I have to admit, I was amused by the reaction towards that whole Janet Jackson thing by the US media. I was doubly amused upon seeing it reported on our own news programs, all in it's uncensored glory* on the 6pm news. I felt that I was living in a nation that was far less sensitive towards such nonsense, and that we didn't share the same hangups towards sex and violence as our northern friends. It seems, however, that I only felt that way because I wasn't paying any attention. In many ways, we are slowly approaching puritanism. In other aspects, we're already there.
Lately, there has been a lot of talk regarding Big Brother Uncut. Now, I don't know about you, but I don't see how there can be any confusion regarding the shows content. The advertisements make it quite clear in regards to the programme's content, it has an appropriate rating and warning, and it's on late at night. Rather than decide to take it into your own hands to declare what we should and should not be allowed to see, I feel that individuals of conservative taste and morals should exercise their right to not watch the bloody thing. Should you happen to accidentally come across someone's genitals whilst channel surfing, please, change the channel - don't continue to watch the programme for 10 more minutes and then write in to the Daily Telegraph to complain.
Regarding the article, there are flaws in some of the statements. The section in question should be written as following, with my additions capitalised.
On the inside: Penis rubbed on woman's back. WOMAN MAKES COMPLAINT. SEXUAL ASSAULT (CATEGORY 2), PUBLIC EXPOSURE AND LEWD BEHAVIOUR. PENALTY: FIVE YEARS IN GAOL.
On the outside: PENIS RUBBED ON WOMAN'S BACK. WOMAN MAKES COMPLAINT. Sexual Assault (Category 2), public exposure and lewd behaviour. Penalty: Five years in GAOL.
On the inside: Man grabs a woman's breast and calls her a "whorebag". WOMAN MAKES COMPLAINT. SEXUAL ASSAULT (CATEGORY 2), OFFENSIVE BEHAVIOUR. PENALTY: FIVE YEARS IN GAOL.
On the outside:MAN GRABS A WOMAN'S BREAST AND CALLS HER A "WHOREBAG". WOMAN MAKES COMPLAINT. Sexual assault (Category 2), offensive behaviour. Penalty: Five years IN GAOL.
On the inside: Demeaning conversation about genitalia. PERSON MAKES COMPLAINT. OFFENSIVE BEHAVIOUR, SEXUAL HARASSMENT. PENALTY: TWO YEARS IN GAOL.
On the outside:DEMEANING CONVERSATION ABOUT GENITALIA. PERSON MAKES COMPLAINT. Offensive behaviour, sexual harassment. Penalty: Two years IN GAOL.
Yes, not only did I call into question the arguments, I also edited the spelling, punctuation and made the sentences more consistent with each other. It's no surprise there's no name to go with that story! Another point I take issue with is the concern over Big Brother largest audience - teenagers. Have you ever heard what young adults speak about? Ever been one yourself? For the past several thousand years, the prime topic for discussion among adolescents is sex, and their method of speech has always been one that isn't approved of by society as a whole. Filing complaints against the network that brings us the delightful Toadie will not change what is fundamental to human development.
All this thinking of the children fails to give thought to what sort of people the children will grow up to be.
*Ok, there's nothing glorious about a pierced nipple. Yuck.
Getting Janet Jackson off the air is a good thing.
Getting Toadie off the air is a good thing.
Giving young adults nothing to watch is a good thing.
So the puritans and I are almost on par here. Maybe we should just force kids to watch hardcore pornography until they're sick of it. That way they're still free to watch what they want, it just won't be stupid.
First, my comment wasn't saying we should ban this stuff, it was that if the puritans succeeded in banning the stuff then there's an infinitessimal chance that whatever replaces it would be more interesting to me. Therefore, I don't really care until they start bitching about the violence in video games. Interestingly, I think a large percentage of Big Brother proponents would be bitching, right along with the puritans, with their big fat hippie bongs and T-Shirts that read "Make love, not war". I'm just doing my part to keep the pressure on the retards that like this stuff.
Second, television isn't everything. This may seem a little difficult to understand for someone who uses dialup (having said that, I've seen your edonkey list; I just happen to be able to get more anime than I can watch). If it's porn you want, look on the internets. That's what it's there for. Here's something you do understand, though: A lot of the media you and I see just plain old isn't available to us. It's not banned, but it may as well be, because we're either not gonna get it, or we'll end up paying ridiculous prices for it.
Case in point, I want to see a lot of the films from the Sydney film festival. Fuck, I'm not going to watch them at 7 o clock on a weekday in the city, with only 2 showings. Why can't I get em on my TV? That's right! Big Brother's on, and even if it wasn't they'd be showing reruns of The Simpsons or MASH instead of putting on something decent. It's ridiculous that the ABC and SBS are the best channels in sydney.
Here's what I'm getting at: If you let people watch what they want, media becomes inbred, like it's become. The good thing about radio originally was that DJs had their finger on the pulse, and they'd give you decent music to listen to, that you couldn't have found yourself, because you didn't know what you were looking for. New and interesting shows just don't get a chance, shows that fuck with us or try and show something decent (eg: Micallef Tonight) just don't get the chance to gain an audience.
Point being, there's a difference between freedom and variety.
Add Comment
<< Home