Hitting the floor running, the censorship laws are blatantly de-railed as I would prefer to call it, it's all gone overly PC - "Pointlessly C**p". Improper content is censored in this write-up. - I'll start with my travels in the late 1990's whereby I visited Stockholm for a week of 'fish and blonde banter', but ended up with a few days of meeting loads of Finnish men doing what I intended to do, going for 'fish and blonde banter'. Needless to say it was a bigger wash-out than a trip to Cumbria; if you can find a bridge to cross-over for a visit that is. These beefy sheep dipping clothed men don't actually talk, and when they do, it's about fish. - However, we did discuss the UK's censorship laws, of all subjects for several minutes in-between Carp and Salmon. "Britain are not allowed to talk about anything" these burly men were saying. I was led to believe the same was apparent over there as well, but I was mistaken. They just don't talk about it. It's old-hat for these people. Instead the minimal chat level for a relaxing evening derived to 'fish'. Then again when did you last hear of an offensive Finnish person?
We Brits have never been offensive; accept for our fashion statements abroad, but that doesn't count. We're known for our extravagant colours all in the wrong places and our raw red rears from using factor 2 and missing a bit, well a large bit usually. The censorship laws systematically are dithered over to every viral detail, this includes, any films that were released in the US or Australia, which makes viewing epics first in the UK non existent. Our censorship laws deciders are I assume go into their office all armored up to the neck, bracing them-selves to what they may uncover. These brave souls working, toiling for the good of our nation, these individuals should be out in Afghanistan on the front line, instead being cooped up in an office braving sordid details that could tarnish our innocent minds of riff raff that may descend onto the market from overseas or slightly smell of Vaseline.
The Uk's censorship offices must be the busiest offices in the EU, sampling extracts, checking double and triple meanings, swiftly editing out slap happy parts that would disturb the minds of the hard of hearing anyway aged. The dampening down of words are crazy, so that the swearing is replaced by a piercing blip siren repeat six times that sets off the baby monitor; and ends with you taking a paracetamol. Are these censorship law makers being commissioned by Pharmaceutical companies? - Yet in life the notorious offish language is at epidemic level that spurts out randomly among the youth. The chances are you don't go and confront their obscene spitting and constant swearing just in-case they may have an offensive weapon lodged in their hoodies, apart from their revolting mouth, so keeping all this censorship material away from these groups is a waste of time. - Computer games are bought online from foreign lands escape the censorship laws and go directly to homes across the UK. Piracy material is huge in the UK and this material is available with a handshake on the High Street. We are kidding ourselves that there is any censorship in the UK, because of the internet. I'm not going to throw myself to the lions and discuss 'P**N' and the vial material that doesn't need a mouse dropping of identity to view sordid material that fills the youth with filth and dirty language, this 'should' remain in the boudoir with members of the public who love each other and have vowed to be together until time stops.
I did think about just putting a long line of ****************** *** ****** through-out this write-up but saw it wasn't that fun. You see censorship is not fun, but who are we to tell adults well consenting adults with a brain between them how to live their lives. This being is not going to go on a pursuit and start digging big holes. But, I surprise myself when my aloof tongue does have a smidgeon of fogey-ness. Some might say, perhaps an essence of trapped wind that resembles 'old fashioned' that comes from my heritage and I'm distinctly finding out it is disappearing as quickly as the Artic Ice Caps; within the UK. - The main problem is that there has to be censorship laws, but not in the areas they are residing. I like my vegetables and quite frankly a curved carrot shaped precariously should be allowed in our supermarkets, but they go amiss, or get chopped down to size, or perhaps diced into a salad. In fact after school I found great enjoyment in vegetable shapes. Now I've been forced to finding them on the Question Time panel, or on allotments.
