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

It's well known, and always has been, that Universal pushes the envelope *and then some* when it comes to Halloween Horror Nights. They are known for being the most extreme in the industry.

I also seem to remember stories of so-called "Shot Hoochies" slinging drinks all throughout the event - which is something you *also* don't see at the other guys' events.

I can see where the biggest disconnect is. On one hand, some of you take the hard line "you were warned," while many of us take the position that the warning is irrelevant because it's just not cool to call little girls whores. There is no argument anyone can make because, to us, it's indefensible. All of this stuff about what should be expected and what's "well-known" or whatever is totally irrelevant because it's completely contextual. Obviously some of you are fans, super, but I would have no reason to expect this, and I follow the industry and live next to one of the parks.

Again, what you may expect or what you perceive as warning doesn't matter if you simply feel it isn't ever appropriate. I agree with Vater... it's a train wreck for everyone involved.

I thought about giving more of an explanation about what my particular context is, but honestly I feel like it would be a waste of time.

Jeff said:

I can see where the biggest disconnect is. On one hand, some of you take the hard line "you were warned," while many of us take the position that the warning is irrelevant because it's just not cool to call little girls whores.

But the girls wouldn't have been (jokingly) called whores if the warning had been heeded.

To me, the warning supercedes the content of the show.

I can't get past that. You can't ignore the warnings and complain about what happened.

With that said, I at least see what you're getting at - just because the warning was ignored doesn't make it 'right' to make the girls part of the show in this way. (I don't necessarily agree, but that's neither here nor there)

But I don't think it's reasonable to expect the actor to make that call on the fly. Their job is do the act, not make judgement calls about the audience. Because the chain of logic (warnings, followed by real world walking away from objectional material and so forth) should dictate that no one will be inappropriately caught in the line of fire.

And the fact of the matter is, that after over a month of doing the show just one parent is angry. They're the outlier. Surely, they're not the only one's to be called whores or something similar, yet there's been no other outrage. That leads me to believe the problem lies with them since everyone else seems to be enjoying the attraction responsibly.

LG, I agree with ya on this one. Jeff the warning wasn't irrevelant at all and there is no disconnect except for the ones who are PC and can't understand that it was part of the show. Also the girls shouldn't have been in that haunt period. If the girls wasn't there then they wouldn't be offended and seeing that they are the only ones who did get offended. They are the ones with the problem and those who can't understand what setting it was said in.

When my daughter was roughly the age of 13, I took Sarah and three of her friends to Valleyscare. The difference here is that I never let any of them out of my sight. I was next to them when they went through all of the scare zones. I would never allow 13 year old children to be unsupervised at an event like this. I would be afraid of far worse things happening to them. So again, where were the parents?

I agree the actor may have crossed a line by calling the girls whores. I can see how that could happen when an actor is improvising dialog in a scare zone. Simple mistake - apologize and move on. Customer service screwed up big time by telling the parents they would have to buy tickets to discuss the issue - cannot believe that could actually happen - major fail.

However, I'm so sick of the attention whoring of our society - when you run to the media for any perceived injustice.

Bakeman31092 said:

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.

I straddle the fence on the overall debate, but I would think the fact that you wrote "whore" and wouldn't even type the other word is example enough that they aren't on the same level.

You can say "whore" and "slut" on tv, radio, and apparently at theme parks. That you can't say the n-word, drop the c-bomb, or use homosexual slurs in those situations says to me that those things are in a completely different category.

Lord Gonchar said:
But the girls wouldn't have been (jokingly) called whores if the warning had been heeded.

To me, the warning supercedes the content of the show.

I can't get past that. You can't ignore the warnings and complain about what happened.

I'm not even sure it's about the warning, which is frankly ambiguous at best because saying something has a "mature theme" doesn't really say anything.

I think it's fair to say that "whore" is not at the same level as the "N-word," yes. But there is a cultural shift in progress, and more and more people are not OK with using that word, and especially directed toward teenage girls. It's not just something that gets uber-feminists riled up anymore, and it's not about being politically correct. It's a derogatory, misogynistic term. In the technology industry, we've seen it destroy careers. Misogyny is just as troublesome as racism and xenophobia to me.

If your argument comes down to "but the warnings," we'll never see eye to eye.

Jeff, if the parents had heeded the warnings then the situation would never had happened. The warnings are there to help us decide on the things we do. They was too young to have gone into the haunt and should had stuck to riding the rides.

Jeff said:

But there is a cultural shift in progress, and more and more people are not OK with using that word, and especially directed toward teenage girls. It's not just something that gets uber-feminists riled up anymore, and it's not about being politically correct. It's a derogatory, misogynistic term. In the technology industry, we've seen it destroy careers. Misogyny is just as troublesome as racism and xenophobia to me.

