What age is BTVS and Angel aimed at ??

[JCC]

I'm fourteen right now, but I first discovered Buffy when I was like, 7.

I think that every child should watch Buffy and Angel. Buffy especially for children, because it deals with issues like same-sex relationships maturely and respectfully, and I think that the entire series is evocative, fun and defining of a liberal mindset.

 

[Crazy Flakes]

I think that every child should watch Buffy and Angel. Buffy especially for children, because it deals with issues like same-sex relationships maturely and respectfully, and I think that the entire series is evocative, fun and defining of a liberal mindset.

I disagree. Even though their portrayal of a very nice, loving, and healthy same-sex relationship can be good for kids, there are way too many bad interpretations of sex for it to be a healthy show for kids. Buffy has casual sex with a lot of men, and notice that she never gets an STD, pregnant, or anything. Even though it did sort of deal with the emotional harm casual sex can do (i.e. Buffy hates herself for sleeping with Parker and Spike), it never really affects her in the long run. Plus, it's way too graphic for children. But I do agree that it can help give teenagers who have already been through the physical damage casual sex can do a better mindset.

As far as the age you should be to watch Buffy, it's definitely relative to the person. I'm friends with a fourteen-year-old who loves Buffy and Angel, and she seems to understand both shows just as well as anyone else. On the other hand, there are probably a lot of other young teenagers who don't get it. Overall, I think the first couple of seasons of Buffy are fine for preteens, since the chances are that a lot of the sexual innuendo would go over their heads, but by season 6, it might get a little too explicit for anyone younger than a mature 13 to 15-year-old.

 

[The Chosen]

My sister is 6 and she can watch it with me. She ain't afraid of no Buffy.

But she grew up with me watching all this stuff and she's not really scared...she even knows how to kill a vampire! Lol.

 

[LittleMissLikesToFight]

I was 10 or 11 when it started and i didn't find it too scary, i actually understood the campyness of it so took some of it as more humorous. i can;t believe i was that young though it didn't "feel" like it haha.

 

[Jenny]

My sister is 6 and she can watch it with me. She ain't afraid of no Buffy.

Forget the baddies and goulies. I'm trying to picture my nine-year old watching Spike do Buffy in the alley. Or in the balcony of the Bronze. Mommy, why is that white-haired guy bumping that blonde girl up against the wall?

EDIT - HAD to edit because Crazy Flakes' rep comment made me laugh so hard! 😀 😀

 

[Mr. Pointy]

Sorry to sound like an old fossil but if the rating is 12 or 15 then a nine-year-old should not be watching it...those ratings are given for a reason by people who should know what they're doing. Those of you who know me will know that I am generally anti-censorship, except when it comes to kids' viewing.

I don't care how mature you think the average nine-year-old is but their mind is simply not developed enough to deal with some of the more complicated emotions and concepts that are dealt with in Buffy and Angel. They enjoy the action sequences and the obvious comedy but some of the more intense stuff can be upsetting for them. So, unless someone with a respected qualification in paediatrics or similar can convince me otherwise, I will stand by my first statement.

 

[palabravampiress]

^ I'm against enforced censorship. I like having ratings on TV, though. TV ratings will tell you roughly what kind of objectionable material a show contains and to roughly what extent. That allows you, as a viewer, to make an informed decision about whether or not you want to watch. After that, I think the parents should decide what is appropriate for their children, not the state.

I didn't watch Buffy when I was young (it didn't exist), so I can't say for sure what I would have thought or how much I would have understood. I CAN say that my parents probably would have let me watch it. TV shows, movies, books, video games... all of these can be used as a window to the world. You can present real-world issues in a non-threatening environment and start a dialogue with your child. When I was young, I'd already seen a lot. Addiction, sex, violence... these are part of the world. For whatever reason, I wasn't a sheltered little kid who had never had to deal with these things. When I was six or so, a family member got shot, arrested, and eventually sent to prison. Prior to that (and after), he had alcohol addiction issues and is/was a violent drunk. This uncle lived a block down the street from me, so he was always in my life. The next year, my teenage aunt (also down the street) got pregnant and married. Some other cousins followed suit. The next year, there was a shooting at the Jr. High right next to my elementary school. The next year, the aforementioned aunt was chased at knifepoint around her apartment by her insane husband (he was institutionalized for awhile and, predictably, they also got a divorce). You get the point: I was young, but that didn't stop the world around me from going on exactly as the world does, bad things included. I was young, but I wasn't stupid; I knew what was going on around me. It affected me. In some ways, it marked me. My parents often used media as a springboard for discussions about the real world. Using TV or books offered a comforting sense of distance and a bit of objectivity. Also, my television viewing habits didn't rank very high up there on the list of stuff to be worried about. lol.