Censorship laws have taken comedy away from certain groups. Despite being owned by computers and working for them on a daily basis, no-one is clock-work and marching off like a Korean soldier on parade. There are no human droid production lines in the UK, people are allowed to make mistakes, unless it is in my favour of course. That is also in regards to our values and in balance the UK is successful in being multi-cultured. Hence, why their was such a big police presence when BNP leader Nick Griffin appeared on mainstream television as he obviously would ruffle some feathers, in his beady-eyed manner. Sprouting rhetoric historical analogies that un-hinged his credibility of a candidate of worth and of great moral standing; this is what was transpired anyhow via the Broadcasting House editing suite, as there was a delay of 15 minutes as scripts were scrutinized and then cut if the value of Griffin's word was too discriminating to any particular group. That evening the censorship law makers were working at a rate, along with their lawyers all at the license holder's expense. Overall the one hour show cost the taxpayer over 150,000 GBP, all because of the warped censorship control that is embedded deep inside the UK's psyche. Afraid to inflict verbal harm to any group, all of any wrong doing. Yet contradictory we are a democracy; hence why protestors were able to voice their own hatred under the term of 'protest' against the BNP stances. Diluting patriotism in one swipe, because many of the protestors were not opaquely British anyway, no-one is?
The censorship law that was exploited by Jonathan Ross and Russell Brand at the end of last year involved the immature, puerile stunt which involved their tyrant quips at aging actor Andrew Sachs's Gothic grand-daughters sexual antics. Both were rightfully reprimanded at leaving repulsive tuneful messages on Sachs's answer-phone, all under the blurry boundaries called 'entertainment'. - Again, all paid by the license holder 'Joe Public'. When Ross was suspended on practically full pay for three months, it was regarded as a welcome break for Ross over the Christmas period. It typified that the fall-guy was in fact 'Joe Public'; censorship ruling which doesn't protect the public, but is inevitably paid for by the public. It is a PR stunt, to make it look as if laws are in-place but overall as helpful as Frankie Boyle in a Mosque.
Quite frankly, (no pun intended) it is a mine-field on paper for comedians alike. No more Bernard Manning with a brash Northern tone; excavating censorship subjects. It will be only a matter of time until dear Frankie Boyle will be tamed for lighter humor content. No doubt he will relish the chance of taking the flack himself as a Scot, red-haired, and has a fully loaded tongue, at his expense. He's no fool; it's his 'bread and butter'. With the way it is going with 'Political Correctness' and bureaucracy meddling, soon the lawyers will be introducing 'self censorship laws' stopping comedians in taking the p*** out of their own endeavors, just so in case it doesn't pour scorn on public members who just may look the same, or can relate to the analogies in a negative sense. Eventually, censorship laws, like other laws will seize up communication; all communication offerings will end up like a de-humanized 'call center'. No character, tight dialects, short sentences, and bland to the core. Censorship takes the colour away from life extremism, we may not want to know whether your Team Andre or not when it comes to celebrities lives, however, the UK is heading for a relentlessly tiresome 'nanny state'. When no-one will be able to think of there own values.
Now with new powers for law enforcers regarding new censorship reforms earlier this year (2009) it is now possible for innocent images on a laptop or personal computer to be misconstrued by a law enforcer in England and Wales, even if the activity is legal. This law in its entirety strangles common sense and there is no where to hide.
I do not think censorship laws in britain are too strict, i dont think they are strict enough. What gives people the right to know every aspect of someones life? Celebrities dont get the privacy they deserve and what right have we to know every tiny detail about them? Whether its splashed in the papers or displayed on the net it is still unfair. I do not think it is right as i feel everyone is entitled to their privacy. In my opinion, the only things the press should be allowed to report about are the important things such as the government and the economy. However i dont think censorship should be too strict because then it may be used as propaganda in favour of the government. I do not see censorship as a restriction on individual freedom, i see it as a way of protecting people from complete exploitation.
there is no too strict or not too strict. the fact that there is a standard or a wrong or a right is a matter of opinion . why i say this is because most governments are "democratic". SO. it does not matter what some expert or his nemesis thinks. all that matters is what a society chooses to impose upon themselves. the choice , which usually stems from the societies beliefs. whether the beliefs be relegious or scientific. i think more public opinions polls or referendums on such matters are neccessary. not on every little issue. but instead on the general feeling around certain levels of censorship. i`m a firm believer in that if a society calls themselves a democracy, then no choice they make is bad. if it gets them killed. then the blood is on the hands of the people. and no individual can be blamed as history has done in the past few centuries.
In my personal opinion, some of the censorship in Britain has gone to the pot in Britain.
On some occasions we are getting to see more and more on the television where they are relaxing some of the censorship rules, even now down to allowing some of the cartoons from this modern age to have outrageous blood and graphic scenes which in my opinion, although animated are not suitable for young children.
