Actor calls 13-year-old girls "whores" at Universal Hollywood, according to cell phone video

Jeff, that's one thing I kind of thought about: was the actor told to use the same language no matter the age? Did she have a basic script that included this word for females? Did this actor choose to not break character, or does Universal stress not breaking character for any reason? Could a less strong word have been used seeing these girls were obviously younger (such as brat) or a more...subtle turn of phrase (maybe even "fresh meat" or "tainted" or just about any other phrase)? I'm not as upset about this supposedly happening (I'm not a total ass that doesn't get a little uncomfortable that children were called whores), but I agree with slithernoggin that perhaps this should have just never been said to begin with. Just to be a smart amusement park. A smart business in general. These girls shouldn't have been there unsupervised, and it is a parenting fail, but the park should either use some sound judgment or set definite age limits to attend or not attend unsupervised.

So, is this an adult only night? I'm asking seriously.

I'm saying unless it is stated it's an adult only night, then most parents would think it's safe to let their teens roam.

That's what I'm saying: the park could set an age limit on the haunt to possibly negate some of the issues having younger children attend obviously creates. Or the park could have some sort of wristband for kids under a certain age that indicates "I'm not allowed to attend certain areas without parental/adult supervision". Or they could make it adult only or even 16 and up. Just throwing some ideas out there.

It's an event that has Extreme Mature Content. It doesn't have to Say adults only.

I don't get how these people were warned that they'll face extreme mature content are offended when they in fact faved extreme adult content.

It doesn't matter what kind of place the event is held in.

If I break the law out of ignorance, I still broke the law. If I go to an extremely adult event out of ignorance, I'm still at an extremely adult event.

PS this event has been going on for well over a decade and now we should put an age restriction mandatory just because two thirteen year old girls were exposed to something they weren't ready for?

Makes no sense to me.

Clearly, it wasn't the girls in this particular case that had a problem with the language, it was the (disengaged) mothers.

That said, my issue with this argument -- people who enter a place advertised as having "extremely adult content" can't complain about adult content -- is that at an amusement park, children have access to the adult content. You can't rely on children to police themselves.

And that's why their parents shouldn't have allowed them to go. Whether it's a theme park or not, that's on the parents.

Wonder how much longer this dead animal can be pummeled...

"Extremely Adult" sounds a lot like, as I said before, actors dropping F-bombs and flashing their *******, of which I am pretty sure Universal is not doing.

LostKause said:

"Extremely Adult" sounds a lot like, as I said before, actors dropping F-bombs and flashing their ******, of which I am pretty sure Universal is not doing.

Which then makes the warning overkill and more effective/restrictive than it actually needs to be.

Which is a good thing, right? Err on the side of caution.

Vater said:

Wonder how much longer this dead animal can be pummeled...

Well, it is Halloween.

Tekwardo, I'm in agreement with you. I'm not advocating for an age restriction. I am sorry these girls were upset, and all around (as Vater said), the whole thing just sucks. I was more wondering if the park could or would find an age restriction beneficial. They'd be less open to stuff like this happening again, not to mention children would be safer if accompanied by an adult in such a crowded and highly charged event. I'm just kinda wondering if it has come up in meetings or the like. Dorney had an age restriction in place for Haunt that seemed like it was enforced pretty well (I saw a few younger people get turned away even with adult supervision). I actually don't like the idea all that much, but I can see where it has its benefits.

All in all, epic parenting fail. Then teaching your children that when you get butthurt about something, you should hire a lawyer and go to the media? Even bigger parenting fail. What's bigger than epic? Meta?

Apocalyptic?

Tekwardo said:

Stop assuming the actor knew these girls were underaged.

Tekwardo said:
If I break the law out of ignorance, I still broke the law.

0_o

Jeff, it seems to me that you want to blame the actor instead of the girls who shouldn't have been there in the first place. The park did have warnings up which the kids didn't heed. IT's not the park's fault that the parents are too stupid to understand what adult material means. You stated that warnings are irrevelevant but maybe it's the people who make that claim who are int he wrong.

Jeff said:

Tekwardo said:

Stop assuming the actor knew these girls were underaged.

Tekwardo said:
If I break the law out of ignorance, I still broke the law.

0_o

I guess I have to do the work and connect the dots for you?

The Actor was paid to do what she did, and had been doing for a month. It's not up to the actor to assume that these girls are either underaged or not mature enough at any age to be offended by her. Because, regardless of your opinion on the matter of the warning, there was a warning present, and the actor was acting within the bounds of said warning.

But you keep saying that the warnings don't matter, it's still inappropriate. Fine, again, that's your opinion, but the reality is that there was a warning, and just like the law, ignorance (of the warning) is no excuse to be able to say that someone didn't expect to be confronted with EXTREME (not a vague term) Adult (again, not really that vague) or Mature (ditto) content.

But nice straw man argument just quoting 2 things and acting like they're mutually exclusive

Lord Gonchar said:

Well, it is Halloween.

And we're almost to page 13.

I see fails for everyone involved in this one.

1. Actress (She made a personal, derogatory remark. That's an idiot move regardless of content warnings, age, sex, etc.
2. Mothers (Do you really know where your kids are.)
3. Universal (Bad P.R.)
4. Little Girls (I'm only casting a small amount of blame here because of their age. I can't get passed what the girl said to the press. ".....Uncomfortable, that's not what you want to feel when you go to an amusement park"

It appears neither the mothers or daughters knew there was a Halloween event of any nature going on that day. The mothers should have sprang for Disney tickets.

What happens when you combine 4 different types of stupid? 13 pages at Coasterbuzz on Halloween.

Screamlord said:

Jeff, it seems to me that you want to blame the actor instead of the girls who shouldn't have been there in the first place.

That's a bit of a leap. I think there's all kinds of stupid to go around. But as I think I've mentioned before, in the circles I run in, that's just not a word you use to describe women, fantasy or not. If that makes me uppity, PC or whatever else you want to label me as, so be it.

Alright I have to ask... What exactly does "straw man argument" mean?

I don't blame the actor: she was doing her job.

I do blame the parents: they let their children wander around a place without supervision.

I don't blame the children: they're children. They can't be expected to make mature judgements.

I do blame the park, a little: the employee who said they would need to buy a ticket to speak to a manager said something idiotic, but was probably just following the orders they had been given.

But when all is said and done: if you're going to let children in, you need to be considerate of the fact that children may be present. And if children may be present, you don't call anyone whores.