unsuitable for their children, I certainly would have no problem with that. The PTC desires to remove from television anything that it has found to be repulsive, not acceptable for children, etc. It employs tactics to remove what it finds offensive from television. *That* is what I find to be the definition of an anti free speech advocate.

Give parents warnings, provide technology to assist them in controlling what their kids watch, and don't. Oh wait, that already happens. Above and beyond that, there is room for television that appeals to all tastes.
Precisely, Angela. As far as i'm concerned everybody on the face of this planet is (or should be) entitled to an open and fair opinion and should be able to live their lives by their own beliefs, assuming those beliefs do not affect the freedoms of others. I'm pretty sure that everyone who is enlightened enough to be here at Whedonesque feels the same way.

Nobody has said that the people who belong to the PTC are not allowed an opinion or that they cannot live by their own beliefs. However when they start trying to push those beliefs onto others, by trying to have banned anything that they do not wish to see, that is where i have a problem. They use their freedom of speech to try and stifle the freedom of speech of others. Is it so surprising that we have issues with that?
I've said it before on this site: Brent Bozell (who heads up the PTC) is a humorless, joyless prig (yes, that's spelled correctly, but, hey, if you want to, run with it) who would be very happy to have all the shows he deems inappropriate for children removed from TV, cable and broadcast.

Just trust me on this one, folks.
Cousine, Did you miss how many times everyone on this thread agreed that these shows are not for children?

Personal Note: As I said at the beginning of this thread, I'm a squeamish person with a squeamish young son. Neither of us likes horror, blood or guts. That is one reason that once I found out what this video was, I decided not to watch it, especially since I had also decided long ago not to watch most of the shows mentioned. ---My choice, no one else's.

I like Buffy in spite of the horror and yucky stuff, not because of it. My son and I are careful about what episodes of Buffy he watches, mostly so he does not get scared or grossed out. We both recognize it is not a children's show and treat it as such. I do let him watch with me sometimes though because there are so many wonderful and thought-provoking things in the series. I would never let him watch it without me.

Saturday he caught me watching Season 4 and started asking to see different episodes.
"Please can I see where Tara and Willow first discover that they can do magic together?"
"I'm sorry, Honey, that's in 'Hush'."
"Oh no, I don't want to see that one. How about where Buffy first finds out Riley is in the Initiative?"
"That's in "Hush" too."
"Oh. How about the first time Buffy sees the Initiative?"
"That one we can do."

Watching together we have had some interesting discussions including the fact that some people confuse violence and love, mixing them together. He has also gotten a positive and casual view of homosexuality as another way some people love each other, which I personally am happy about. Though I know others would be appalled by that, the fact is that he, like so many people in the world, has Uncles and Aunts, whether by blood or adopted, who are gay. I am pleased that he has been introduced to the subject in such a positive way so that he will not be shocked or simply embarrassed by it when he is older.

All that said, the Gnarl demon is one that really grosses me out and I won't let my son watch...which is the judgement call I think everyone on this thread has been saying parents should be making rather than watchdog groups...except I said it with more words. ;-)
Nicely put newcj! Couldn't have said it better myself!
"Andarcel? It's called SATIRE! Look it up. It may also help you to look into the story behind Johnathan Swift's A Modest Proposal so that you don't take whole world so literally in the future."

I was keenly aware that you were engaged in heavy-handed sarcasm, which is sometimes confused with satire. I was responding to the positions directly implied by the sarcasm, i.e. that sex and violence, however extreme, ARE appropriate for children to see because they are "natural." I thought that this was obvious in my post, but I will be careful to make it explicit in the future. If in fact you were satirizing yourself in the act of sarcastically ranting, then I'm sorry but you really didn't leave any cues for me to pick up on such an elaborately ironic tone. And judging from at least some of the applause here, most people saw your rant as straightforward sarcasm.

To others here: I don't support the PTC in any way. It's the parents' responsibility to raise their child, not television's, and I have no sympathy for the idea that all of television should be sanatized for the sake of a minority. I just think some of the implications of Zach's post are pretty insupportable.

And no, I would never willingly expose children to Barney, Teletubbies or the like either.
As a final aside to this notably dead topic, I think children like to be scared. Sure, none of the clips in the PTC video are suitable for children, but that doesn't mean that some scary things aren't okay. A utopian world of hugging and giant rabbits can be fun for the tots, but as you get a bit older, I think things like Star Wars and Harry Potter are appealing because of their dark side. No gore, no blood, no guts, limited violence, but if any of you remember seeing Darth Vader for the first time at 11, then you'll know that half the fun was how menacing, scary and distinctly evil he was. I imagine it's the same deal for the various Harry Potter baddies today. And hell, for a younger age still, Cruella De Vil in 101 Dalmations (the original animated version) was pretty scary too.