Then we have the most famous situation of censorship yet. Tom and Jerry. How many times the weird yet whack Mary Whitehouse has has tried so many times to ban this cartoon for its violence, and yet failed badly. Yet now the censorship board have taken a huge step and decided that all the Tom and Jerry Cartoons that have ever been created will now be edited and will no longer be able to show the characters having a Cigar or Cigarette.
They can blow each other to kingdom come with shotguns and explosives, they can beat each other senseless with baseball bats, pool cues and golf clubs and they can attack each other with axes and meat cleavers, but in the censors infinite wisdom they cannot be seen to promoting smoking to children.
When are these people going to realise that they need to attack more major censorship issues first.
There are scientific studies to show the harm pornography has and the addiction problems it can lead to. Pornography leads to empty dead interactions. Loving relationships are fulfilling and sex within this context is what is satisfying. Using pornography actually destroys this ability to connect with your partner, creates a dependancy for other things outside the relationship, which creates a gulf between you and your partner (even if you try to include this as a third aspect to being a couple) because of how have polluted your mind does not involve you partner but acts as your substitute, which in the end will break up your relationship because what you have seen will make you want to act tr out on another person. People are not sex objects. Pornography is not about having an equal partner, it is about sexual power/domination in which the scenes depicted show the other person enjoying being treated in a demeaning manner which hurts them but on camera or in the photoshot (perhaps with some injected Botox to help) this quickly has to turn from a grimace to a smile.
The mental state of these people featured is severely damaged, about 80% have been abused as children and any person viewing the material is extending the abuse into their adult lives. Abuse to them is like being at home, they have not experienced anything else. You become their financial sponsor to the perpretator.
It is not about 'church' being big brother which people are quick to point the finger at, trying to escape from yourself and casting your dissatisfactions about your life on other people, feeding your greed and addiction for more will result in you abusing them at best (though I say this carefully) or raping them. What sort of person do you want to turn into? Have some self respect and respect for the other person. Being content in life is about balance. There is a natural human law in life, go against it you suffer. What's wrong with love?
The Laws need to be stricter and updated.
OK, obviously a subject that a lot of people have a view on I would have thought. But here is my two pence worth.
Firstly, when looking at Censorship laws you should consider why we have them, namely to try and keep a certain moral code in place in this country. When looking at this country we see moral standards slipping all the time, so why should we consider reducing standards further still.
I am sure that there has to be a link between what we allow children to see on TV and their behaviour at school, in the home and everywhere else.
After all we have one of the highest teenage pregnancy rates in the world, we have violence in our schools and generally it is becoming a more horrible place to live by the day.
Why reduce censorship laws and make it easier to show more violence, more sex or bad language on TV and elsewhere. Who would actually benefit from this?
I am sure that there are a number who would like to see the laws relaxed, but I just cannot agree.
I am sorry if this comes across as a bit of a rant, but I do feel quite strongly about this.
I assume that this category was posted quite a while ago as the amount of censorship has reduced in recent years and certainly with regards to pornography the laws have relaxed and now pretty much the same material can be purchased in this country that used to be only avaialble in Europe.
There is still a need to have censorship to ensure that the vunerable in society are protected however for the majority of mature adults my view is that they are sufficiently knowledgeable to make their own minds up about what is and what is not acceptable.
For me the real need for censorship exists to protect the young. In my view the three biggest risks are from TV, computer games and the internet. TV because it appears that many children now have TV in their bedrooms even if it is only there as a means to play their playstation games on and therefore while little Johnny is supposed to be tucked up in bed can you really be sure that he is not tuning in to late night TV which does have some rather tasteless programmes on at night.
The second area that appears to be totally out of control is the internet, I would never let my children loose on this without some kind of supervision even if the nanny net pograms are beig used as it is too easy for them to access some pretty violent sites.
Finally computer games seem to get more and more violent these days and the rating system is very important to help sometimes ignorant parents make decisions. Some games really do glorify violence and in some cases promote the gang and gun culture that is creeping in to even small towns from the big cities.
In my view we need some censorship to protect our young and help give parents enough infornmation to make decisions about some products.
