What Is Pg-13 Bad For Children

Words: 1053
Pages: 5

The movie industry is one of the biggest in today’s world with a revenue of around 40 billion dollars and around 600 movies a year are made and shown in theaters across the world. The Motion Picture Association of America (M.P.A.A) is in charge of of rating these movies to decide what age levels it is appropriate for. These ratings are used by parents to decide what films are appropriate for their children to see. Yet, a recent debate has sparked on the validity of these ratings, especially when it comes to PG-13 movies. A PG-13 rating means parent’s should be cautious for children under 13, while a movie with an R rating is strictly for people ages 17 or older. In recent years, the ratings on movies have grown more lenient towards graphic …show more content…
It is hard to deny that there is an issue with movie ratings and their accuracy, yet many argue what the cause of the issue is. I believe the film industry does not view violence as a sensitive subject to younger viewers and therefore does not take it into enough consideration when it comes to rating a movie. Movies such as Captain America, The Dark Knight, and The Avengers all contain violent material, yet young kids are make up a large percentage of the fan bases. According to Joseph Price et al., in an article for the Journal of Children and Media, “Experimental studies demonstrate that exposure to media violence causes people to have more positive attitudes about aggression and to behave more aggressively immediately afterwards”(241). Studies for years have shown that violence portrayed in the media affects its audience psychologically. Priya Nalkur et al. state, “Explicit violence is an especially worrisome influence of films and other screen media considering extensive research showing that violent behavior in youth is linked to violent media consumption”(440). As violence becomes more common and welcome in movies, we as a society become more …show more content…
Price et al. state, “Although parents differ in their feelings about which types of content have the most impact on their children, there is much more evidence of the negative psychological effects of exposure to violence than of exposure to sex or profanity”(241). The argument over this issue should not focus on why sexual content is rated harsher than violence, because both materials should be restricted for older audiences. Yet, the biggest issue at hand is, as of now, violence is viewed as safer for younger audiences than sexual content. Price et al. examines a study done by Ron Leone who found that “violence was mentioned in 81% of the R-rated movie descriptions but in only 31% of the supposedly more explicit NC-17 descriptions. In contrast, sexuality was mentioned in 58% of the R-rated descriptions and 96% of the NC-17 descriptions”(242). This shows the double standard between violence and sexuality depicted in movies. Those who argue that sexual content being rated strictly is the cause of unreliable ratings, should realize the bigger issue is that violence is not. Leone’s study shows that movie rating descriptions show that sexual content is in a movie, whereas violent content is left out of the description. “The MPAA rating system fares relatively well in informing parents about potential youth exposure to explicit sex. However, its treatment of violence