Boys Beware

No matter how one feels about the attitude towards gays in "Boys Beware," can anyone deny that it gives some sound advice?

For example, whether the "gay" aspect is present or not, a young boy should definitely not take rides from strangers, and especially not befriend them and take gifts from them. This is a popular method for gay men who are bad to earn the trust of young boys, so pointing this out really isn't wrong at all.

If your friend is stupid enough to get into a car with a complete stranger, yes, taking down the plate number is also a good idea. And if you are walking towards an area where you will be particularly vulnerable, like under a pier as in the film and you see a strange man following you, yes, it's a good idea not to go in there.

Yes, the narration may be a little off, as well as the overall attitude. The film doesn't stress that not all gay men are bad, and that is wrong, sure. But it's just as wrong to deny that many of them, enough to be concerned about, are predators, just like many heterosexual men, and women. The obvious bias against gays in the film doesn't negate that the methods shown in the film for getting the young boy's confidence are indeed used, always were and always will be.

And of course that doesn't stop at gays towards young boys - it could be any kind of adult looking to groom and mold an innocent kid.

So the film is a relic in its execution, but like mommy and daddy always would say, "Don't take candy from strangers."

An anti-gay short. It makes it clear that gay men are mentally ill and prey on young guys. It "dramatizes" two stories. It's all narrated by some guy. Full of homophobia and misinformation. If it weren't so sick it could be funny. I realize back in 1961 that homosexuality was still considered a mental illness but that doesn't excuse this. Supposedly this is still being shown in certain countries in the deep south and that's just sad. I find it hard to believe that in this day and age people would actually take this seriously. I really feel bad for closeted kids who see this and believe it as being the truth.

A short "educational" film, Boys Beware may have set out with good intentions- to warn children about sexual predators. That's a subject we're actually more sensitive about today than when the film was made, so modern audiences can relate to that. Where Boys Beware emerges as a relic of an old-fashioned prejudice is in its insistence on treating child molesters and homosexuals interchangeably. Homosexual is the word used to describe the predators in the film. It's called "sick" and not "normal." And "homosexual" is defined as someone who seeks a sexual relationship with one's own sex. So it's all homosexuals painted with one brush- never mind that most have adult relationships, all homosexuals are potential molesters.

To me, going out of your way to describe molesters who attack boys as gay is like referring to molesters who attack girls as straight. Child molestation just isn't a healthy orientation either way, and to associate it with one is dangerous. Conveniently, this film overlooks that some predators prey on girls. Maybe its intentions weren't so noble after all. At the end of the day, this is something people today can look back at with wonder, similar to Birth of a Nation's treatment of blacks. Thank God we've (mostly) moved passed this.

Boys Beware is a look back at a past when jobs were plentiful, neighbors were caring and trusting, and crime was low. As a result it helps bring out the knowledge of dangers to our young men in our community: The constant threat of pedophiles or other strangers who could potentially end their life. The short, produced on a frugal budget of $1000 dollars has excellent acting and provided a very important message to the community. This video was so well made it is still used to this day to help inform young ones about the dangers lurking in their community. I highly recommend showing your children this video so they know the consequences of trusting strangers without asking their parents if it is a wise choice to trust them.

(this is part of an essay I wrote for my FHSS Sexuality Class on the film)

"Boys Beware", a film produced in 1959 and later shown around many American schools in 1961 has a catastrophically strong anti-Homosexual message attached to it. In a nutshell, it follows three 'sick' men who prey on young boys, sexually abusing and in one case, killing them. Had "boys beware" used the right logic, it could have been helpful to children and teenagers in preventing pedophilia and rape. Instead it hides behind bigotry and hatred, perfectly depicting the social attitudes of it's times.