........guard I'd imagine this subject was introduced to the site quite a while ago as I've found this nanny nation of ours dropping it's guard in some regions in the past year. Censorship is a strange thing and one that I can't fully grasp, how did it come to be that a group of people should make a decision for the millions of us on what we can and can't see. I'm of a free mind and personally I'd like the choice myself. However I do understand that some things are just plain unfit for certain peoples eyes. Censorship mainly exisits in the media within the UK, the most widespread censorship seems to have been when it comes to films. Cast your mind back a few years and you may remember the time when The Exorcist was finally deemed suitable for viewing by the UK public as was The Texas Chainsaw Massacre, then remember the disappointment after watching them when you couldn't fathom what all the fuss was about. The BBFC is in charge of deciding what cinematic and home video releases are suitable for what age range. Previous decision makers seemed to be stuck in the past and would demand major cuts to pictures or even place a flat out ban. The present regime seem to be a lot more understanding and seem to realize that most people can actually think freely. This has brought about the '12A' catagory at the cinema, it's given the parents/guardians some choice over what films they want their children to see at the cinema if they're under a certain age. I think you'd agree that most 12-rated films under the old rules weren't that extreme and on the whole suitable. Recent films such as X-Men come to mind when I think of this. But of course it still comes down to the fact that maybe we should just be advised about what the content of something is rather than being told that it isn't suitable. They have this kind rating in the USA where for example a child can see an 18-rated film if they are
taken by a responsible adult. Naturally you'd think that mst adults would have restraint and sound judgement. The point is they have the choice. But then of course people argue that this kind of policy has created a nation who resort to some midless violence and films etc are to blame. Well in response to that we have to say that the USA is a far bigger country than the US with many different races of people. It can't just be the media. The USA isn't the land of the free in all respects. For example a music act like Marilyn Manson really gets up the nose of a few american states and so they proceed to ban himm from performing purely because of what he supposedly stands for. It's a comical situation when most of the time the people in charge can't see past their own ideals and can't even see that by banning acts like Manson they are adding to the hype and interest. I'm sure Manson loves it in a way, he probably sells more records to the disenchanted youth because of it. We have to have some sort of guidelines in the UK. Right now I feel we're at a crossroads where we're being more open in what we censor. It's certainly a lot more free than it used to be but we're not completely there. However I'm glad I live in a country where most of the time we donlt seem to have a problem with anything. I'd rather live here than in a country that will ban films purely because they're mildly raunchy........if we were like that then whatever would Channel 5 do on a Friday night ?!!!!!!
I'm going to regret this, I feel, but oh well, here goes everything. I know that you have all heard the many pros and cons for censorship within the United Kingdom, and I'm not going to start listing them all here. Read somone elses opinion if you are looking for a rational debate about the censorship laws. Right now, I'm feeling angry with my countries leaders, and frankly, need a rant about it. So here goes nothing.... I'd like to know why I'm paying the price for living in a society that feels I no longer have the right to choose. Every day I have to go to work in a job that specifically states I must ' Promote the independence and choices ' of my service users. So why won't the idiots who write our societies laws grant me that same respect? Let me start with the drug laws. Whether or not it will damage my health is neither here nor there. I damage my health every day by having to watch Tony Blair on the news inching himself closer to the bowels of George Bush. I try to avoid it as much as possible, but the fact is, I worry about war. The worry causes me to be stressed, and in turn this is damaging my health. I don't actually watch the news anymore, but as my best mate is in the Navy ( already stationed in readiness of the battle ahead because yes, the armed forces ARE preparing for iminent war ) I'm finding it more and more difficult to ignore. I'm scared, and if drugs will make the pain of watching some pompous champagne swilling morons blow up my world around me, then bring 'em on. I want to be able to choose to take them all, uppers, downers, and drugs that will send me out to space. If you want me to ignore what politicians are doing, and the corruption that surrounds them, then at least let me self medicate to the point where I no longer give a s**t. Sadly, at present the only legal way to become oblivious to the world and the problems within it, is to drink alcohol. I say sadly, because
alcohol + Tray0098 = obnoxious, aggressive imbecile. Therefore, it is rare that you will see me drunk these days. And, to make matters worse, Amsterdam is a long way to travel for a spliff. So, unless I decide to move, I shall remain a stressed out anally retentive United Kingdom resident. Here's something else that really winds me up. Why did I just have to pay £35 for a DVD from Amsterdam that frankly, as it was made here, should be sold here? I know that the censorship laws have been relaxed as far as films go, but they've been a bit slow in giving all of the previously unobtainable stuff a classification, and as you are probably aware, without a rating in the UK, they can't be sold down the shops, as *most ( *all ) councils will only allowed BBFC classified films to be sold here.Typical. I heard a rumour that the people who work for the British Board of Film Classifications have been dropping like flies...from the stress of watching excessive amounts of hard core porn and chop & slash movies. It's a shame they couldn't self medicate. I think the reason I get so worked about these things is partly due to the amount of paedophila going on in todays world. It makes me totally sick, that officials are worrying that I'm watching hard core porn while high on drugs, and generally having a good time behind my closed door with other consenting adults, whilst more and more crimes are being committed against children. If there aren't enough resources to fight all crime, I think the time has come to prioritise. Let consenting adults do as they please, as long as it is only with other consenting adults. We'll use the money we save to catch more paedophiles. I guess the problem is that our censorship laws are forever trying to accommodate societies changing opinions on what is and what isn't acceptable behaviour. I tell you what though, I know this. I've watched the Michael Jackson documen
tory three times, and I still can't believe it. Peter Pan is alive and well and living in Neverland. And my 7 year old daughter loves his old 70s disco stuff. She's a funky kid.
