By Kevin Kaumans, Entertainment Editor
Have you ever noticed how buying a book is somewhat different than buying a movie or video game?
Obviously, the physical material is different. But so is the whole standard of rating.
See, when you go to a movie theater with an “R” rating, or buy a “M”-rated video game, what is the first thing you are asked? That’s right, your I.D. But with books?
You can check out the most violent, bloody books known to man, and no one bats an eye.
The cashier won’t question your age, no one asks to see any identification, nothing.
But why is this?
It’s not like books don’t contain violence, sex, and other forms of graphic content.
Despite this, there is no law stopping — say, a third-grader — from walking into a store and purchasing “It,” by Stephen King, a book that contains sex and gore in it.
And what about splatterpunk books?
For those of you unaware, splatterpunk is a sub-genre of horror that focuses primarily on being as grotesque and brutal.
Should we not be at least a little bit worried that our country’s children can access this kind of material no problem?
That being said, I myself am not so sure that adding a rating system with books would be such a good idea.
Because, while I do agree there are many books out that children shouldn’t read, that doesn’t necessarily mean that stamping a “R” or “M” rating on the book will solve anything.
My worry is, if a law does indeed get passed to let people know what books do or don’t have mature content within them, what’s to say this system won’t be abused like many others like it?
First off, who would get a say in what is or isn’t too much violence to not qualify for a certain rating?
Would kids books be rated in certain age groups, or would all of them be given one rating for ages 5-through-17?
Because that, I find, would not make any sense.
After all, teen books are a lot more violent than books that were made for elementary schoolers.
Also, in my experience of reading books where the main characters are talking animals, a lot of books targeted towards the younger generation get away with a lot more dark elements than books featuring humans do.
Take “Warrior Cats” by Erin Hunter, for example.
While the series may seem just about a group of stray cats trying to survive in the wild at first, the books regularly feature death, animal fights, and pregnancy complications.
I mean, the second book in the series literally has a character die while giving both to her kittens.
Yet the book’s writing style is too simplistic to be considered an adult book.
So, what would its rating be?
My point is, books are not as easy to distinguish as movies or video games when considering who should or shouldn’t get to access it.
So, my solution: Let the parents decide.
After all, why should authors be pressured to make sure a kid they don’t know doesn’t get exposed to anything too explicit?
My point is, parents need to learn to watch their kids if they don’t want them experiencing complicated elements too early.
Stop handing them the Ipad, stop expecting everyone else but you to watch your kids’ safety, and do your civic duty as a caregiver.