That's just my two cents. I think there is objectionable material in Buffy. I even think there are things in it that don't translate well unless you have some real-world experience (like Doublemeat Palace; I love that episode... mostly because I remember the horror and drudgery of that kind of work). I just think that presenting real life issues through this highly metaphor-infused mythos of vampires, demons, and slayers functions very much like the fairy tales of old (before they were watered down). I think people need that -- kids as well as adults. I think it can be comforting and enlightening to get some distance by putting a monster's face on our problems. In a lot of ways, it makes scary or taboo topics a lot more accessible. I think that framing real-world issues in this way when you are younger can help prepare you for dealing with their real-world counterparts when you are older.

When I was young (twelveteen or so. lol), I watched a soap opera story in which a teenage boy gets AIDS and accidentally passes HIV onto his girlfriend. The boy died slowly and horribly. The girlfriend lives, to this day, with HIV. This story was pretty darn intense -- maybe too intense for a twelve-year-old. Even so, my mom practically forced me to watch it. She used it as a springboard for a continued and semi-open dialogue about the importance of safe sex. That story definitely took me into my teens with my head on straight with regard to sex. Because my mom had used that story to address real-world issues in a relatively open manner, including medical facts and statistics, I had a good basis for decision-making when I was on my own (and I'd been willing to listen to my mom's opinions because they weren't about ME, they were about the characters). So, yeah. Just as my mom used a soap opera story as a teaching tool, I think she would have used Buffy as a teaching tool, too, had it existed when I was a young child. I don't think Buffy is necessarily aimed at young kids (just as soaps aren't aimed at young kids), but that doesn't mean that a conscientious parent can't use it in a positive, constructive way.

 

[SC7 Fan]

my lil sis is nine and she watched a couple of episodes with me and she was really scared so i wouldnt recommend it for lil kids

 

[Jenny]

Sorry to sound like an old fossil but if the rating is 12 or 15 then a nine-year-old should not be watching it...those ratings are given for a reason by people who should know what they're doing. Those of you who know me will know that I am generally anti-censorship, except when it comes to kids' viewing.

I don't care how mature you think the average nine-year-old is but their mind is simply not developed enough to deal with some of the more complicated emotions and concepts that are dealt with in Buffy and Angel. They enjoy the action sequences and the obvious comedy but some of the more intense stuff can be upsetting for them. So, unless someone with a respected qualification in paediatrics or similar can convince me otherwise, I will stand by my first statement.

You know what, I don't even turn on the TV when the little one is in the room. 99.999 percent of what is on is just totally inappropriate for little ears and eyes. And you know, I never realized it until I was watching things from HER perspective. And I mean shows like Friends, Oprah, Simpsons, whatever, not just shows with the supernatural themes to them.

I'm actually surprised how many stories here are popping up about youngsters watching Buffy or any show not specifically targeted at children (and even some of those are questionable).

My sister's good friends' son is displaying scary violent tendencies. Not necessarily physically (although he IS somewhat more innapropriately physical than most children his age), but he threatens to kill his mom, or other kids, with knives etc. He is turning 5 in July. He was threatened with expulsion from his daycare centre.

Well wouldn't you know it came up in casual conversation that this boy has seen SAW III. Watched it with his mother and her fiance. I was flabbergasted. I don't think exposure at an early age is a way of desensitizing children. Heck I don't WANT my daughter desensitized.

Mr. P I agree with you wholeheartedly, I guess maybe until you have children and grandchildren of your own you don't realize how you are their advocates, and exposure to those kinds of shows - well I hate to say the word abusive but it most certainly is neglectful to say the least.