I used to live in a Third World dictatorship. Yet I found that the newspapers in that dictatorship were surprisingly brave at telling readers the truth. In Britain our media is heavily censored. I have tried posting information about the following on the Channel 4 (UK) news forum ( http://community.channel4.com/6/ubb.x?a=frm&s=162603557&f=503603557 ) - 1. "On September 15, Newsweek reported: 'U.S. military sources have given the FBI information that suggests five of the alleged hijackers of the planes used in Tuesday's terror attacks received training at secure U.S. military installations in the 1990s.' " http://www.sumeria.net/politics/bushknew/milschool.html 2. "When a van fitting that exact description was stopped just before crossing into New York, the suspicious “middle-easterners” were apprehended. Imagine the surprise of the police officers when these terror suspects turned out to be Israelis!" http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/fiveisraelis.html 3. "PARIS, Dec 31 (Reuters) - French police who arrested an airport baggage handler accused of having guns and explosives hidden in his car said on Tuesday they had also arrested a witness who alerted them to the suspect vehicle." http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/L31385519 4. "A United Nations observer at the trial of two Libyans accused of the Lockerbie bombing has said the judgment appeared to be politically influenced. " http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/in_depth/scotland/2002/lockerbie_appeal/1773868.stm 5. "Van Romero reported that he had studied the videos of the WTC collapse and concluded that the towers were most likely destroyed by carefully placed demolition charges." http://emperors-clothes.com/news/albu.htm ALL OF THE POSTS REFERRING TO THE ABOVE INFORMATION APPEAR TO HAVE BEEN DELETED. My other posts, on m
ore trivial matters, got posted. I have had similar experiences in trying to get 'news' posted on the BBC website, or printed in the letters columns of newspapers. My conclusion is that news in Britain is censored. Our censorship laws on news are too strict. Fewer and fewer people in Britain are watching news programmes on TV. Fewer and fewer are reading newspapers. Is this because people feel that the official media is too much controlled by the establishment? Internet news sites seem to be flourishing. Winess the amazing success of www,whatreallyhappened.com
Thus far in my life I have largely behaved myself mostly due to my religious upbringing. However, in the last few years I have drifted from my previous beliefs and started to explore areas that were previously ?banned?. A subject that I got talking about with girlfriends recently is porn. This is obviously one BIG NO NO if you are religious so in the past I have always swooshed by those top shelves trying not to look and uttering in my mind how dirty and horrid these mags are. However, after being accused of being prudish and narrow-minded by one of my friends for still thinking the same way at my age, I promised to be open-minded and at least have a look to see what I was condemning blindly. My friends insisted that they well and truly loved it and regularly viewed it via the internet or bought magazines or videos. So, with the help of internet search engines I found a wealth of free porn available to browse through. Here are the thoughts that went through my head?.. a) Wow there is a lot of it b) Sheesh! Such variation c) So many pop-ups! d) Some people are really sick e) I hope no-one can see my monitor through the window f) Woooa! Someone shares the same fantasy as me! Cool! g) Is this legal? h) My friend was right i) I am actually turned on Yes, I actually did find it a big turn-on when I was browsing the sections that interested me. And I can see myself doing that again for a little thrill and for the benefit of being ready for my partner! I sort of admired the people who had had the guts to go out there and make their fantasies come true by making the pics and films! (As long as it was all consensual of course, which is another topic) However, I got to thinking about other people who use porn for the gratification of their more darker fantasies. I did notice many links to child porn sites and rape sites who?s link boasted ?real rapes? etc. I did not visit any of these sites which I c
onsider to be particularly sick but obviously some people do and it is a massive industry. For this opinion?s sake, let?s just talk about the consensual adult porn (omit the illegal and well sick types such as child porn) being accessed by legally adult people and for now put aside the issues and dangers of porn being accessed by minors. What I am curious about is what effect viewing pictures and videos has on the people who choose to use them. Does it satisfy their desires and simply give an outlet for a fantasy that may never have seen the light of day otherwise? Do they find that their partner is willing to join in and do their own version? Is that enough for them? Or do they then want to actually go out there and re-create some of the more sick things they have seen with strangers like the rape scenes they may have watched? There are an awful lot of ?schoolgirl spanking? sites available with (officially old enough) girls dressed up as schoolgirls being spanked/caned etc. If people are fantasising about this and indulging their fantasies by viewing this material, are real schoolgirls in danger from perverts just for walking down the street in their uniforms? After partaking in my activity of not being ?narrow-minded? I had to go out to the shops. I have to say that after a couple of hours of going through all that stuff, I perceived the way that men looked at me very differently. In my mind I was thinking that in their minds all they saw me as was someone they would want to spank or tie up or dress up as a schoolgirl, maid or slave of some sort. I felt kind of less secure than normal when I considered that a lot of these men have probably accessed similar material and carried around these images with them. (sorry for sounding like I have put all men in this category ? I know that not all of them have, but I also know that some of them have) With my girlfriends, they seem to use it for their own private pleasure and perhaps to i
nclude their partner if he is willing. Is this true of other women who use porn? But I would like to know particularly from men??? Does your viewing of pornography provide a useful and complete outlet for your sexual desires? (as the argument goes for prostitutes providing a service that probably saves other women from being raped because they are available to oblige) Or does it make you want to actually re-enact what you have seen? a) with your partner or b) in a more illegal way of wanting to go out and rape someone? Does it gear you up and encourage you to do something daring and perhaps illegal that perhaps before you would never have had the courage to do? Without trawling through the court files of convicted sex offenders to see if they had a porn habit, I really do not know the answer to this question. (By the way, I am aware that people may not want to answer this honestly as they may feel that they are incriminating themselves, but I would really like to hear opinions on this subject of perhaps how their mates feel etc or how YOU think other men use and perceive porn) As for my own answer to my own title question ? I think that porn is good for ME, but I am not so sure that it is useful or suitable for all, depending what people choose to look at. Some sites should definitely be illegal, as they are, but where does it stop? Who has the right to decide what is allowed and what is sick? Someone who looks at ?schoolgirls? getting spanked may not think that their indulging in their fantasy through porn is particularly sick but if you are a parent with a teenage daughter, you definitely will. But that gets into a censorship issue??
