The current controversy over giving the movie Bully an R-rating is akin to the current movement of conservative men "helping" women protect themselves against "evil" decisions. The movie is intended to battle widespread and ever-increasing bullying. There is an advantage to having parents see the film and learn more about the problem and its consequences, but the real target audience is and should be children. The fact that the movie contains what we called "curse" or "dirty" words (when I was a child 80 years ago) should hardly serve to bar seeing it by those who need it the most.
How can we continue this ridiculous notion that somehow our children must be shielded from hearing certain words? I recently posted an article decrying the hypocrisy of prohibiting profanity on television but letting the most horrendous violence thrive without restriction.
What is the harm to children from hearing these words in a movie, particularly when they hear those same words everyday in the schoolyard, on the streets and probably even in their own home? The language that can harm them is that coming from a bully, and that is the message the R-rating keeps them from hearing.
If parents, nonetheless, want to shield their children from such language they certainly are free to do so, but there should be no external restriction on movie admission merely because of the language a film contains. I have a sneaking suspicion that those who are most strongly in favor of the prohibition are the same ones who decry government interference (although the restrictions here are industry-, not government-, imposed). No one other than parents should be telling children what words they can hear. It is more important for children to learn the harm and dangers of bullying than be shielded from the language used in carrying out that bullying.
Marshall Fine: Movie review: The importance of Bully
Michael Tucker: It's Time That We Rethink How We Rate Movies
Patrick Gill: Why Bully's Rating Should Be Changed
It could be argued that the film's producers are trying to bully the MPAA into changing the rating as well...
Language is a big deal, Rush L, and the Montana judge are examples of how language can be used to harm others. Consider the reaction their words had to the public.It makes me wonder about how both Rush and the judge behaved as children. I suspect horribly, considering their adult behaviors.
In America film and television are powerful mediums that bring public awareness to events and people outside of themselves. Censorship of The Bully has the potential to sanitize the impact of bullying, and may mislead the public about the degrees of maliciousness that occurs when people are victims of bullying.
I am borrowing words now of an iconic movie psychopath, Hannibal Lecter, who describes the reason why this movie should not be censored : "To understand something you have to look at what it does." In this case what IT does is abuse, and the tactics and precise language are key to both understanding and prevention of bullying.
When a child feels that suicide is the only option left, do we really have time to tip-toe around the subject? Children are dying.
I agree with Mahr's take on the parents living in a narcissistic bubble - I believe the bubble is more about protecting the parents - against their responsibility to educate their children about sex, bullying, and personal identity growth during a critical age in their lives, and surrounded by potentially hostile schoolmates. About a month ago there was a big stir on YouTube because pre-pubescent "tween" girls (ages 9 - 13) were making open videos asking, "Am I pretty?" - many of them had been called ugly and further viciously denigrated by fellow students - the remarks to their posts were filled with hate and vitriolic rhetoric - telling these fragile minds that they were "ugly and that they'd be doing the world a service if they killed themselves." Apparently, at least one of them did so. I kept asking - why do kids turn to other kids - regarding so many crucial, personal growth issues - rather than their parents? Then I remembered those parents living in those narcissistic bubbles.
As far as the film - media has become the new parent - it's what kids will listen to - of course it should be seen by as many as possible - along with their "bubble-headed" parents.
Thanks, Judge.