06-01-2017, 03:23 AM
Ive been thinking about this. And I think what I keep getting hung up on is that in my mind I want to draw lines between artistic censorship, entertainment censorship, political censorship, and so on. So thinking theoretically I guess you can draw those lines, but in reality I don't think its possible to really cherry pick things like that.
Im also getting hung up on what exactly censorship is. Are we talking about trying to block certain material or voices from ever reaching the public? Like burning books, killing journalists, throwing paint on works of art. Or just blocking certain segments of the population from having access to it? Like having to be 18 to legally consume porn, not letting a 13 year old by himself into an R rated film. Is just warning people "hey this album has a song in it that is about incest -just a heads up", not restricting anyone from being exposed to it, but just having it one step removed from the public sphere, is that really censorship? I dont know.. part of me just feels like that is courtesy.
Which brings me to something else I feel like voicing on here. I was raised to be respectful, to be polite, and to be considerate of people around me - to basically be aware of how my words and actions affect the people around me. I don't always live up to that ideal, but I do try. And honestly, sometimes, the effect I want to have on others is not a polite, friendly one. But overall, I'd say I'm a very nice, good person. I certainly try to be.
So it pisses me off when people use freedom of expression or not being "PC" as an excuse to be a dick to other people. Its not my job to police people, and I really don't make a habit of doing so. Its a lousy excuse and removes the responsibility off of the person when they excuse straight up bad manners and lack of respect and decency as just not being "PC". Getting fired from your job for being an asshole is not censorship. Like fuck off with that shit. (Not directed at any of you... I had a bad interaction today and it got under my skin.)
Like its about knowing what is appropriate. I curse all the time with my friends, when I write things online.... but I don't curse around my mother. I don't curse at my job when I working with children. Some things can be appropriate or acceptable in private, but not in public. Some things are appropriate in certain public areas, and not in others. I more than understand that many people do not pick up on these social rules - but most of us do.
My feelings on how what a person says can have consequences - if you believe so strongly in what you say, or what you do, or what you created... then own it. And stand by it. And be willing to risk your reputation or your job for it. Like the Kathy Griffin thing - I could argue for or against the artistic value of that photograph and why it should or shouldn't be censored. I can see both sides of it. But I'm not going to argue that CNN shouldn't have fired her. She made a statement, and now she has to deal with the consequences of it.
The Indy 500 reporter - he made a statement. He called it stupid in his apology and I thought his apology was stupid- more of an excuse than accepting any wrong doing. Did he have the right to say what he did? Yeah sure, he was emotional. And one Japanese guy is the same as the rest - in the present as in the past, I guess. But does he have a right to not face the consequences for what he said? No.
Especially when you are a professional, in the public eye, and speaking on a public platform. People have to understand that actions have consequences. I absolutely do not support a world where actions and words do not have consequences. Where we are all free to do and say as we please feeling entitled to be protected from the words and actions of those around us - because to have to deal with consequences would be infringing on their rights. That princess type shit is one of my biggest pet peeves.
How about the nooses being left at the African American history museum in DC? Is that freedom of expression? Is that someones right to express themselves? Is removing it censorship?
Do we draw lines at when something goes from making us feel uncomfortable to making us feel threatened? And at what point does it become illegal? Does the legality of something dictate the appropriateness of it being censored?
Take child pornography, since its been brought up - if the model used in the porn was 18 but convincingly looked like a preteen - I mean, its not illegal, but it still produces a disturbing image... should that be censored in the same way that actual child pornography is? Does it matter that the model did it willingly, was not exploited - is that why things of that nature are banned? Or do we censor images like that because of what effect it has on the viewer?
And to answer a more direct question you had for me, [MENTION=23180]InbetweenDreams[/MENTION] ,
If we removed censors from pornography - do I think that would make pornographic images more prolific? Yes I do. Do I think that the lack of censorship of hate speech would cause more or less hate speech - i think it would cause more. Just look at how free people feel at expressing themselves under the illusion of anonymity the internet provides, when they think they dont have to worry about the consequences of what they say.
