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

The same way one poster is trying to speak on how everyone else should feel.

I never said that they could, LG. I was trying to gauge what other adult Halloween events do comparatively.

From the 8 pages in this thread, I had no idea I was the only one posting in favor of not calling teenage girls whores. News to me.

B'ster B said:

I never said that they could, LG. I was trying to gauge what other adult Halloween events do comparatively.

Exactly like Josh and his parenting example - trying to gauge what other parents do comparatively.

Which was the point. (a little disappointed that I had to explain it...)

I'm comparing a chain, not one set of parents. A little disappointed you didn't get it.

Get a sample of more than one, you might have something....

Well, unfortunately, not everyone I know that's a parent has kids in the same age range... I can make one pretty solid assumption, though - I can say with some degree of certainty that there are probably more parents in their boat than in yours.

Did I miss the part where anyone said people should go around calling little girls Whores?

Okay Mr high and mighty, you're getting annoying.

No one said that. What's being said is that people shouldn't expose their kids to mature content if they're not mature enough for it.

Actually, you can't Raven-Phile.

Tek, you're argument was that I am trying to decide how everyone should feel. I have merely agreed with some of the others here.

What's also being said which was left out is how some on here feel that there is no instance where someone should call them whores.

B'ster B said:

I'm comparing a chain, not one set of parents.

Get a sample of more than one, you might have something....

Heh. Your super-relevant sampling of 9 parks. Good try. You got a chuckle with that one.

I haven't counted, but you might already have 9 parents participating in this thread.

**** just got flat-out scientific up in heeeeere!

Sigh.

What one haunt does has no bearing on what another should do. If anything, you want to differentiate from the same old, same old. And given the wild popularity of HHN, I think they're doing something right.

And none of it matters, because in what world is it not generally accepted that it's up to the parent to determine what they're child sees, does and is exposed to?

When you try to flip it and blame the content creators, artists and people that entertain, you're essentially that bored housewife from Kenosha writing letters to TV shows threatening to boycott them because they said, "Boobies!" or some other nonsense.

There's just no precedent for censoring the product. You can't define appropriate entertainment - you can only define who it may be appropriate for.

But (gasp!), that requires personal responsibility.

Back off, guys. I don't think B'ster B has said anything out of bounds and yet you're jumping all over his every word now. He certainly didn't take nearly as hard line of a stance as Jeff did.

As I said earlier I'm pretty much in the middle on all of this, in fact I think Vater's post sums up how I feel pretty well. But for those of you that think the park is essentially blameless, let's take the same scenario but change some of the specifics. If it really is only about context then consider:

• Change from a The Purge theme to a Mississippi Burning theme
• Change the insult comic/auctioneer to a hooded klansman
• Change "whore" directed at 13-year-old girls to "nigger" directed at 13-year-old black kids

Would you defend the park and place the blame at the feet of the kids and parents the same way you are now? If so, what's the difference?

Yes. Because it's two separate issues:

1. The content of the show

2. Parents' responsibility to temper their children's exposure to what they feel is inappropriate.

Seems that in the course of discussion that these two things are getting blurred into one.

I'm also interested in other chains like SF and what they have for adult themed haunts as well. I think we established that Disney is geared for the kids under 12 category, so I'm not going to include them.

Pages and pages ago, I said that the thing for these amusement parks should do would be to err on the side of not taking this route in any haunt. I still stand by that statement.

Gonch, "yes" meaning you would defend such an exhibit?

Yes.

Assuming the goal was to recreate a real-life, interactive version of Mississippi Burning.

I would defend their right to put on such a show.

Ok, what about real-life, interactive version of simulated rape? Quite scary to some and why not since you have been warned with a sign about it.

The reason I brought this up was someone mentioned earlier about the scariness of being sold in to sex slavery, like the movie Taken.

B'ster B said:

Ok, what about real-life, interactive version of simulated rape? Quite scary to some and why not since you have been warned with a sign about it.

I'm of the opinion that any form of entertainment that doesn't impact those who choose not to take part is perfectly fine, assuming there are appropriate warnings.

Just because you find simulated rape offensive doesn't mean someone else has to.

And I'm still not sure why there's a distinction being drawn between movies and in-person entertainment. That seems laughably arbitrary.

Honestly, not sure. I'd have to see how it was done and who the audience was.

But this isn't about me (again!), it's about the act at HHN. (nbt to mention we keep using more and more outlandish comparisons to try to make the point)

And I'm starting to think no one watched the video the RollerCoasterGod posted. Seriously, watch it. It's B-grade insult comedy.

Like a much less offensive and harmless version of what Lisa Lampanelli does.

Of course they have the right to put on that show, but you can't bury something like that in a generic theme park Halloween event with vague warnings like "extremely adult material." I mean, you could, but I'm not talking in legal terms, I'm just talking about common decency. If you're staging something that has the potential to be deeply offensive then you have to advertise that up front. A black person, adult or teenager, would be completely blindsided by such a show and would be wholly justified in their outrage. Even if the entrance to the attraction featured a burning cross with some klansmen standing around it, or someone being lynched, which would thus fully communicate what the attraction was all about, no one would stand for it because society has deemed that to be out-of-bounds (for obviously good reason). Unless you state specifically that your park houses such an attraction thereby letting the customer know what they're getting when they pay to enter, I say the park has to deal with whatever firestorm comes its way.

And the reason I went to such an outlandish comparison is that I think some people put calling a female a whore and calling a black person the n-word on the same level, in that it is never justified to treat someone that way unless they specifically consent to it.

And I feel that the line, "They will be exposed to extremely adult material." is a wide enough umbrella to not only cover just about anything they could realistically do, but also serve as a very stern warning to those considering letting their children go to make sure they are able to handle what they might be getting into.

I do agree with I think what you said earlier LG about the parent needing to be around with these younger kids to see what it is that their kids are filtering in.

At the same time, I wouldn't expect an amusement park to put on such a show. There are other chains with adult haunts and I have not heard one example of other parks doing this.