Censorship laws in this country are, in my opinion, way too strict and should be brought down a touch before this country gets a reputation as being too stuffy (Oh sorry, I forgot, we already had!) I don't think there is any point in trying to hide things such as swearing and violence, because there is so much of it about in real life, that it can't be escaped. Hiding violence in films seems, to me, trying to hide from the amount of violence which exists in this day and age, and in real life. What is the point in the censors cutting a violent scene? Do they think it is going to stop all the violence in our society? Do they think it is going to reduce crime rates? Do they think it is going to improve the state of the world? All it is going to do in reality is make people angry as they are being deied the opportunity of seeing things that other countries' laws permit them to see. And would this not, in fact, encourage violence? If people really want to cut down on violence and anger, then why not put more coppers on the streets? Why not reduce petrol prices? (but I won;t go into that- that is another issue entirely!) Surely these sort of things would make people more content with the country we live in, rather than editing a few measly scenes in a film, and therefore not rebel against it. If we want to discourage violence and aggression in our country, we need to look at its causes and I doubt that all this anger stemmed from a few lousy films! Ok, so there may be scenes which are just too revolting or offensive to show, by every countries' standards, but why does Britain have to go that step further and censor just too much? It's not like any good comes out of our strict censorship laws- this country's crime rates are hardly better than those of other countries, infact we are probably one of the worst! It is just a cop-out blaming violence on films and television. If someone has a pscholo
gical problem- as many killers do- their killing frenzies aren't a result of television. If someone is violent towards someone, it is usually triggered off by provocation, not watching a film. I mean, how many people come out of watching a violent film in which someone was murdered thinking to themselves "I'm going to murder someone tonight!"? I can understand why children should not be allowed to watch such things, because they are impressionable, and do not know what's right and wrong, but htere's no point in trying to sheild adults from something that is evident everywhere we look. Back to the point of it being a cop out blaming violence and crime levels on films- those who make those accusations need to look at REAL LIFE reasons why so many people rebel against the law as most of us don't live in a fictional world and can distinguish between fiction and non-fiction. Maybe people dislike the way that this country is run and the things it does. Maybe b;aming it on films is a way of covering up the fact that a lot of people disagreee with the way the country is run and that is why they rebel against it. On a whole, I just think that there is no point attempting to hide things which happen every day from people; if they don't see violence in one film, they are jsut going to see it in another, or probably even in real day-to-day life. In a way, it is a good thing to show violence, sex and drugs in films as it opens up people's eyes to the world we live in and can act as a warning for us to be aware that we, ourselves, may have to face violence, drugs etc., and that we can avoid it if we know the consequences.
We may have ben the pioneers of democracy, but public speaking and honest opinions are slowly withering away. This isn't revolutionary, but we should realise the repressions thhat we are faced with every day. We can't listen to the music we want, because it is disjointed by bleeps. We can't watch what we want when we want because it will offend someone. In a way it boils down to a kind of maternel over-protection, where the slightest risk of offence will be obliterated. And if you think about it, at some level anything can in theory offend anybody. If this religous censorship is adopted and expanded, nothing will be left in the way of creativity, humour, art. Shouldn't the majority be satisfied instead of the minority? Political Correctness is the en vogue censorship within the governmental systems. They love it. Trying to take everything to a level where everyone will be satisfied, but in the process just sound stupid. Does anyone really prefer the ambitous title of 'Waste disposal management' to garbagemen? sorry, I meant to say garbagemen/women. That's better. 