"That looks innocent enough doesn't it? A lot of young people hitch hike. But sometimes there are dangers are involved that do not meet the eye. Jimmy didn't like walking home so he decided to thumb a ride. He'd done it one hundred times before and he didn't think anything was unusual when the driver struck up conversation. The stranger was a good listener too and it only seemed minutes before they pulled up in front of jimmy's house. When jimmy pulled out the stranger gave him a friendly pat." The opening moments of the film seem coherent and meaningful. Shots of a shady man offering a young boy a ride home are accompanied by omniscient voice over which is full of hints that the man is a pedophile or rapist and that the character Jimmy is of course in potential danger of harm both physically and emotionally. Any half educated person watching this film in todays times would be asserting that "Boys beware" was exploring a pedophilia sexuality and it's dangers. Had the film followed from its original connotations it would have made sense, but then of course it would not be folly for analysis on its promotion of heteronormativity. As the next scene begins, "Boys Beware" begins to erode in its coherence. Homophobia, and lack of understanding of other sexualities (which both exist inside of the heteronormative paradigm) will rear it's ugly head. "The following Saturday they went fishing together. By then they were using first names. Ralph said it was more friendly. Then during lunch, Ralph showed him some pornographic pictures. What Jimmy didn't know is that Ralph was sick. A sickness that was not visible like smallpox but no less dangerous and contagious. A sickness of the mind. You see, Ralph was a homosexual. A person who demands an intimate relationship with members of their own sex." Homosexuality is denounced here for the first time in the film, full of hysterical assumptions and fears that are so absurd one finds it impossible to believe any audiences even took the film seriously. Having defined the term "homosexuality," the film successfully promotes male/female relationships without even showing any. It does this simply by comparing homosexuality to a disease, labeling it dangerous and contagious going far enough to separate any form of sexuality that does not fit in with the heterosexual paradigm as sick. While media in popular culture in today's world tend to shy away from upfront and direct criticism of homosexuality, "boys beware" sheds light on the fact that the media can be a factor in how the unthinking masses come to conclusions. In the 1950s, most people were disgusted with Gay people outright- as shown and maybe in part because of this film. Today, most people are okay with Gay people but so long as they are not a close friend or family member. Popular culture reflects this, as evidenced by huge amounts of Gay characters used for comedic (but not dramatic) effect in television shows. What this hints is that heteronormativity will always be around any society until a sweeping majority of it's people accept other sexual orientations unconditionally. The heteronormativity in "boys beware" is just a testament to the hatred felt at the time, as is the passive heteronormativity shown through todays use of stereotypical Gay characters that are hardly ever made to connect to audiences on a meaningful level.

One should feel deeply sorry for the amount of Gay or confused teenagers who were shown this film after its release (as it was distributed for over twenty years). In promoting heteronormativity as the only accepted norm, the film magnifies how much Homosexuals are the "other." This would have been damaging to impressionable Gays: "But all homosexuals are not passive," the narrator begins, "The stranger agreed to give Mike a ride home. The companionship, the praise, the friendly attitude dispelled any misgivings about going with a stranger. He probably never realized until it was too late that he was riding in the shadow of death. But sometime that evening Mike Merric traded his life for a newspaper headline." "In the shadow of death"? Whoever made this film obviously learned scriptwriting lessons in hyperbole. 'I am going to become a killer'-- is what many young boys can not be faulted for thinking upon viewing this film fifty years ago. If one ever wondered why so many Homosexual men married into straight relationships and lived lives of lies, one has to look no further to this film, and films such as this that force Heterosexuality as the only human relationship by a hardline default. Anything else are labeled illnesses that can lead a homosexual to become a murderer. Comparing such a ludicrous film to most media today, we are quite tame. It is true that Gender opposites continue to be the overwhelming norm, and that heteronormativity (at least subconsciously) is hard to escape. However, being homosexual is no longer so separated from the heteronormative paradigm that it once was. Viewing historic, albeit, stupid films such as "Boys beware" is important in understanding that as a society we have made progress in our acceptance of things outside the heterosexual norm, but also sends a chilling reminder of the times we missed only by a few decades.