 

[Joyce Summers]

You know what, I don't even turn on the TV when the little one is in the room. 99.999 percent of what is on is just totally inappropriate for little ears and eyes. And you know, I never realized it until I was watching things from HER perspective. And I mean shows like Friends, Oprah, Simpsons, whatever, not just shows with the supernatural themes to them.

Agreement here. You always seem to assume the bad content comes from more supernatural or action shows, but when my neice was here with her parents a few months ago, she came across an episode of Friends which while it obviously wasn't terrible the characters started talking about things you do not want a seven year old to hear. Her Mother and I couldn't reach the remote quickly enough. Luckily, the girl remained entirely clueless and naive which is exactly how it should be.
I mean some references are so unexpected. My Mom entirely regretted letting me watch Grease when I was five and I asked 'What's the word Rizzo sings? Lousy with what?'. My Mom told me she wasn't sure either and it was probably made up. I mean I don't think Grease is inappropriate for children in general but their are some scenes I'd really rather they not see.

And as for Buffy, there's very few episodes where the show is entirely fun and innocent without one bit that is inappropriate or would scare young children. I mean can you imagine a seven or eight year old watching Hush? Or Dead Things? It just doesn't seem right. For the majority of the show, especially but not exclusively, the later seasons I just don't think young kids are old enough for the content. I mean even Teacher's Pet could bring up a situation like the Grease scenario. Although I have know TV stations in the past to air Buffy in the early hours appropriate for children wherein they edit out any slight swearing, sex scenes and references etc. But still, I don't know whether I'd still be unsure about young children watching it, but that's just me.

Well wouldn't you know it came up in casual conversation that this boy has seen SAW III. Watched it with his mother and her fiance. I was flabbergasted. I don't think exposure at an early age is a way of desensitizing children. Heck I don't WANT my daughter desensitized.

The boy of FIVE SAW SAW III?!!! Oh my god. That's just, those films terrify me and for a young boy to see it....no wonder he's having serious violence issues. Seeing films like that at such a young, and impressionable, age is going to make it appear the norm. After all that's an age where it's difficult sometimes to differentiate between reality and virtual.
And like you said, why is desensitizing a GOOD thing? I certainly don't want my daughter desensitized either. That's when you get problems like this. Desensitized means not caring and not acknowledging. How is not bothering about violence in the world a good thing? That just...distorts, well, everything. I have to say letting a little boy see SAW III is completely insane.

 

[Mr. Pointy]

^ I'm against enforced censorship. I like having ratings on TV, though. TV ratings will tell you roughly what kind of objectionable material a show contains and to roughly what extent. That allows you, as a viewer, to make an informed decision about whether or not you want to watch. After that, I think the parents should decide what is appropriate for their children, not the state.

I understand the point you were making in the rest of your post and agree with the paragraph above insofar as it goes. Unfortunately it relies upon the parental discretion involved to be responsible parental discretion, which I feel is less often the case these days - Jenny's case of the five-year-old watching the Saw movie, is an example of what I'm talking about.

I'm now going to sound like some reactionary old Tory, which kind of rankles with me because I'm so far from that it's unreal (except in this one area).

It seems to me that in western society today more and more people are inclined to take less and less responsibility for their actions (and the consequences thereof). Normally, this doesn't bother me overmuch...I sigh, tut and do all those grumpy old men things (moaning a lot and not doing much unless it affects me directly) but the one thing that does bother me is when it is in connection with children. Yes, it is a decision that should be taken by parents but it seems to me that many parents (by no means all fortunately) are abdicating that responsibility in favour of an easy life.

For me, allowing, whether deliberately or by omission, a child to experience any media inappropriate to his or her age is tantamount to abuse as they are being exposed to material which they simply are unable to correctly process.