I don't think censoring it gets rid of the emotions and opinions behind it - and its stupid and dangerous for anyone to think that censoring something "fixes" that issue - it just removes it from the public sphere. You can censor female nipples from billboards in Times Square, but women still have them. You can ban child pornography but children are still exploited, you can bleep out the lyrics but people are still going to sing them, you can fire someone for making a racially charged statement, but they still are going to be racist. You can fire Kathy Griffin, but she still going to hate Trump. I don't care what people do at home, say to their friends, what they jerk off to late at night under their bed covers when they think the rest of their neighborhood is sleeping.
But i have to admit, I do care what is allowed in public.
So I think having minimal censorship, used as a warning of questionable content is still the answer I feel most comfortable with. Whether its a sticker on an album, or an art work behind the door of a gallery space or museum, or just a note a professor might write on a syllabus about a book - I do not view that as infringing rights, blocking freedom of speech, or dangerous censorship. Again, thats courtesy to me.
And if the person is going for a more in your face sort of thing, they want to shock, they want to challenge people, they want to make them uncomfortable - then the work should either be able to speak for itself, or the creator behind it should have the balls and the dignity to back it up and face the consequences of putting something taboo, questionable, offensive, or whatever else, into the public sphere. And by saying that, I dont at all mean that people should stop doing things like that. I just think that if its something that should be protected by freedom of expression - it should be something the creator is willing to take a risk for. I don't think people should feel entitled to be able to force others into uncomfortable positions without having to feel a little uncomfortable themselves.
It is the risk takers who make change. Gay rights are not fought for and won by people who were closeted and hid their sexuality like a dirty secret to be ashamed of. Civil rights are not fought for and won by minorities who keep their heads down and their mouths shut, just taking shit and accepting thats how life is. Things are not given, they are fought for. And fighting is risky. If Kathy Griffin wants to make a statement on Trump using a bloody mask, and believes there is some kind of value to it, then she should do it and fight for it. If the Indy 500 reporter wants to make a statement about feeling uncomfortable about a Japanese racer winning on memorial day,and believes by saying so defends the honor of his father and the holiday and the race, then he should fight for it. If Frank Zappa wants to write a song about fucking his dead cat, and believes it carries some artistic or entertainment worth, then fight for it.
But don't be surprised or act offended when people fight back.
And thats my essay on that topic...
Im also getting hung up on what exactly censorship is. Are we talking about trying to block certain material or voices from ever reaching the public? Like burning books, killing journalists, throwing paint on works of art. Or just blocking certain segments of the population from having access to it? Like having to be 18 to legally consume porn, not letting a 13 year old by himself into an R rated film. Is just warning people "hey this album has a song in it that is about incest -just a heads up", not restricting anyone from being exposed to it, but just having it one step removed from the public sphere, is that really censorship? I dont know.. part of me just feels like that is courtesy.
Which brings me to something else I feel like voicing on here. I was raised to be respectful, to be polite, and to be considerate of people around me - to basically be aware of how my words and actions affect the people around me. I don't always live up to that ideal, but I do try. And honestly, sometimes, the effect I want to have on others is not a polite, friendly one. But overall, I'd say I'm a very nice, good person. I certainly try to be.
So it pisses me off when people use freedom of expression or not being "PC" as an excuse to be a dick to other people. Its not my job to police people, and I really don't make a habit of doing so. Its a lousy excuse and removes the responsibility off of the person when they excuse straight up bad manners and lack of respect and decency as just not being "PC". Getting fired from your job for being an asshole is not censorship. Like fuck off with that shit. (Not directed at any of you... I had a bad interaction today and it got under my skin.)
Like its about knowing what is appropriate. I curse all the time with my friends, when I write things online.... but I don't curse around my mother. I don't curse at my job when I working with children. Some things can be appropriate or acceptable in private, but not in public. Some things are appropriate in certain public areas, and not in others. I more than understand that many people do not pick up on these social rules - but most of us do.
My feelings on how what a person says can have consequences - if you believe so strongly in what you say, or what you do, or what you created... then own it. And stand by it. And be willing to risk your reputation or your job for it. Like the Kathy Griffin thing - I could argue for or against the artistic value of that photograph and why it should or shouldn't be censored. I can see both sides of it. But I'm not going to argue that CNN shouldn't have fired her. She made a statement, and now she has to deal with the consequences of it.
