The Simpsons...Bart et al - suitability?

[andyoxon]

Does the panel think The Simpsons is suitable for pre-teen age children?  Mrs ao says a colleague has told her there are some dodgy bits in most episodes.   I did see an episode over Christmas when Homer starts managing a country and western singer, and she serenades him with "will you bunk with me tonight" and tries to get through what she means to Homer...

[Regulator]

My neices and nephews have tended to watch it from the age of about 5 or 6.  As with many cartoons The Simpsons operates on several levels, including an adult level.

However, much of the adult content and innuendo seems to go over the heads of kids.

[pcolbeck]

As Reg says it operates on several levels and the adult bits should go straight over the heads of little kids. Once they get the adult jokes then by definition they are at the right age. Family Guy however is a whole different ball game (but very very funny).

[woollypigs]

I don't know, but I used to watch Tom and Jerry when I was under 7.

All the kids I train is generally between 9 and 12 and all of them have watched South Park which is worse than Simpsons.

I think it is a bit of the old chestnut ... try to watch a children program from the 70's now as an adult. How naughty do we find it now but we were just fine watching it.

[CrinklyLion]

Mine have watched it on and off since being v little.  Age appropriateness is very subjective - I don't have an issue with (relatively mild) swearing or risque content, but try to avoid the scary stuff (neither of them deal well with that - Doctor Who teeters on the edge of too frightening for the 8yo biggun, and the Sarah Jane Diaries terrify the littly, who is 2) and am not keen on loads of fighting.

But then, we sit down and watch an episode of Scrubs with them after the bath every night - so I may not be the best example of discriminating parental choices re TV.  The eldest cub's favourite is the one with the toilet on the roof.  Littly likes 2 eisodes with particular songs, although I can't remember which at the mo. 

We have started selecting episodes a bit more carefully in the last couple of years... there's the odd one that would take a bit too much explaining, and since the eldest turned 7 I tend to avoid ones where you see more than 3 of Elliot's bra collection....

[nuttycyclist]

As Reg says it operates on several levels and the adult bits should go straight over the heads of little kids. Once they get the adult jokes then by definition they are at the right age. Family Guy however is a whole different ball game (but very very funny).

I think the difference, from memory, is that The Simpsons is shown during prime kiddy time (i.e. before the parents get in from work and have a meal) whereas Family Guy is shown late at night.

Surely the TV scheduling gives some clue as to suitability?

[pcolbeck]

As Reg says it operates on several levels and the adult bits should go straight over the heads of little kids. Once they get the adult jokes then by definition they are at the right age. Family Guy however is a whole different ball game (but very very funny).

I think the difference, from memory, is that The Simpsons is shown during prime kiddy time (i.e. before the parents get in from work and have a meal) whereas Family Guy is shown late at night.

Surely the TV scheduling gives some clue as to suitability?

Definitely Nutty.

[citoyen]

All the kids I train is generally between 9 and 12 and all of them have watched South Park which is worse than Simpsons.

I let my 11yo watch South Park, but that's because I am a bad parent.

My feeling is that you've got to look past the naughty words and make a judgment about the values espoused by the programme. South Park is just puerile nonsense - an 11yo is the perfect audience for it.

Pcolbeck mentions Family Guy. I wouldn't let him watch that, but mainly because I think it is vile and misogynistic, not to mention unfunny. I have no problem with so-called "offensive comedy" (I love Curb Your Enthusiasm) but I find Family Guy witless.

To get back to the OP, I am happy to let my son watch The Simpsons, but you really have to make a judgment for your own children based on your own values. Maybe watch it a few times yourself first to get a feel for it. I'd say that the episode you refer to is fairly typical.

Personally, I'd rather watch King Of The Hill than the Simpsons, though I know I'm in a minority with this. But King Of The Hill is wonderful family viewing - definitely safe for a pre-teen but with very grown-up themes to its content.

d.

[citoyen]

Surely the TV scheduling gives some clue as to suitability?

I would say not. The rules that govern the so-called watershed are based purely on a black & white checklist and make no value judgment.

d.

[Wascally Weasel]

I think that the Simpsons is fine for children of all ages (I include myself in this description).  It attracted a bit of criticism, especially in the early years but I think the critics missed the point – it’s got a decent moral centre to it, it just doesn’t belabour it in a syrupy way.

It was heavily marketed in the UK (prior to release) as if it was all about Bart, when in reality the heart of it is definitely Homer Simpson (who I think was one the great comic creations of late 20th century popular culture).

[citoyen]

it’s got a decent moral centre to it, it just doesn’t belabour it in a syrupy way.

Spot on.

d.

[andyoxon]

Surely the TV scheduling gives some clue as to suitability?

I would say not. The rules that govern the so-called watershed are based purely on a black & white checklist and make no value judgment.

d.

I tend to be wary pre-9pm too.  I've always enjoyed the Simpsons, and TBH the minis have been watching it for a few months.  I think mrs ao, who is also not keen on Tracy Beaker, needs an induction to see what she thinks herself.   One of younger mini's friends watches East Enders, which from memory tends to be very negative.  But at least there are some good kids progs out there, particularly the wildlife/animals, Blue Peter/Art attack, Sarah Jane etc ilk.

[Eccentrica Gallumbits]

I'm stunned by the number of parents who let young kids watch South Park - and this isn't a dig at you, citizen smudge. My mum's neighbour's little boy was talking about how much he liked it when he was about 8. That was about a week after they'd shown an episode where a lorry containing a cargo of aborted foetuses had crashed. It's very funny at times, but it's not puerile nonsense. Some of it is very adult.

[citoyen]

a lorry containing a cargo of aborted foetuses had crashed. It's very funny at times, but it's not puerile nonsense. Some of it is very adult.

It depends what you mean by "adult". I would say the themes of King Of The Hill are very "adult" - eg whether or not kids should have sex education at school - but a cargo of foetuses crashing? I would say "taboo" or "offensive" are more appropriate descriptions of that kind of content. South Park is definitely puerile in the sense of immature, trivial and lacking seriousness. Although it does have a fairly cutting satirical edge at times.

d.

[citoyen]

A girl in my class at school had very strict catholic parents and was banned from watching most things on telly for fear it would corrupt her. So instead of watching this evil stuff on telly, she went out and got pregnant at 13 by a 30 year old man.

d.

[Cudzoziemiec]

Several years ago Mrs Cudzo taught a class of 14-year-olds in a Catholic girls school. Over half the girls in the oldest class (age 18-19) were pregnant. And one of the girls in her class was fairly clearly being abused by her father, but no one with any authority could be persuaded to do anything about it (a year or so later the mother left her husband and took the girl with her). But I've no idea what they watched on TV!