"They are always very lax about putting restrictions on violence for children's movies, which I think is much more harrowing than sexuality for children"
About this Quote
Kaufman points to a cultural double standard: American gatekeepers tolerate a surprising amount of violence in media aimed at kids while treating sexuality as inherently more dangerous. Ratings bodies have long allowed elaborate battles, mass destruction, and peril under PG or PG-13 labels, yet a brief moment of nudity or frank discussion of desire can trigger a stricter rating. The result is that children routinely absorb narratives where conflict is solved with force, bodies are impervious, and injuries vanish by the next scene, while depictions of intimacy, care, or even age-appropriate conversations about bodies are sidelined as taboo.
The harm calculus behind this pattern is shaky. Research has tied frequent exposure to violent imagery to desensitization, elevated fear, and distorted views of risk. For young viewers, the spectacle of violence can be both thrilling and anxiety-inducing, and it can normalize aggression as entertainment. Sexuality, by contrast, is not synonymous with explicitness; portrayed responsibly, it can model consent, tenderness, and boundaries. Nobody is arguing for erotic content in childrens films, but there is a wide space between pornography and the total erasure of affectionate, honest representations of human connection. When ratings systems reflexively punish sexual candor while giving a pass to stylized brutality, they teach a lopsided lesson about what society values and what it fears.
Kaufman speaks from experience. As the director of Henry & June, the first film to receive the NC-17 rating, he confronted the Motion Picture Association at a moment when sexual openness in art cinema was penalized more harshly than mainstream violence. His career, including films like The Unbearable Lightness of Being and Quills, often explored desire as a serious subject, and he saw how prudishness about sex coexisted with indulgence toward violent spectacle. The challenge he poses is not to flood childrens media with eroticism, but to rethink standards so they prioritize context and potential harm: curb gratuitous violence, portray consequences honestly, and allow age-appropriate depictions of intimacy that foster empathy rather than fear.
The harm calculus behind this pattern is shaky. Research has tied frequent exposure to violent imagery to desensitization, elevated fear, and distorted views of risk. For young viewers, the spectacle of violence can be both thrilling and anxiety-inducing, and it can normalize aggression as entertainment. Sexuality, by contrast, is not synonymous with explicitness; portrayed responsibly, it can model consent, tenderness, and boundaries. Nobody is arguing for erotic content in childrens films, but there is a wide space between pornography and the total erasure of affectionate, honest representations of human connection. When ratings systems reflexively punish sexual candor while giving a pass to stylized brutality, they teach a lopsided lesson about what society values and what it fears.
Kaufman speaks from experience. As the director of Henry & June, the first film to receive the NC-17 rating, he confronted the Motion Picture Association at a moment when sexual openness in art cinema was penalized more harshly than mainstream violence. His career, including films like The Unbearable Lightness of Being and Quills, often explored desire as a serious subject, and he saw how prudishness about sex coexisted with indulgence toward violent spectacle. The challenge he poses is not to flood childrens media with eroticism, but to rethink standards so they prioritize context and potential harm: curb gratuitous violence, portray consequences honestly, and allow age-appropriate depictions of intimacy that foster empathy rather than fear.
Quote Details
| Topic | Movie |
|---|
More Quotes by Philip
Add to List