The Indy 500 reporter - he made a statement. He called it stupid in his apology and I thought his apology was stupid- more of an excuse than accepting any wrong doing. Did he have the right to say what he did? Yeah sure, he was emotional. And one Japanese guy is the same as the rest - in the present as in the past, I guess. But does he have a right to not face the consequences for what he said? No.
Especially when you are a professional, in the public eye, and speaking on a public platform. People have to understand that actions have consequences. I absolutely do not support a world where actions and words do not have consequences. Where we are all free to do and say as we please feeling entitled to be protected from the words and actions of those around us - because to have to deal with consequences would be infringing on their rights. That princess type shit is one of my biggest pet peeves.
How about the nooses being left at the African American history museum in DC? Is that freedom of expression? Is that someones right to express themselves? Is removing it censorship?
Do we draw lines at when something goes from making us feel uncomfortable to making us feel threatened? And at what point does it become illegal? Does the legality of something dictate the appropriateness of it being censored?
Take child pornography, since its been brought up - if the model used in the porn was 18 but convincingly looked like a preteen - I mean, its not illegal, but it still produces a disturbing image... should that be censored in the same way that actual child pornography is? Does it matter that the model did it willingly, was not exploited - is that why things of that nature are banned? Or do we censor images like that because of what effect it has on the viewer?
And to answer a more direct question you had for me, [MENTION=23180]InbetweenDreams[/MENTION] ,
If we removed censors from pornography - do I think that would make pornographic images more prolific? Yes I do. Do I think that the lack of censorship of hate speech would cause more or less hate speech - i think it would cause more. Just look at how free people feel at expressing themselves under the illusion of anonymity the internet provides, when they think they dont have to worry about the consequences of what they say.
I don't think censoring it gets rid of the emotions and opinions behind it - and its stupid and dangerous for anyone to think that censoring something "fixes" that issue - it just removes it from the public sphere. You can censor female nipples from billboards in Times Square, but women still have them. You can ban child pornography but children are still exploited, you can bleep out the lyrics but people are still going to sing them, you can fire someone for making a racially charged statement, but they still are going to be racist. You can fire Kathy Griffin, but she still going to hate Trump. I don't care what people do at home, say to their friends, what they jerk off to late at night under their bed covers when they think the rest of their neighborhood is sleeping.
But i have to admit, I do care what is allowed in public.
So I think having minimal censorship, used as a warning of questionable content is still the answer I feel most comfortable with. Whether its a sticker on an album, or an art work behind the door of a gallery space or museum, or just a note a professor might write on a syllabus about a book - I do not view that as infringing rights, blocking freedom of speech, or dangerous censorship. Again, thats courtesy to me.
And if the person is going for a more in your face sort of thing, they want to shock, they want to challenge people, they want to make them uncomfortable - then the work should either be able to speak for itself, or the creator behind it should have the balls and the dignity to back it up and face the consequences of putting something taboo, questionable, offensive, or whatever else, into the public sphere. And by saying that, I dont at all mean that people should stop doing things like that. I just think that if its something that should be protected by freedom of expression - it should be something the creator is willing to take a risk for. I don't think people should feel entitled to be able to force others into uncomfortable positions without having to feel a little uncomfortable themselves.
It is the risk takers who make change. Gay rights are not fought for and won by people who were closeted and hid their sexuality like a dirty secret to be ashamed of. Civil rights are not fought for and won by minorities who keep their heads down and their mouths shut, just taking shit and accepting thats how life is. Things are not given, they are fought for. And fighting is risky. If Kathy Griffin wants to make a statement on Trump using a bloody mask, and believes there is some kind of value to it, then she should do it and fight for it. If the Indy 500 reporter wants to make a statement about feeling uncomfortable about a Japanese racer winning on memorial day,and believes by saying so defends the honor of his father and the holiday and the race, then he should fight for it. If Frank Zappa wants to write a song about fucking his dead cat, and believes it carries some artistic or entertainment worth, then fight for it.
But don't be surprised or act offended when people fight back.
And thats my essay on that topic...
![[-]](https://gayspeak.com/images/duende_v3_local/collapse.png)
