Answer: It's purpose is to provide guidance on how films should be rated.
That's just an educated guess, btw.
Its purpose is to help Parents make a decision on what they wish to expose their children to. Oddly enough, pornography seems to carry more warning than violence. We watch R rated horror films that give us nightmares and that's fine. We watch an X rated skin flick that gives us pleasure and its the height of evil.
You have characterised the American public. From where I stand I do not give a shit about Trump/Biden, but what I see is a collection of idiots.
You have it. You have an abundance of videos of actual parents quoting from actual books, citing specific cases.
Very good. It's to provide guidence ... for parents to guide their little children. Now that you've grasped the principle, apply it to books in a children's library. Parents provide guidance for the films, and for the books the children read.
It begins with inappropriate books in children's libraries, paid for with tax dollars and if not, then the parents are demonized as book banners.Gary Childress wrote: ↑Mon Apr 15, 2024 7:45 amIts purpose is to help Parents make a decision on what they wish to expose their children to. Oddly enough, pornography seems to carry more warning than violence. We watch R rated horror films that give us nightmares and that's fine. We watch an X rated skin flick that gives us pleasure and its the height of evil.
Violence is OK. Sex, though? OMG, call an ambulance!
I'm not interested in what parents might be quoting. I am interested in your opinion that certain books are "perverted", and which books they actually are. This is simple; I have asked for the titles of the books that you have personally judged "perverted", but you will not tell me.Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Mon Apr 15, 2024 1:25 pmYou have it. You have an abundance of videos of actual parents quoting from actual books, citing specific cases.
I'm not against restrictions in principle, but I can't say it's a matter of much interest to me. The public spreading of misinformation is a matter of much greater concern to me.You're not against restrictions. You're not going to simply "tolerate" all cases of such interference. And that's the only point worth us having established here.
Why are you telling me this, what's it got to do with me?
And I'm uninterested in whether your opinion is identical to mine. But I do find it interesting that you have an opinion, and so are not universally "tolerant" of the exploitation of children.
It's a aid for your understanding, because you often express incomprehension, and you apparently have not grasped the gist of IC's patient explanations.
The powers that be also rate violence and language, along with sex scenes.
Actually, Gary, the rating system is a leftover of an older period of what was called "The Hayes Code," that ended in 1968. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hays_Code. It classified films according to content, and contained prohibitions of several kinds, including "profanity, suggestive nudity, graphic or realistic violence, sexual persuasions and rape." While it was probably too tight (it prohibited even certain types of kissing, for example) and somewhat confining to 'artistic license' for directors and producers, it had a very interesting side-effect: it made things like storylines much more important, because creators could not rely on graphic violence or sex to "jazz up" weak scripts. For a time, strong writing of characters and dialogue became absolutely necessary for a film to have any real success. Another side-effect it had was the creation of a kind of "golden era" of filmmaking for women, because women's roles gained prominence: they couldn't just appear as eye-candy, and sexual tension had to be created by their snappy dialogues and interesting comportment, not by them merely peeling off clothes or being exhibited as victims. As a consequence, some of Hollywood's greatest women stars appeared during this period. Think of Hepburn, Kelly, Bacall, Davis...Gary Childress wrote: ↑Mon Apr 15, 2024 7:45 amIts purpose is to help Parents make a decision on what they wish to expose their children to. Oddly enough, pornography seems to carry more warning than violence. We watch R rated horror films that give us nightmares and that's fine. We watch an X rated skin flick that gives us pleasure and its the height of evil.
Violence is OK. Sex, though? OMG, call an ambulance!
You publicly made an allegation, and I think it reasonable that you should be expected to account for it. That is what this is about; not whether our opinions happen to match.Immanuel Can wrote: ↑Mon Apr 15, 2024 1:46 pmAnd I'm uninterested in whether your opinion is identical to mine.
I don't think we should tolerate the deliberate spreading of false or misleading information.So since the OP here is about tolerance. We can see your stand is that we shouldn't tolerate everything.
I've "alleged" nothing about you, and owe you no more. Sorry.
I don't think we should tolerate the deliberate spreading of false or misleading information.[/quote]So since the OP here is about tolerance. We can see your stand is that we shouldn't tolerate everything.