Ron Newman (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
ron_newman) wrote in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png)
davis_square2008-08-22 07:40 am
ron_newman) wrote in davis_square2008-08-22 07:40 am
Entry tags:
Somerville Theatre bans (young) kids from entering after 6 pm. Let's discuss it here
This week's Somerville News has an article about the Somerville Theatre's policy of banning children under 12 8* from entering the theatre after 6 pm, even if they are accompanied by adults.
Is the theatre's policy a service to its customers who want a peaceful movie experience, or is it unfair discrimination against families with young children?
I'm posting this because we can have a more civilized discussion here than on the Somerville News blog comments. Ian Judge, the theatre's manager, reads this community, so we may be able to provide useful feedback to him here.
* Edited 11:55 am to add: I have a serious factual issue with this article. It says the policy applies to children under 12, but the theatre's website and exterior signs say it's for children under 8. That's a significant difference -- maybe significant enough to change people's opinions.
Second edit, 3 pm: Ian Judge has clarified that the theatre's policy is to exclude children under 8, not 12, from entering after 6 pm. He had made an erroneous statement to the News reporter which very unfortunately made it into the published article. Also, here is Ian's response to the specific incident detailed in the News article.
Is the theatre's policy a service to its customers who want a peaceful movie experience, or is it unfair discrimination against families with young children?
I'm posting this because we can have a more civilized discussion here than on the Somerville News blog comments. Ian Judge, the theatre's manager, reads this community, so we may be able to provide useful feedback to him here.
* Edited 11:55 am to add: I have a serious factual issue with this article. It says the policy applies to children under 12, but the theatre's website and exterior signs say it's for children under 8. That's a significant difference -- maybe significant enough to change people's opinions.
Second edit, 3 pm: Ian Judge has clarified that the theatre's policy is to exclude children under 8, not 12, from entering after 6 pm. He had made an erroneous statement to the News reporter which very unfortunately made it into the published article. Also, here is Ian's response to the specific incident detailed in the News article.
no subject
This policy makes me much less likely to patronize the Somerville Theatre.
no subject
What right?
no subject
However, we do have a tradition in the US that people who are willing to pay for goods and services, as long as those goods and services are legally within their rights to obtain, should be able to exchange money for those goods and services.
- We already have a system for keeping children out of movies like The Dark Knight, which somebody upstream mentioned as having seen unaccompanied children in: it's called the rating system. When I was a kid, movie theaters were perfectly willing to card for R-rated movies.
- We already have a system for ejecting patrons who are causing trouble. It is called "the right to eject patrons who are causing trouble."
It seems to me that both of these put enough of a safety net on the tradition of allowing people to spend their money on goods and services that profiling children as likely to be particularly poorly behaved consumers is simply unfair.
no subject
And this policy has been in place for 18 months, why is it all of a sudden news?
no subject
That being said, now that I know about it? I completely disapprove -- not of the events described in the paper, in which it seems like the theater was completely within its rights, but of the policy itself. I find it discriminatory.
no subject
1. Our patrons want to watch movies in peace.
--Totally! I'm all in favor of throwing out/keeping out disruptive patrons.
2. Because of the demographics of the area we serve, this branch of our theatre doesn't really profit from catering to children, which make up about 5% of our audience.
--OK. No problem with these statements of fact.
Solutions that make sense:
1: We don't show anything kids/families would typically want to see after 6pm. (The other branch of the theatre, which has a larger child/family audience, does.)
--Sure, makes sense.
2: We prevent obnoxious teenagers from sneaking into the theatre illegally, as described in the article that started this discussion.
--Great! I approve.
Solutions that don't make sense:
1. Put a blanket ban on all kids.
--Why is this necessary if you hardly get any kids anyway, and you're already working hard to keep out the ones who try to sneak in illegally? So suppose you've got a mature, well-behaved young Batman fan who wants to see the 6:30 showing of The Dark Knight (rated PG-13) with her teenaged sibling and parents who just got home from work. What's wrong with that? Is their money somehow inferior to everyone else's?
(Counterargument: Nobody has noticed this ban before now, so it obviously can't be affecting very many people.)
(Answer: Well, yeah. That suggests that the other things they're doing to discourage kids from attending must be working pretty well.)
Alternatives to outright-banning kids:
1. Require that all kids attending shows the Somerville Theatre after 6pm be accompanied by a parent or guardian no matter what the movie rating.
2. Don't offer child discount tickets after 6pm.
3. Throw people out if they are making a disturbance. Put up a large sign to this effect. Enforce it.
(Counterargument: Those bitchy entitled moms will put up a fight if you try to throw their families out.)
(Answer: Right, because gangs of 16-year-olds on their cell phones, drunken college students, and elderly deaf folks who talk too loud -- to throw in a few more age-related stereotypes here -- always leave quietly and meekly when you try to throw THEM out of the theatre. But I guess their money just smells better...?)
no subject
FEI's other theatre, the Capitol in Arlington, has $5 child tickets before 6 pm; after that, kids pay full price.
(Somerville Theatre ticket prices; Capitol Theatre ticket prices)
no subject
no subject
Born? No. We get that right when we pay for the ticket, or the service, or whathaveyou. It's not just children, of course--anyone of any age can be disruptive, and we have the right to disturbance-free entertainment when we're in an establishment that can set rules for such things. If someone is disruptive, the theater can ask them to leave; problem is, no one monitors it, so it's up to other viewers to leave their seats, go talk to a manager, and miss part of the movie. And people don't want to do that. It's easier for them to set restrictions beforehand.
There are other sorts of establishments that don't allow--or at least discourage--children, even if it's not explicit--why is a movie theater more offensive? Because it's not a widespread phenomenon?
no subject
If it were any other group, there would be so much outrage.
I friggin' hate disruptive kids more than anyone will ever know, but it's completely unfair to punish the parents and the kids who have worked their butts off to raise kids to be quiet and respectful.
no subject
no subject
It'd be a funny statement if I hadn't heard that before in real life.
no subject
no subject
I was 12 or so when my mother brought me to see The English Patient, which is rated R. I remember seeing The Snapper, rated R. Muriel's Wedding, rated R. All around the age of 12 or 13.
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject