Papa Don't Preach...

In a news flash that was brilliant yet brief, Dakota Fanning's new movie Hounddog debuted at the 2007 Sundance Film Festival. In what is apparently the only riveting aspect of the movie (besides Fanning's predictable precociousness - which always makes her seems like she's 35), Fanning's twelve-year-old character is raped by an older teen. Fanning, who for her part claims the scene was tastefully shot, is only twelve herself, a fact that has some child advocacy groups up in arms. In the fallout from the movie, which was first screened for the Sundance Audience on January 22, 2007, an interesting group has stepped to the forefront to chastise the filmmakers, request an investigation by the Department of Justice, and even seek the assistance of a higher power (the First Lady). Who is this group who is railing against indecency and kiddie porn? Who is standing up for our children and striking a blow against pedophiles everywhere? Would you be surprised if I told you the answer involves the Catholic church?

Somewhere in our great country (I think it's New York if we're getting specific), there lies a powerful and influential group called the "Catholic League." Much to my initial shock and disappointment, this group does not consist of any of our favorite superheroes and it is not headed by a musclebound stud in red tights named "Bishop Strong." Instead, the Catholic League touts itself as [cue car dealer commercial voice] "THE NATION'S LARGEST CATHOLIC CIVIL RIGHTS ORGANIZATION!!!"......Huh?......Yeah - and there's more. According to the League itself, prejudice against the Catholic Church was the deepest bias in the history of the American people [cough...slavery...cough]. But wait - it gets better. How many of you out there knew not only that "Catholic baiting is the anti-Semitism of the liberals", but also that "Catholic bashing has become a staple of American society?" And here I thought it was baseball and hotdogs.


Pointless ramblings aside (mine too), the Catholic League has found the time amidst this hail of Catholic bashing to strike out and serve as a protective conscious for all of American society. It was apparently in that very role that the president of the Catholic League, Bill Donahue, decided to call upon the Department of Justice and the First Lady to assist in a tactical take down of Ms. Fanning's new movie, Hounddog. As Mr. Donahue explained, in virtually every media outlet that would hear him, it is the Catholic League's position that Hounddog is illegal child porn that must be stopped. While it is obvious to all involved that young Dakota was not actually subjected to rape (in the end, it is just acting), the suggestion of such a rape on the big screen seems to be where Mr. Donahue's contentions lie. It is the "promoting of simulated child rape movies," that Mr. Donahue wants to discourage, and he seems to be pulling out all the stops to do so.

Well that's not so bad, is it? Does anybody really want to watch kiddie porn? Ok - we probably don't want to hear the answer to that question. Does anybody want their neighbor watching kiddie porn? How about their kid's school teacher? Bus driver? You get the point. So it would seem that the League is fighting the good battle. Hollywood makes dirty kiddie porn movie...the League strikes back...we all live safely ever after. But there is one big obstacle standing in the way here - I sometimes refer to it in conversation as, "The First Amendment." You might have heard about it as "Freedom of Speech." I won't bore you with intricate details, but suffice it to say that those Hollywood guys and gals have at least some right to make the kind of movie they want to make. If we let the League start determining what is acceptable film content, we might be in for a dramatic change in American cinema.

Orwellian fears aside, there is another nagging aspect of this debate that must be addressed. As Mr. Donahue alludes, the problem with simulated child rape is not necessarily that the child actors in the film are harmed, but that watching the film might incite horrific behaviors in those who lean toward pedophilia. But is that enough reason to censor THIS film? Do movies really determine how we act in our day to day lives? Fortunately, a wise and influential group has already answered this question for us - that group is...the Catholic League.

In the spring of 2004, Mel Gibson's eagerly awaited The Passion of the Christ was released to film audiences and throngs of Christians worldwide. Commenting on the film, and on the growing criticism about the possibility that the film could ignite anti-semitism, Mr. Donahue had this to say:

“Two months have elapsed since the film was released and no Jew has been killed. Not only have there been no pogroms, there have been no reported beatings, and no reported acts of vandalism associated with the film. This is true not only in the U.S.; it is true all over the world. By now the movie has played in literally scores of countries, all without violence."

Apparently, for Mr. Donahue and the League, the proof is in the proverbial pudding. Why should we be concerned about the promotion of anti-semitic movies if watching these movies doesn't actually cause any violence? Donahue repeats this rhetoric again in a February 2004 letter to "The Jewish Community," when he explains that "[t]he idea that Christians will attack Jews in the streets after seeing The Passion of the Christ is pernicious [10 cents!]"..."[i]f the movie is likely to engender violence, then we should expect that when people finish watching it, they will be in a rage."

Just to make sure we have this right...as long as movie-goers don't stomp out of the theater in a visible rage and engage in mob violence in the street, the movie is not promoting violence? Hmm. No concerns about perpetuating stereotypes or engendering future acts of violence? Ok. So be it. You're the League - I'm just one person. BUT, while I have your attention let me ask you this, Mr. Donahue. Why do we have to give the potentially anti-semitic film a chance, but not the potentially pornographic film? Shouldn't we just wait and see whether there have been any hyped-up movie goers emerging from Hounddog and trying to grab twelve-year-olds from the popcorn line? Isn't the proof in the pudding? Why do we afford the benefit of the doubt for one exercise of the First Amendment, yet call in the First Lady for another?

The point, Mr. Donahue, is that movie patrons, citizens, and other persons generally referred to elsewhere as THE PEOPLE, should decide what is and what is not acceptable in our movie-going experiences. While the Catholic League has a nice name and probably a cool Catholic-mobile, they cannot and will not be the final arbiters of all that is acceptable in mass media. The League has shown inconsistency in the past when it fully supported a violent film that had not so subtle hints of anti-semitism. The League met this film with cheers and applause - not concern for the violence that could befall young, Jewish children. Just because the League has now become suddenly squeamish does not mean that certain filmmakers not named Mel Gibson should lose their right to make movies.

This debate cannot be concluded without acknowledging the giant elephant in the room of which we have not yet spoken. Come on over here Dumbo - pull up a chair. What's that you say? You're not an elephant, but a North American cousin of the elephant called the Hippo-crit? Interesting.

Suffice it to say that the Catholic church has had its share of problems with issues involving children, pedophiles, and the lethal combination of the two. That the civil rights super group associated with the church would choose kiddie porn as a call to arms to clean up the film industry is a stranger truth than fiction could ever wrought. While I have no interest whatsoever in watching Hounddog, I value the First Amendment rights that each American is granted upon birth. To be optimistic, perhaps the realistic and powerful rape scenes in Hounddog will bring to light a very real problem in this country and help those in need to speak out against a terrible atrocity. Perhaps it will be nothing but fodder for perverts. I guess we'll just have to wait and see. Isn't that right Mr. Donahue?