Now I know that there is no definite scientific proof of a link between, for example, a child's TV viewing habits and any bad behaviour but more and more I'm prepared to accept the anecdotal evidence that there is such a link. I think that all of us can come up with similar examples to Jenny's from our own lives - I certainly can (it's a losing battle but I still try to fight it).
If you'd asked me twenty years ago I would have said this was rubbish...there is no scientific evidence, therefore there is no link...I would've been certain and unswayable. So, what is the difference? For the last several years my immediate family has included young children, which has completely reversed my opinion...getting to a point now 🙂...and I sometimes find it difficult to look further than ensuring their protection and well-being as much as I can.

You are right palabra, we can't keep kids in a cocoon as the bad things in the world carry right on happening around us but we can (and should) try to deflect the worst of those things away from them when they are too young to properly understand them.

...phew!

 

[Tueuse de Vampires]

My sister's good friends' son is displaying scary violent tendencies. Not necessarily physically (although he IS somewhat more innapropriately physical than most children his age), but he threatens to kill his mom, or other kids, with knives etc. He is turning 5 in July. He was threatened with expulsion from his daycare centre.

Well wouldn't you know it came up in casual conversation that this boy has seen SAW III. Watched it with his mother and her fiance. I was flabbergasted. I don't think exposure at an early age is a way of desensitizing children. Heck I don't WANT my daughter desensitized.

I know a kid like that. A friend of mine has this 7 years old brother. And well, he calls us names like 'Schlampe' (the German version of bitca) and hits us (of course as long as he only hits us that's no real harm, I mean, he's a child), feels really superior in fighting, and uses really questionable language in general (language even I wouldn't use). Well, and let's just say, in their house, the TV is ALWAYS running, seriously, I've known my friend for 9 years and in all the times I've been over, the TV was never off (and they watch some really questionable movies from time to time). So honestly, I kinda blame the TV for the behaviour of her little brother.

Now I know that there is no definite scientific proof of a link between, for example, a child's TV viewing habits and any bad behaviour but more and more I'm prepared to accept the anecdotal evidence that there is such a link. I think that all of us can come up with similar examples to Jenny's from our own lives - I certainly can (it's a losing battle but I still try to fight it).
If you'd asked me twenty years ago I would have said this was rubbish...there is no scientific evidence, therefore there is no link...I would've been certain and unswayable. So, what is the difference? For the last several years my immediate family has included young children, which has completely reversed my opinion...getting to a point now 🙂...and I sometimes find it difficult to look further than ensuring their protection and well-being as much as I can.

I wouldn't generalize that, though. My dad let my brother and me watch Star Trek with him for EVER. So already in kindergarden I watched the original series, and from when I was 6, we watched Voyager every week. Star trek is probably not even anywhere remotely close to kid's TV, but still I don't think it has harmed us in any way. Quite to the contrary, my brother claims his interest in physics stems from there and I personally think it also teaches some great moral values.
On the other side, when I was in kindergarten, almost everyone was into Powerrangers, or The Turtles, well shows like that, aimed at a younger generation. I never watched any of these, but from what I've seen it didn't do anything good for kids, at least the ones I've known.

 

[InsaneMystic]

I come from a family where nobody minded me (and even my kid sister!) watching horror movies at an awfully young age. I must have been nine or ten when I watched "American Werewolf in London" (and that's none too light stuff, if anyone doesn't remember the film; one or two scenes of it still freak me out today, esp. the nightmare sequence when the demon soldiers invade the main char's home), and my four years younger sister (!!) was watching along. While I guess it doesn't traumatize a kid any more than growing up in a severely dysfunctional and violent family does anyway (I don't think watching this stuff got me any worse for the wear, but that's because I was pretty bad for the wear already), in hindsight I can only agree that "parental discretion" of this sort pretty much constitutes abuse in itself.

And come on, SAW III at five? I don't watch SAW even now in my thirties, as stuff of that caliber freaks me out even though I'm no sissy to horror movies. Having a kindergarten kid watch that is just sick, I can't put it another way.

 

[palabravampiress]

Well yeah, the downside of allowing parents the freedom to make their own decisions about what their children view and under what circumstances is that some parents make spectacularly craptastic decisions. I'm sort of a wimp when it comes to horror movies, so I've never had any interest in seeing any of the Saw movies, but that certainly doesn't sound like a film that should be viewed by a young child.