That may be true. (again, I'd tend to disagree but it's irrelevant as far as the discussion)

But here's the thing - it wasn't an actual attack on their character. It was show, it was humor, it was pretend time. It wasn't misogyny.

I think that makes all the difference. I'm all for humor in life, I think laughter is the best medicine, I believe if you can't laugh at things then you're only harming yourself, I think there are very few lines to be drawn in the name of humor or show or fun.

I think it's ok to joke about all the things everyone has listed here as potentially offensive.

There's a difference between actively attacking someone with words meaning to cause harm and using the same words in completely different context.

Click through that Lisa Lampanelli link I posted. If those same things were said in an abusive or derrogatory way, it would be totally different. But everyone in the room has agreed that we're going to point out the absurdity of those things, joke about them, throw them at each other for fun and have a good time.

It's entirely possible to call someone a whore (or any of the other terms mentioned - and many much better ones that haven't) and have it be harmless.

So even if I go past "But the warnings!" (and there's no reason to), it's still a non-issue in my eyes.

If I go to an Eminem concert and become offended with his language...who is to blame?

Dr. Dre

I understand where Lord Gonchar and others are coming from... but I still think that a theme park just shouldn't "go there".

That said, these girls entered a haunt they maybe shouldn't have been in. And, to me, there's a difference between "she called us whores and we were offended" and "she called us whores after calling us each, individually and numerically, sluts, and we didn't leave the area".

I still think these girls were okay with what happened, it's the two mothers involved that are making an issue. To me, two phone calls and one contact via the park website do not equal now we hire Gloria Allred.

I'd have done a little research and sent an email to upper execs in a position to address my concerns -- companies the size of Comcast are going to have email address protocols that are pretty easy to figure out.

slithernoggin said:

I understand where Lord Gonchar and others are coming from... but I still think that a theme park just shouldn't "go there".

I have said this twice in this very thread.

I also agree with SWS in that you just don't let girls (or boys for that matter) in that age group run around alone unsupervised.

Lord Gonchar said:

Dr. Dre

Oh yeah, I forgot about him.

Jeff said:

There is no argument anyone can make because, to us, it's indefensible. All of this stuff about what should be expected and what's "well-known" or whatever is totally irrelevant because it's completely contextual.

Screamlord said:

Jeff, if the parents had heeded the warnings then the situation would never had happened.

It's like a broken record. How did someone else put it? They just shouldn't go there?

Aamilj said:

If I go to an Eminem concert and become offended with his language...who is to blame?

You're late to the party. I don't think Eminem is calling you names to your face. That, and as far as we know, you're not a little girl.

Understanding both sides, I find this topic intriguing. I really don't have much more to talk about except this...

When some disgruntled customer comes to me and asks to speak to a manager, I first ask him or her to tell me just a little bit about what they want to talk about with them so that I can find the right kind of manager (like which department should they be from), and then I immediately get that manager. Just a few words.

I don't make them jump through hoops to speak to a manager. And even then, sometimes I offer to fix the problem myself if I have the power to do so.

I don't know if Universal still "empowers" their employees to make situations like this right, but back when I worked there, the park encouraged us to find creative solutions to fix a problem as quickly as possible. It was an amazing program that really worked.

Long story short. I moved some strollers blocking the covered entrance to stroller parking. It rained. Customers were mad that their strollers were wet. I took them to the gift shop while they were waiting for a manager and the park bought them some dry clothes and ponchos. By the time the manager arrived, the problem was diffused. The manager heard their complaint, apologies were said, and the family went on to enjoy the rest of their day. I, as an employee, was "empowered" to get the park to purchase them the items at the gift shop.

So why couldn't management meet the parents of the girls outside the front gate to speak with them? It is ridiculous for an employee to tell them that they will have to buy a ticket to speak to management. I bet if they got a simple apology and maybe a round of tickets to come to the park when there is no HHN event, everything would be peachy.

This is really nothing more than a simple censorship debate. One, side believes that Universal should censor their art (for various reasons) and the other believes that Universal has the right to do what they want. These things always get heated, violence threatened, etc.

Who's threatening violence?

Well punching someone in the balls is violent. Regardless of whether he really would it not.

^^^Art is disrespecting the patrons of your park? How do some of you keep wives? :) A little misogynistic to think its ok to "call someone out of their name" as they say in the hood. I can understand throwing around the language in a show (Bill/Ted), but if one of the characters were to call me ....umm... let s say the "n" in the name of art, then heads will hit the pavement....in the name of art of course.