Depraved modern comedy.

nadateturbe

^I'm more concerned that the OP appears to be sending out the message to her GD that sexual acts between two men are depraved or perverted.^ really MissInterpret?. I find that strange.

I am shocked Fair2good. And many will agree with you. Doesn't make us narrow minded prudes. I watched a little bit of Naked Attraction this week. What is the world coming to?

I feel sorry for young generations.

I think some posters have perverted the OP's words and turned them against her. Fair2good didn't say that.

She is right, voyeurism, even consensual, is classified as a perversion.

SeaWoozle

Fair2good
HousePlantQueen

To be fair, you have to look for it, but it's there.

In other words they are tricking people into watching this filth. Otherwise there would be a huge warning about the content.
Still more views more money for them. Pornography, instead of being a privately viewed, is judged normal viewing for 15 year old.

I feel quite shocked that people genuinely believe oral sex, with or without someone watching, is “perverted” or “pornagraphic”.

Again - the OP did not say that oral sex was perverted or pornographic.

You have twisted what she said.

MissInterpreted

Chestnut

MissInterpreted

Oh dear, I'm not even sure where to start here - or even if I want to! Morally degenerate? Perversion? That's unbelievable.
And I'm pretty sure that in 2024, many 15-year-olds have seen far worse on their phones!

Oh, that's okay then. Let's just open the floodgates of depravity and let everyone see it on TV. 🤦‍♀️

There is an 'off' switch - it's actually very easy to use. And I'm more concerned that the OP appears to be sending out the message to her GD that sexual acts between two men are depraved or perverted.

Oh dear Ms censor.

I'm quite concerned about the lies being perpetrated on here:

And I'm more concerned that the OP appears to be sending out the message to her GD that sexual acts between two men are depraved or perverted

She wasn't.

Freya5

MissInterpreted

Chestnut

MissInterpreted

Oh dear, I'm not even sure where to start here - or even if I want to! Morally degenerate? Perversion? That's unbelievable.
And I'm pretty sure that in 2024, many 15-year-olds have seen far worse on their phones!

Oh, that's okay then. Let's just open the floodgates of depravity and let everyone see it on TV. 🤦‍♀️

There is an 'off' switch - it's actually very easy to use. And I'm more concerned that the OP appears to be sending out the message to her GD that sexual acts between two men are depraved or perverted.

Oh dear Ms censor.

Censor? I'm saying the exact opposite...

Freya5

Respectfully, the OP is a grown adult, knew this was a 15 film and could easily have done their research BEFORE sitting down to watch it. The internet is awash with honest reviews of films and programmes allowing folk to make informed choices on what to watch.
Especially as she had her grand daughter with her.

Nobody is tricking anyone. The warnings were one click away from the main page. Many people I know, myself AND my children included, research films before watching them and don't just go on the trailers or blurb.

I get what you're saying Callistemon. Thanks
I think it strange that someone would be more concerned about the young girl being given the wrong idea, than about this stuff being shown on TV.

Cossy
I feel quite shocked that people genuinely believe oral sex, with or without someone watching, is “perverted” or “pornagraphic”.
You're still missing the point. It's the transmission of these images on TV that we're discussing, not the act itself. However, some consider voyeurism is a perversion, and that is what the viewer is being encouraged to do, so go figure that out. You might argue that TV is normalising all manner of sexual behaviour and feeding it to our youngsters.

I guess the message here is to check which films or TV programmes are appropriate for us to watch with teens and accept, for better or worse, that things have changed.
Well the two programmes I mentioned were aimed at teens so checking is futile. You have to watch children’s programmes, travel, gardening, cookery etc. if you want to avoid gratuitous swearing and full blown sex acts. Maybe they should now have classification for TV as they do for movies and games.

I clearly belong in the era of Jane Austen, as I see sex as something private between two people. I'm not interested in anyone else's sex life, don't want to watch what they do, and don't see it as entertainment. It seems now that watching every kind of sexual gymnastics does save anyone coming up with a good script. Years ago I watched 'Clayhanger'. The plot moved with glacial slowness, but the passion that built up between two of the cast was electric; at one point she said 'People will talk', and his response was 'I expect it's the way I look at you'. It was so beautifully acted, by Dennis Quilley and Janet Suzman, and was one of the most sexually charged and passionate scenes I have witnessed.

nadateturbe

I get what you're saying Callistemon. Thanks
I think it strange that someone would be more concerned about the young girl being given the wrong idea, than about this stuff being shown on TV.

Yes.

We can all use the off button but often a programme synopsis does not always give a complete idea of the content.

nadateturbe

I get what you're saying Callistemon. Thanks
I think it strange that someone would be more concerned about the young girl being given the wrong idea, than about this stuff being shown on TV.

Doesn't make us narrow minded prudes

No, it doesn't.

Interestingly, I've just done a little research on age ratings for films I remember seeing when I was a teen and have noticed that Philadelphia's rating has changed. When I saw it XX years ago, it was a 15. Now I see it's a 12.
Whilst I appreciate that it doesn't feature graphic sexual scenes, it does show that some themes are seemingly more accepted now. It doesn't necessarily make it right, but gives an idea on how times have changed.

That's what I mean about pushing the boundaries, normalising many things, not just sexual matters, until teenagers now do not know what the boundaries are.

Joanna Lumley has often spoken out against sex scenes:
"I think they're revolting," she said. "I don't know why people write them, and I don't know why we watch them."