Mind, what I'm advocating here isn't just letting kids watch any old thing (like SAW!) sans any sort of structure or supervision. I think that is irresponsible. I'm just saying that, while Buffy is aimed for a young adult or adult audience consisting of teens on up, I think that with the parental guidance, Buffy could be viewed by those in a younger age group without causing any sort of major psychological damage. Certainly, this doesn't apply to every episode, circumstance, or child, though. If something seems to be frightening or otherwise influencing your child to an unhealthy extent, then by all means, turn the channel or begin some completely unrelated activity (like playing an actual game). Basically, I'm against government-enforced censorship, but parents should be allowed to censor as they choose -- and, indeed, I think that is part of being a responsible parent. I am sure that had I wanted to watch SAW when I was in kindergarten (or, say, one of the Hellraiser movies, which would have been more contemporary), my parents would have said No and found a more constructive outlet for those desires. I'm not saying that parents can't say no; I'm just saying that allowing a child under the recommended age of 15 or so to view Buffy is not necessarily abuse or neglect, nor do I believe that parents should be held legally accountable in any way if they do make the decision to allow their children to view Buffy prior to the recommended age. It's all well and good to express outrage or dismay at your neighbor's poor parenting; it's quite another to have your parenting techniques (including media censorship -- or not) regulated and/or mandated by the state, which is what would be the case if ratings were enforced by the government.

Just as it is possible to make your child's media intake decisions in an irresponsible, neglectful, and harmful way, I think that it is possible to make those decisions in a responsible, conscientious, and possible beneficial way, as well. I think neglectful TV viewing habits in parents are usually part of a larger pattern of neglect (in which they allow the TV to do the raising). It is a true shame, but some parents are neglectful. Even so, I really don't think that the fact that some parents are neglectful means that the state needs to step in and enforce standards to the extent that it takes choice (and responsibility) away from parents (or even punishes those) who would choose to flout age ratings for perfectly defensible, responsible reasons. So, while I've got no particular beef with the existence of age-related ratings, I do have a beef with the idea that all such ratings are set-in-stone and that flouting them necessarily constitutes neglect or abuse.


All of that said, I should note that I am a childless libertarian. 🙂

 

[Mr. Pointy]

All of that said, I should note that I am a childless libertarian. 🙂

Duly noted... 😉

Actually, I think we're arguing the same thing from different perspectives here.

I very much agree that it is the responsibility of the parent to control what their child is exposed to. The sad thing is that there are too many parents who don't take that responsibility at all seriously and I think that where that abdication of responsibility is taken to the extreme that it is damaging to a child then society has a duty to step in to protect that child. Ratings on a DVD or TV programme are only recommendations when all is said and done and it should be up to a parent to make a decision based on those recommendations and other information available to them.

I don't honestly believe that a nine-year-old who accidentally watches one 12-rated episode of Buffy will be mentally scarred beyond redemption, especially if it is framed in a context by parents. However, to make it a regular event that the same kid gets to watch unsupervised 12-, 15- and even 18-rated material on a regular basis is a different thing altogether.

 

[Superstar]

Now I know that there is no definite scientific proof of a link between, for example, a child's TV viewing habits and any bad behaviour but more and more I'm prepared to accept the anecdotal evidence that there is such a link.

It is not just tv. There are many outside influences.
Music is of probably more consequence than tv, especially to young minds.
Try listening to... say rap for an example - and its glorification.
Then explore the mystery of mixed messages sent where the singers are given more "cred" by how much time they have spent in jail, how many drive-by's they have been in, how they treat other people and who got murdered first; like it's a contest in cruelty.
Couple that with immediate environment, school conditions, television habits, choices of friends and outright peer pressure and you have a massive powder keg.
And yes, I am talking about 5 year old and up.

 

[Jenny]

OK I just went up and gave my sleeping daughter a hug...this discussion is saddening me for some reason.