'Vehicle and motor sale and distribution'? What's wrong with car salesman? Oops, sorry, too gender specific again. sorry this is just getting boring. Still, we can't complain. We live in a society where we can see educational exhibits like 'Bodyworlds' (www.bodyworlds.co.uk) where human beings are displayed in a plasticised, immortal form, which serves as a great educational tool. In many countries this would have been banned for moral and legal reasons. And we have sites like dooyoo. Freedom of speech to the world wideness of the web. It's just human will for wishing that things were that little bit freer.
I don’t know…. Would be the answer I would give if I was asked if censorship is a good thing. For many reasons To Protect Our Children’s Minds Is a major point in this discussion, but let us look at the current state of affairs. Children 10 years old, getting pregnant. Children 8 years and younger swearing at people and abusing public property. Children of 11 getting so drunk they need their stomachs pumping. Children KILLING other Children, and so on. What person in their right mind would not look at this state of affairs and see that the current methods of censorship don’t work. Now I am not saying that censorship is a good or bad thing it is on both side of the line. I feel that it denys the more open minded and mouthed side of our culture in Britain, yet at the same time it stops us getting too open minded and allowing indecent things to occur all over the country. There are lines though, which should not be crossed, and the only thing stopping the crossing is the certificate on the box and parents. The most effective stopper out of all of the barriers which we put up to ‘protect’ our children are ineffectual and so therefore it should come back to the parents and they should be held responsible. To Protect the Rights of Innocent People Is yet another point brought up by people when questioned. But how do you do that, when as soon as they’re arrested the papers and tabloids are printing stories true AND UNTRUE, about the accused person. Shouldn’t there be a from of censorship here. I know there is a system to go through after the allegations but that will not repair the damage to your reputation. Another example of how censorship lets us down. To Stop Obscene Material Reaching our Screens Now this is a point I feel strongly about. I hear those news reports of music being banned from shops, films being cut down by hours, and magazines told to remove articles
and I think…. Hey! What are you doing? Music is an expression of somebody’s work, they put a lot of effort and feeling into those songs and that is what makes some of them decent enough for a DINKY like me to listen to them. Yet the controversy surrounding his lyrics and how they effect younger people should not exist. His records are for the older generations and should not be listened to by any one under 18 years old. This should be controlled by parents, but it is not… It is for those over 18 as we as the more responsible persons know that the things he sings about are not real and certainly should not be done. WE know yet the young and impressionable don’t seem to have the common sense to realise that. I feel that I have covered the points I wished to cover, but I will add one last thing. Undue Advertising A large part of censorship is used by film producers and event hosts, it’s even used here on Dooyoo to reduce brand names profiting from something they did not endorse. This is the exception of censorship, it actually works. All in all censorship is a vital part of life yet instead of arguing that it is too strict or not we need to take it upon ourselves to protect our individual worlds from the things you wish to protect yourself and your children from. All it takes is a bit of effort.
