WE HAS MET THE ENEMY
by Melvyn R. Copen August 1, 1999
© Mel Copen, August, 1999

Some time ago, my wife and I volunteered to take our 7 and 12-year-old grandsons to a Sunday movie. The immediate issue was what were we going to see – a decision not to be taken lightly if both generations are to survive the ordeal.

The logical course of action was to obtain guidance from our son and daughter-in-law, particularly since the boys indicated two “R” rated films as top choice and further stated that this was OK with their parents. The response we received came as a surprise. It probably shouldn’t have. “It depends on the reason for the rating. If it is for nudity, no way. But if it’s for violence or language – that’s OK.”

We were a bit stunned when the logic behind the latter statement was explained to us. “They see so much violence on TV and on video-tapes and hear so many four letter words wherever they go, it isn’t a problem. That’s what life’s all about.” An interesting discussion ensued in which it became apparent that our children considered us totally unrealistic and rigid in our thinking.

We have all experienced situations where continuous exposure to some stimulus results in a diminution of the effect. People begin to take things for granted and systems build “immunities.” What was once exciting becomes mundane and greater intensity is required to maintain the same level of impact. That applies to meeting celebrities, drinking alcohol or using other drugs, eating chocolate, traveling and many other matters. Why should it not apply to violence – particularly when much of the violence is experienced vicariously?

There was a time when a violent experience for a child was a very personal thing. It meant getting into a fight. Interesting lessons were learned. It hurt! It hurt even if you won! Contrast this with the total lack of pain experienced by a viewer watching violent act after violent act on TV. It looks like great fun, and at least the hero seldom has problems. Even the dead people are resurrected on other shows. Or better yet, participate in a video game where you can commit the murder and mayhem yourself. The worst consequence is a poor score and the jeers from your opponents.

Last Friday, in Georgia, a terrible act of violence was committed, taking the lives of a dozen people and injuring many others. Think of the pain to everyone concerned, particularly to the loved ones of those who no longer exist except in memory. Consider all the other acts of random or meaningless violence that have made the recent news – many involving juveniles.

Some will argue that the solution lies in gun control. I don’t know. Our record on enforcing laws to keep illicit materials (drugs, guns, what have you) out of the hands of abusers is abysmal and I find myself in great sympathy for people who, given the realities, feel a need to protect themselves. To me, there is a stronger connection between much of today’s violence (which was almost unknown not too many years ago) and our permissive attitudes towards the glorification of violence and the constant exposure of young people to violent acts.

Educators learned long ago that role models can serve as very powerful and positive educational vehicles. For example, it is hard to teach “entrepreneurship,” but putting people who have an entrepreneurial bent next to successful entrepreneurs greatly enhances chances for success. However, poor role models can provide an equally strong impact in the negative direction. Think of the number of role models to whom our children (and the rest of us) are exposed on TV and in the movies who seem to validate the principle that violence is an acceptable way to express one’s frustrations against others or against society in general.

A number of years ago I had an opportunity to visit Easter Island – a fascinating place for those interested in cultural anthropology or just island beauty. The island is one of the most isolated inhabited places on Earth, its nearest inhabited neighbor being Pitcairn Island (of “Mutiny on the Bounty” fame), over 800 miles away. A twice-weekly air service had just begun, stopping over on flights from Santiago Chile to Tahiti. Prior to that, a Chilean military vessel put into port twice a year with essential provisions that the island could not supply. Before the air-link, the only contact its 1,200 inhabitants had with the rest of the world was, essentially, by radio.

I struck up a conversation with a man who turned out to be the island’s judge. He came periodically from Valparaiso, Chile to handle any legal actions. I asked about the issues he encountered. He said that there had been virtually no crime on the island until a few years earlier. Everyone knew everything about everyone else, even what they owned. There were no thefts, no murders, no assaults – there was no place to go and people had been forced to learn to live with one another. The turning point had come, in his opinion, with a major event that transformed the island – the arrival of Television.

Initially, all the programming was provided by videotapes brought in via the navy boat. The first shipment contained a set of Tarzan movies. During the first few weeks after the broadcasts started, the infirmary was busy treating young people with broken limbs. Somehow swinging on vines wasn’t everything it was cracked up to be. In his opinion, this should have been seen as an indication of things to come.

Broken arms and legs mend. But the main problem on the island at the time of our conversation – about 10 years later – was juvenile violence. Youngsters didn’t share the sense of “community” or recognize the full cost of their actions. The only thing that had changed was the advent of TV, and, of course, the TV content had moved rapidly from the initial more benign programming to shows where the violence content was identical to what we had in the US.

How do we put a stop to violent action? Gun control? Not likely. The major impact will come from education, in reducing the amount of exposure to “violence for fun,” in sensitizing parents and teachers, and in enlisting the support of the news media. Putting extra air marshals on airplanes didn’t stop the highjackings. But a moratorium on reporting the actions did.

We are trying to change our children’s’ viewpoints, although it’s late. We’ve already established a mind-set that blunts them to the idea that exposure to violent scenes might be a significant factor. A nation-wide effort is needed, but it will not succeed without parental (and grandparental) effort and the cooperation of the media. Positive action in this arena is much more likely to remove the feeling of helplessness that exists – more so than tighter gun control, stronger law enforcement or tougher penal codes. And of course, setting good examples for children when conflict situations arise within the family may be the most important step of all.

To quote the words of that immortal Georgia philosopher, Pogo: “We has met the enemy and he is us.”

PS. We ended up taking the kids to a PG-rated Disney film – which we all enjoyed.