When I heard about laws being past for fines on anything that the government deems to be "indecent" I knew that we were in trouble. After years and years of the government being unable to clamp down on "obscenity", they've gotten smart enough to just change terms on us. "Indecent".
Well, the ramifications have already come out. The WB has already started editing their programs out of fears of getting fined.
Full article is at the New York Times website, although you'll need to register to read it.
And what are they editing out? What is "indecent"? Well, two girls kissing in a bar. That's indecent, apparently. I get the impression that if it was a man and a woman kissing in a bar, that would be fine.
Also, there is a shot of a girl unbuttoning her jeans that is also being cut. The article doesn't state anything along the lines of seeing so much as underwear, but the very act of unbuttoning is "indecent."
The FCC fined CBS affiliates $3.6 million dollars for broadcasting an episode of "Without a trace" because there were scenes in the show about teenagers having sex. Again, no comments about nudity... just because they were teenagers having sex.
Now, this isn't about prurience in entertainment. This is about what our government is declaring "bad", "wrong" and "indecent."
Non-heterosexual sex is indecent. Kids having sex is indecent. This is the same ideology that prevents safe sex education in schools. Kids having sex? Just because their bodies are *screaming* for sexual activity at that age is no reason to think that they're actually *having* sex. We shouldn't think about it. We shouldn't educate them about it. We shouldn't address it, or portray it in our entertainment. And girls don't kiss girls, and if they do we don't see it because it's indecent. La la la la la la, I can't hear you!
Every day this government closes its collective eyes and mind a little more. The question of whether art reflects life or life reflects art will be irrelevant, as life and art will have less and less relation to each other and art becomes simply a pacification and propaganda tool for people who want to tell everyone else how to live. The stuff of life is indecent.
So says the FCC.
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
The senseless ravings of a lover, poet, and lunatic. Granted the three terms are pretty much synonyms, but you can learn to deal with that over time.
3 comments:
Hi Dan,
I like the look of your new website - its clean and professional looking.
About censorship, I was wondering should there be any line drawn? Should there be limits on what is shown on the public airwaves? In the frantic desire for attention (and ratings for commercial outlets) entertainers have and will do anything.
Hmmm, I was just thinking that entertainers should be grateful for the censorship line. When the line exists, entertainers can dance up next to it; walk it like a tight rope; and occasionally cross it. It proves how brave and edgy they are. It attracts the attention, they desire so dearly. Then, when enough people play around and trample some existing censorship line it gets wiped out and a new more extreme line is drawn. The cycle continues.
Censorship is like as leash on a big undisciplined puppy. It prevents the dog from knocking down, humping the legs, and drowning with wet, slobbery licks, those unwitting strangers that unluckily cross its path.
Todd from "Noises Off"
:D Heyas Dan! Nice to see you back again bloggin...
I kind of agree with you on the trend of "Nanny Government" - its interesting how you mentioned the teenagers and how indecent it was for them to be even thought of as having sex. Apparently the government thinks if they see it they will do it, or is it the other way around?
If they are hoping to go back to the "values" of the older generations, perhaps they need to re-evaluate those values and decide where the current values came from. How and why are people so free to show these images on TV? Ratings? perhaps.. money for the most part (which is ratings I suppose).
Im still quite frustrated with the lack of responsibility individuals seem to take with their own actions - why take responsibility when the government can think for us. Rather frightening when you consider the caliber of individual in office lately. Many times the schools are in similar situations where the parents expect them to raise their kids for them - but .. oh no!! Dont you dare even think about disciplining or saying anything that may be controversial... thats indecent
Its going to be interesting what is deemed indecent - and how long this will continue. For now, Ill just hum a happy tune while holding my ears and eyes so I dont see anything I shouldnt... well, I will once I hit enter on this... >_>; Maybe - who knows, I may just go watch some cable tv.
Sharon ^^/" (da ebil mom)
Hey Todd! Hey Sharon!
The question of censorship is a huge one, and very complicated, obviously. But I'm very, very interested in who decides what is decent and indecent in these conversations. I absolutely think that limits are very useful from a creative standpoint. Limitations provoke creativity more than anything else. Bowie couldn't sing about heroin addiction on the radio, so he sang about Major Tom and his spaceship.
But again, it's a question of who says that this is ok and this is not. And it goes beyond "boys kissing girls is fine, but girls kissing girls is not", although I have a big problem with that distinction.
My new play, Vagina Dentata, deals a LOT with this. Why are we so afraid of ourselves? As a society, we are so afraid of our own bodies and what we do with them that we declare them indecent, transform their functions into curse words, and try to hide them and "protect" ourselves and our children from them.
I'm not saying that people should be allowed to give head in the middle of the food court... although that would make an interesting sight. But I think that the big question is "why do we feel this needs to be hidden"?
Why are we afraid and ashamed?
Post a Comment