I'll start off by saying that I'm not yet a parent (We're working on it, but it's too early to tell so far.) and therefore my comments come only from theory and observation, not from experience. With that in mind...
Yesterday afternoon my husband and I went to a matinee and saw "Spiderman 2". For anyone who hasn't seen it, it's pretty adult, the villian's costume is pretty scary, and it has lots of screaming people, and lines like "Or I'll peel the flesh from her bones", but not a lot of blood and gore or bad language, which I guess keeps it in the PG-13 rating realm. My husband and I thought it was great. What I didn't think was so great was the presence of over 50 little children under age 6. Two little girls in front of us had been dropped off by their mother, who reappeared to sit with them 5 minutes from the end of the film, I presume when her own movie was over, and behind me sat a 3 1/2 year old boy, there with his parents who are work colleagues of my husband. Throughout the movie I heard him ask his father to explain things to him: "Why are they doing that to him, dad?" Before the movie started we were chatting with him and his parents and I learned that he'd been given the choice of what to see (it was that or Shrek 2 or Harry Potter 3). I also learned that he pretty much sees everything that comes out, as his mother pops a movie into his bedroom VCR to get him to sleep at night.
I don't know what to think about all of this. I was a very imaginative, dramatic child, and I remember having nightmares for a month about the blueberry girl in Willy Wonka. My parents strictly limited TV time for my brother and me, VCR's and videos hadn't been invented yet, and the closest thing I ever got to a grownup movie as a child was something "James Bond" at the drive-in, and I slept through most of it on the backseat of the car. (Which would NEVER happen now--the sleeping in the backseat part, that is.) Lots of people have told me that things are different now, and kids are more sophisticated, but are they really? If acceptable now means we strap them safely into their carseats and take them to see 'Spiderman 2', then maybe I should abandon all hope of having children, because I'm now wondering about damaging them by forcing my 'different' views on them.
Here's where I stand: I'm inclined to agree with the American Academy of Pediatrics that children should be kept completely away from screens until the age of 2. There will be no televisions or VCRs in my children's rooms until they're teenagers, and I plan to strictly monitor what they see, read, play, surf as long as I possibly can, especially with regard to violence. I want to encourage reading and imaginative play and hands on learning about the world.
Am I fighting a losing battle? If, to quote an acquaintance, having children means "you'll give anything for time to yourself and for them to just shut up and leave you alone." am I wrong for wondering why the person who said that had children in the first place?
How do you define what's 'good' for children--yours or anyone else's?
Yesterday afternoon my husband and I went to a matinee and saw "Spiderman 2". For anyone who hasn't seen it, it's pretty adult, the villian's costume is pretty scary, and it has lots of screaming people, and lines like "Or I'll peel the flesh from her bones", but not a lot of blood and gore or bad language, which I guess keeps it in the PG-13 rating realm. My husband and I thought it was great. What I didn't think was so great was the presence of over 50 little children under age 6. Two little girls in front of us had been dropped off by their mother, who reappeared to sit with them 5 minutes from the end of the film, I presume when her own movie was over, and behind me sat a 3 1/2 year old boy, there with his parents who are work colleagues of my husband. Throughout the movie I heard him ask his father to explain things to him: "Why are they doing that to him, dad?" Before the movie started we were chatting with him and his parents and I learned that he'd been given the choice of what to see (it was that or Shrek 2 or Harry Potter 3). I also learned that he pretty much sees everything that comes out, as his mother pops a movie into his bedroom VCR to get him to sleep at night.
I don't know what to think about all of this. I was a very imaginative, dramatic child, and I remember having nightmares for a month about the blueberry girl in Willy Wonka. My parents strictly limited TV time for my brother and me, VCR's and videos hadn't been invented yet, and the closest thing I ever got to a grownup movie as a child was something "James Bond" at the drive-in, and I slept through most of it on the backseat of the car. (Which would NEVER happen now--the sleeping in the backseat part, that is.) Lots of people have told me that things are different now, and kids are more sophisticated, but are they really? If acceptable now means we strap them safely into their carseats and take them to see 'Spiderman 2', then maybe I should abandon all hope of having children, because I'm now wondering about damaging them by forcing my 'different' views on them.
Here's where I stand: I'm inclined to agree with the American Academy of Pediatrics that children should be kept completely away from screens until the age of 2. There will be no televisions or VCRs in my children's rooms until they're teenagers, and I plan to strictly monitor what they see, read, play, surf as long as I possibly can, especially with regard to violence. I want to encourage reading and imaginative play and hands on learning about the world.
Am I fighting a losing battle? If, to quote an acquaintance, having children means "you'll give anything for time to yourself and for them to just shut up and leave you alone." am I wrong for wondering why the person who said that had children in the first place?
How do you define what's 'good' for children--yours or anyone else's?
Comment