I think what I'm saying is this: while I agree Buffy is not for kids, and while I don't like the PTC, and while I'm not saying anyone who dislikes the aforementioned clips is anti-free speech, I STILL think your kids should be watching the new series of Doctor Who. All people like gross, creepy things, at least to some degree.

/me picks nose.
There's violence on TV and movies which will make me flinch, and I've got a rule that TV-MA and R-rated stuff has to be screened by my wife and I before I'll decide if my kids can see it (as far as I'm concerned, they can wait until they're in their 30's to see the South Park movie, like I did). I haven't found much in violence that I consider offensive, though.

Sex between consenting adults, and casual nudity should not be considered an awful thing on screen. The fact is that violent sex, especially rape, is much more likely to be portrayed on screen than anything tender ("Pushups? In your bed? Naked?" OK, maybe that's not a good example) is what I consider a terrible thing.

But if I could remove one act from TV screens, it would be vomiting. I just don't need to see or hear it.
I don't really agree with this group's methods although I can see they have good motives. It is important that TV isn't constantly explicit because it would expose children to things that they shouldn't have to face yet. I know people complain that children need to grow up, but if people didn't impose restrictions then children wouldn't be able to watch TV at all if rape scenes for example were shown at any time.
However, I think that they need to view each case more closely and look at the context in which it came. I would consider very little of B/A to be gratutious, and most of the relationships and events are portrayed sensitively. But there are parts (season six in particular) which aren't entirely suitable for a young audience, even though they are important and deserve to be seen by an adult audience.
Basically I think that these groups should actually look at what they are complaining about before condemning it. As the above poster noted, it should be okay to show casual nudity or sex so that it doesn't become a completely taboo subject, but we shouldn't be barraged by unneccessary and meaningless stuff.

There is a kind of overzealous, controlling, religious element to this kind of thing. I think they are sort of obsessed by sex and intend to oppress everyone else about it. It is ironic that they spend so much time on viewing material they dislike so much.
Okay, let us parents agree that:
1. We need to limit what our children view on TV.

2. We need to take the time to find out what our children are watching, no matter what their ages, especially if they have personal televisions.

3. We have to educate our children on violence, sex, cruelty, evil, etc. because those things are right out the door (at least for those of us not living in security, gated communities).

4. Our children are out responsibilities. We need the help of others in our society, be they are our children.

5. We talk to our children as honestly (adjusted for age) as possible whenever they ask us questions about why certain people are mean, selfish, stupid, and so on.

PTC's motto is "Because our children are watching." My husband's immediate reaction was "Our children aren't."

Mine aren't watching Buffy or Angel or Nip/Tuck, etc. because I either record new shows or have shows on DVD, and my husband and I watching them when the children are in bed.

Also, I tell my children "This is a scary/mean/gross show, and you don't want to have nightmares." In which case they leave the room.

My mother took me to a Harryhausen style movie, "Jack the Giant Killer," when I was 3. This resulted in screaming nightsmares for me, and a refusal by my mother to take me to any remotely scary movie until I was in junior high. I agree with her decision. But I would never have taken my children to see it in the first place.

Okay, done beating this dead horse. Oops, the PTC is going to react to that one.

P.S. The Gnarl scene was nauseating, uncomfortable and disturbing to me, but I believe it was supposed to be. Things that evil should cause revulsion.

[ edited by darkling on 2005-03-29 22:33 ]

[ edited by darkling on 2005-03-29 22:33 ]
well spoken darkling! And I think this is the end of this thread. Rounded up nicely, eh?
End of thread, yes. Don't bother to read this. Gnarl grossed me out in a way that most Buffy violence doesn't. Why? It was graphic. Most of her standard slayings don't include spin-kicks to the head complete with spraying blood and broken teeth (although there are spin-kicks to the head). It was well-lit and slow. Scared the pants off me. In that sense it was highly effective. It was also something that I'd probably keep away from children. I have no problem with children seeing bad words or sexy stuff on tv. I have no problem with children seeing boxing, or buffy, which I consider relatively clean violence (In boxing, they signed up for it and it is a sport with a ref, in buffy it is generally tied to plot and is non-graphic iconic violence). Graphic violence is where I get twitchy. But only to the point of turning it off. When I was a kid (and actually still), I didn't like scary stuff. I wouldn't watch scary movies or tv. I don't see why that's such an unreasonable thing to assume. We have to take stuff off the air because a kid might see something that upsets them? Maybe you should teach kids to WALK AWAY from upsetting tv, or not to watch it in the first place.

Also, when was this voodoo gunk? I can't remember that bit, and I can remember every appearance of someone trying to eat a hardboiled egg (Xander hardboils the Bezoar, and Buffy's roommate, Kathy, peels one).

What bothers me about the PTC is they have the same violent reaction to Cher saying "Fuck 'em" as they do to violent rape and torture scenes. That seems messed up.
Well I don't know what they're talking about - those were great!! ;D
Would those people please remove the giant stick from their ass now??

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