[...] Also check out Shannon’s Adopted Children = Psycho Killers [...]

So I’m not alone in wanting it to flop? Good to know.

Anyway, I won’t be seeing it either as a) I don’t see many movies in the first place, and, b) when I do see a movie, it’s certainly not a horror movie.

Seriously, if we were only to allow movies that don’t offend someone there would be no movies. Someone always gets their panties in a bunch over one thing or another. If you don’t want to watch it, don’t. Let the consumer decide. I am sure if my husband does not see it in theaters he will rent it later. He loves a good horror film. I like a good, crude, offensive comedy. To each his own. I remember hearing on the radio that adoptive parents were outraged by a line in Juno. A line that totally made sense for a smart teenager to say. Was she supposed to be politically correct? I have yet to meet a teenager who is. My point is, lighten up. I don’t watch movies that make fun of religion or promote things I disagree with. I will not be watching Milk. So what? I don’t think it should be censored and not available to others to watch.

You seemed pleased that they took a line out of the previews but were unhappy that it was still in the film. If you want the line removed, that is censorship.

Agree with Bean’s Dad. I *have* heard many “thinking person[s]” wonder about how the bond between adoptive parents and children will develop. Shoot, many people, moms and dads alike, wonder about how they will bond with their own children! I think that admitting that the adoptive relationship may prove to be more challenging is not some “non-thinking person’s” stupid idea but an admission that the world isn’t perfect and saying something is so doesn’t make it so. And as Bean’s Dad points out, there is a history of this very question back thru time. Sure, it might be “offensive” that this stereotype persists, but to frame it in terms of “only ridiculous people think this way” is pretty, well, ignorant. And ridiculous.

I’d argue that fairy tales and horror movies prove a history of discrimination and prejudice, rather than some deeply human truth. In fact, adoption has been around as long as the human race has been around. In fact, a growing body of research is starting to show that the human race wouldn’t have survived if it weren’t for non-parents taking care of children other than their “own.” By the way folks, adopted children are in fact, their adoptive parents’ “own” children.

Twyla, are you saying Shannon shouldn’t write about her objections to this movie? Stop censoring her…oh wait, you don’t have any authority over her, so you can’t be censoring her. See?

Twyla, I think the problem is that I never suggested people shouldn’t see what they want. I suggested, actually, that people objecting to the movie should discuss their objections to help educate people on the topic. You are calling censorship where not only is there none, but I am objecting to censorship’s usefulness at all. Saying I don’t want to see the movie and why is not demanding no one be allowed to see it.

Shannon, I think prejudice and discrimination are deep human truths. I think we should be as aware of them as we can, but horror connects to dark parts of human existence. The best horror should try to get to what makes you uncomfortable. As you can guess, I’m a horror fan, and I gather you are not, so perhaps we’re talking across one another here.

Okay, let’s back up. I just reread what I wrote and in my original article I said I did not want a movie censored. I did not say you did. Then in response to Shannon saying something about censorship I referred to the reference in the blog about a line being removed from the previews. After that marthalucille decided I was trying to censor Shannon’s article. Then she called my very thin mother fat. Super-duper mature, marthalucille. Then Shannon you say that you are not calling for censorship but in your article you talk about pro-adoption people getting a line removed from the preview. Maybe there is another word for throwing a fit and getting your way and removing content from view. I always have called that censorship.
My point from the very begining was: if we only had movies that did not offend we would have no movies. You are free to discuss the issues you have with any movie. It is wanting the producers to remove the line from the movie that does not sit well with me.

1) Nuh uh. I said that you *weren’t* trying to censor Shannon, just like Shannon *wasn’t* advocating censorship of the movie. 2) So, “your mama is so fat” jokes are immature? Sizzling update, thanks. Always had wondered why I never heard anyone over the age of ten tell them.

Let’s try this again, but I’ll word it differently this time: a “your mama is so fat” line is an insult. Pointing out that you’re doing exactly what you erroneously claim to be criticizing is an argument. I’m sure, for the record, that your mother weighs half of what I weigh, and that the kids certainly don’t call out “hey, Kool Aid” when she busts through a wall.

Part of free speech is protest – organized protest, disorganized protest, boycotts, rallies, lobbying, written opinion. The goal of of that protest speech is “don’t do this anymore” or “start doing this now”. Wanting producers to remove a line from a movie because you think it’s socially harmful is the exercise of free speech. Private citizens throwing a fit and getting their way is called democracy – that’s the word you’re trying to think of.

I hate it when the people on the opposite side of the political spectrum from me rally enough votes or money or threat of removal of advertising dollars to get their agenda passed. And I love it when “my side” does the same exact thing. But I don’t call it censorship when I hate the results and free speech when I agree with them.

IF you object to the removal of a line from a movie trailer, why don’t you write the producers and tell them that it is very important to your family’s values that the line be left in? Then get all your friends to write to them too! Would that somehow be different than letting the film sink or swim in the free market? In case you don’t know, the answer is no, it is not. There is no qualitative difference between “throwing a fit” and “paying to see the show” – they are THE SAME.

Shannon- I may have unfairly put you in the camp that wanted and agreed with removal of lines. I am sorry for doing that. I want to be sure and tell you that I appreciate your writings on this blog. You are one of the few that I make sure to read. A lot of the reason is because your view is very different than mine. I don’t want to surround myself with only things I agree with.

you would think that {“Many adoptive parents took issue with a line in the movie, appearing in the trailer, that “it must be hard to love an adopted child as much as your own.” Nonsense, of course, as any thinking person–with or without adoption experience–would conclude.”} but I as an adoptive parent I get asked all the time if the love is any different with my adopted children than with my biological children. The people that ask this seem to be “thinking person (people)” they seem to be people that have jobs and seem like they are intelligent enough, but yet they still ask. I didn’t read everything, but I think part of the jist of what Shannon wrote was the real underlying problem, yes they are going to make films that exploit many things and people are unhappy. but being an adoptive parent I have to stand up for what I believe and stand up for my children and show them that this is offensive because believe it or not people thinking people don’t get that you can love a child that is not biologically related and there is a fear and this movie preys on that fear, and adoption already had a bad enough rap, it needs some positive publicity already. sorry shannon if that isn’t where you were going. I didn’t read your article. I found this article on facebook.