Who,fights for my rights to racial equality?its ok i was made homeless,left in a tent with no water,heat,light,or toilet facilities, while going through the most awful cancer treatment!!But you think thats ok as long as i dont offend anyone???Well IM, offended who helps me?This was all because asians and white alike decided,i should go home!!To the south of england.Well,trust me if i could afford to i`d be off like a shot..Why is this ok,for people to be rascist to me,yet i have no defence??I cant even talk about it,or write about it???.What would my dear dad say who fought for freedom and our right to live in a free speaking world,and the right to speak our minds?? I had racial slurs on my walls "southern white bitch your not wanted". to name but one message on my walls i can bring myself to name.We were barricaded in our back bedroom for 3days and nights,terrified to move. This was the day before my home was burnt,all our possessions torched, my car burnt out,and us having to be ushered out by police for our own safety!!This in Britain,the land of the FREE.HAHAHA.You all have your little opinions,but i bet if you went through what i did you would sing another tune!! And guess what?I still campaign for EVERYONES rights ,all colours and creeds.But who fights for me?NO-ONE.. Is this only ok if im a minority?Well,i guess i am a minority,as we are getting to the point where i would be a foreigner in my own land!!. Im absoulutely incensed that my rights have been violated in the wake of political correctness.we have to stop this before we are censored in everything we do.EQUAL RIGHTS FOR ALL,NOT JUST FOR THOSE WHO YELL LOUDEST OR CANT SPEAK OUR LANGUAGE. So when you have walked a day in my shoes,you can tell me how you feel,but until you do,you have no right to tell me im wrong and rascist.That is an outrage to me.(The above added 14th june,after being totally shocked by peoples opinions in my email,that i
should shut up and get a life.) Couldnt find a category to put this in so its here. I am incensed that my opinion on immigration was blocked My father fought in a world war,for our free speech,and our liberties. My comments werent rascict. Far from it. I was given to understand speakers corner was a place to freely express our views.(apparently not!)Well,you should rename it"speakers corner for brown noses,those who only say what you want to hear. I am far from rascist,even though i was bullied out of my home by asians and white folk,purely for being a southerner. But that seems ok,as long as we dont say anything deemed politically incorrect. I actually ran my opinion by my soliciter friend today,and she even agreed i was being unfairly treated by having my opinion removed.(she was just round for coffee). I think this political correctness has gone mad.I cant say blackboard i have to say chalkboard.Now thats reverse rascism,as chalky is a name that has been used to racially insult me. DOOYOO you should be ashamed of yourselves. I cannot believe you have locked my opinion.its senseless. You even said in your email it was a good opinion,but it may offend. Well you have offended me,a white non rascist lady who does more for asians and minorities than you will ever know. They hounded me from my home,burnt my belingings,made me homeless,i was in a 2man tent for 7months battle cancer, and torched my car,for which insurance wont pay as it is an act of public disorder,and im currently sueing government to recoup my loss. But does that make me stop,standing on the picket line when asians are being abused?no i picket for their rights even though ive had this trouble.Im a human
itarian,and i do so much work free that i never get credit for,and yes its with minorities.i was first in line to help them when the bnp came to town!!! So dont dare tell me im rascist!! <br>I was merely saying,that in the light of sept 11th,we shouldnt let people into our country until its proved they arent terrorists or axe murderers.As all countries do to us when we want to emigrate.!! What the heck is rascist about that????????? You`d soon change your tune if anything happened in uk because we let anyone in first then look at their background second... Im ashamed to be a member of dooyoo if this is yoour attitude.