To the poster whose friends have the TV on all the time. It's not the TV's fault. It's the parents. Turn the TV off.

palabravampiress - I very much agree with Mr. P's response to you. However I am just trying to see how it could be appropriate for a 9, 10, 13 year old to watch a man get flayed, the 'powerful female role model' almost get raped by someone who is supposed to love her...etc. I KNOW these shows all have important messages. I LOVE the show. I am talking about the show on a very basic level...scenes and images appearing on the screen. 11 year olds don't have the comprehension level to 'get' the show the way we do as we age and are able to reason and analyze in a much more mature way.

And frankly, the parent's responsibility is not limited to just TV. All other types of media fall under the reign of a parent's responsibility. We do our best to teach them, guide them, raise them to be empathetic, kind, worthy humans. But what it comes down to, and I can't say it enough, but we are our children's advocates. They need us, they can't do it on their own. Their protection and soundness of mind are our responsibilities, just as much so as ensuring they eat a healthy diet and are physically active. As far as I'm concerned it's just another basic necessity, that protection.

 

[T.I.P]

I think maybe 13 and above. I mean, alot of kids wouldnt get some of
the jokes or some of the themes and character stories, but it definetly
aint to violent or scary for kids. I seen much scarier stuff than Btvs
at a young age.

 

[Kean]

I started watching Buffy when I was 11 but as Lyri pointed out as the show matured so did I. Now, with the dvds, you can watch the whole thing within a month. That's where the problem starts I think. Neither my mother nor father liked the fact that I watched Buffy. In fact I had to do it behind their backs for the first 4 seasons, they couldn't really stop me by then. A result of me watching Buffy so young is that my neice grew up watching it (She was born literally just when I started watching the show). I was essentially still a child and didn't realise how unsuitable it was for her. Now she is 9 1/2 years old and absolutely adores the show. I cannot stop her watching it altogther but I won't allow her to watch certain episodes (or certain parts of episodes) or any of season 6 until she is like 25! I still see her as my baby and it freaks me out to no end to think of her watching Buffy and Spike kamshucking all over the place, or druggie Willow and especially Spike's attempted rape of Buffy. If I had the choice I would not have let her watch the show untill she was 15 or something like that. Despite the fact that I watched it at an extremely young age I know won't let my kids watch it until they are well into their teens. I just think we should try and let kids be kids for as long as we can, and Buffy is very much a grown up show.

 

[bufsum]

Great thread, here's my perspective:

My dad let my brother and me watch Star Trek with him for EVER.

Replace 'brother' with sister and this is my family. I am 4 years older than my sister... and one of my fondest memories (when my sister was still learning to hold her head up) is sitting on my dad's knee, watching Star Trek. It was a weekly ritual that I will always hold dear. Along with Star Trek I watched The X Files at a very young age, as well. My sister's first crush was on DD. We were desensitized at a very young age. And it was done with our parents in the same room. They were very diligent about explaining any questions we had... and I never remember being too scared to sleep, or any of that. And, the only thing that upset my sister was the episode Hush"¦ and, who can blame her? It was as if these shows provided a safe space for us, and our imaginations.

The whole reason we began watching Buffy is because the initial advertisements claimed it was from "the producers who brought you The X Files," or something to that effect. My sister was 8 at the time. We did grow up with it, and with XF and ST, as well. They are a part of my childhood, and I am proud of them, and of my parents, as well. We gained a lot of prospective from what we watched, and I believe it endowed us a balance of cynicism, realism, and morality; which combined with religion merged surprisingly easily.

At first my parents (mom, especially) were hesitant about us watching Buffy. I remember the first season my sister would be sent to bed early sometimes, unable to watch the show. However, that faded over time"¦ when my mother saw that the show was not causing any ill effects, and was drawing her daughters closer together. The show became a weekly ritual for the two of us, and we often discussed the shows in details"¦ including choices we disagreed with (Spike and Buffy's harmful relationship during season 6 being a big one). All in all, I think the decision needs to be decided on a family-by-family basis. Some children are able to assimilate the more graphic images that Buffy had to offer than others. However, there are obvious exceptions (many of which have already been mentioned).

And, if a family is unstable, and television viewing will not be monitored, than watching something harmful on television may be used as an escape from what is happening in the child's day to day life. This is by no means condoning that behavior, just a possibility.

On a final note: there is clearly no easy answer to this question, it is somewhere in the grey.