“It feels a bit off-balance,” said Rogowski, who went on to point out that children already have many other damaging freedoms online where they are more exposed to danger and not protected.
So, there’s a chance something could be getting lost in translation and I don’t know the context here, but just taking this article’s description at face value,
[Paraphrasing], “Kids can voluntarily be exposed to explicit content on the internet, so why do we need guardians around when I act creepy towards them (it’s my job, no really)” seems like both a tellingly weird rant trigger for this guy and first line of argument in defense of it
e; I should have kept reading the article,
For Rogowski, though, the efforts now made in Britain are in danger of inhibiting creativity. His scenes in Bird involve several small children and teenagers who are depicted in situations of social neglect and even imminent harm. “It’s true that Andrea is very careful and respectful, but it would have been great sometimes if there was a bit more trust – and I think that’s a cultural thing,” Rogowski told the industry journal Variety this weekend. “We are so scared nowadays to expose our kids to maybe a swear word – which is ridiculous, because we allow them to use social media and YouTube.”
Ok, yeah, so maybe spoilers for the movie Bird (I haven’t seen it but I’ve read a few things about it now), but it seems like this actor plays an abusive father figure type, and I could kind of imagine how doing that work would have you running into these regulations a lot and they might get kind of annoying, but a) they are there for a really good reason b) if I was your publicist I’d be writing a profanity filled resignation email right now, because you just created a PR headache for yourself
That all said, I think this guy is more dumbass than creep at this point