Here's what she says in Radio Times this week:
www.radiotimes.com/tv/drama/joanna-lumley-radio-times-magazine-newsupdate/

Chestnut
Good try there with the deflection. But I will point out that it’s very bad form to point out a grammatical mistake on forums.

Callistemon21

That's what I mean about pushing the boundaries, normalising many things, not just sexual matters, until teenagers now do not know what the boundaries are.

But in the case of that film in particular, is it "pushing boundaries" by changing the rating, or not making themes like AIDS/being gay seem a dirty, shameful thing? Which is fundamentally what the film is about.
And whilst I don't necessarily want to see lurid sex scenes in programmes or hear a barrage of foul language, I also realise that it happens and will do my research before I watch it.

Last year I watched The Young Offenders. About a group of teens who get up to all sorts. Exceptionally bad language from the outset, but some of the most beautifully moving scenes you will ever see on screen. I knew what it was about before I watched it, because I checked, and loved every minute of it.

Oh, SeaWoozle, I know this is diverging away from the actual OP altogether, but I absolutely adore The Young Offenders! First time I've seen someone else mention it.

SeaWoozle

Interestingly, I've just done a little research on age ratings for films I remember seeing when I was a teen and have noticed that Philadelphia's rating has changed. When I saw it XX years ago, it was a 15. Now I see it's a 12.
Whilst I appreciate that it doesn't feature graphic sexual scenes, it does show that some themes are seemingly more accepted now. It doesn't necessarily make it right, but gives an idea on how times have changed.

You're so right. What used to be X and only for adults are in some cases now PG and 12. Take the Dracula movies. Each version has become increasingly gory and evil and the older versions are now considered suitable for children. You cannot rely on the classifications any more.

I had no idea there were so many horrible Dracula movies and games out there for 12 and 15. Our children are being groomed in so many ways. Search on the BBFC website.
www.bbfc.co.uk/

petra

Chestnut
Good try there with the deflection. But I will point out that it’s very bad form to point out a grammatical mistake on forums.

I responded to your accusation in detail, no deflection there at all.

LovesBach

I clearly belong in the era of Jane Austen, as I see sex as something private between two people. I'm not interested in anyone else's sex life, don't want to watch what they do, and don't see it as entertainment. It seems now that watching every kind of sexual gymnastics does save anyone coming up with a good script. Years ago I watched 'Clayhanger'. The plot moved with glacial slowness, but the passion that built up between two of the cast was electric; at one point she said 'People will talk', and his response was 'I expect it's the way I look at you'. It was so beautifully acted, by Dennis Quilley and Janet Suzman, and was one of the most sexually charged and passionate scenes I have witnessed.

Yes. I was thinking about Jane Austen adaptations ( having watched Emma. with the family last week). I remember Clayhanger: loved the books, too. I think one of the most sexually charged films was Last of the Mohicans and that was all down to how they looked at each other!

SeaWoozle

Callistemon21

That's what I mean about pushing the boundaries, normalising many things, not just sexual matters, until teenagers now do not know what the boundaries are.

But in the case of that film in particular, is it "pushing boundaries" by changing the rating, or not making themes like AIDS/being gay seem a dirty, shameful thing? Which is fundamentally what the film is about.
And whilst I don't necessarily want to see lurid sex scenes in programmes or hear a barrage of foul language, I also realise that it happens and will do my research before I watch it.

Last year I watched The Young Offenders. About a group of teens who get up to all sorts. Exceptionally bad language from the outset, but some of the most beautifully moving scenes you will ever see on screen. I knew what it was about before I watched it, because I checked, and loved every minute of it.

It is pushing boundaries by changing the rating

It is also encouraging under-age children to watch pornography.

Discussing something and accepting this is what some people prefer, is not at all the same as watching it, and what is more, watching a woman watching it which is titillation and sending out the message to children that voyeurism is the norm. 15 years olds are susceptible and easily influenced.

Film and programme makers seems to have lost any sense of responsibility towards children.

MayBee70

LovesBach

I clearly belong in the era of Jane Austen, as I see sex as something private between two people. I'm not interested in anyone else's sex life, don't want to watch what they do, and don't see it as entertainment. It seems now that watching every kind of sexual gymnastics does save anyone coming up with a good script. Years ago I watched 'Clayhanger'. The plot moved with glacial slowness, but the passion that built up between two of the cast was electric; at one point she said 'People will talk', and his response was 'I expect it's the way I look at you'. It was so beautifully acted, by Dennis Quilley and Janet Suzman, and was one of the most sexually charged and passionate scenes I have witnessed.

Yes. I was thinking about Jane Austen adaptations ( having watched Emma. with the family last week). I remember Clayhanger: loved the books, too. I think one of the most sexually charged films was Last of the Mohicans and that was all down to how they looked at each other!

Colin Firth's white linen shirt was just sold at auction for £25,000, proceeds to go to charity.

I appreciate this is digressing slightly, but I'd be more concerned these days about any teens or young children, for that matter, watching content on TikTok. I have some friends who have a young daughter and the times I've gone round to their house and she's been sat watching inappropriate things for a six year old. Young girls in their teens & older with voiceovers of internet "influencers", talking about showing their "booty" to boys etc. THAT'S not acceptable. There are teens all over TikTok, making funny videos, rude videos, inappropriate videos and assumed violent content. As much as I appreciate all the comments made thus far, I think young people are far more at risk from the stuff on these kinds of platforms and the internet itself. Andrew Tate being a prime example of someone I would NOT want influencing any son of mine.

And these platforms NEED to do more to protect children and young people.