Just some food for thought I've been thinking about this morning. What's the deal with some of the rules we have with the censors?
For example, why is it okay to say ass and hole separately, but not okay to say asshole?
Another, much bigger example is, why is it okay for guys to be topless in media and in public, but when a girl does it, suddenly hell breaks loose? It's not like the anatomy of the human body has suddenly changed from the waist up; you still have the stomach, rib area, breasts (which are flatter for guys), and the kicker, nipples. On guys, nipples aren't censored, but on girls they are. What's the deal with that?
Am I the only one who notices stuff like this?
The reason is that this type of censorship was built since ages ago. Profanities and pornography, much like any word or custom, are developed based on our perception of those things and will be changing constantly.
The reason of censorship is to make something palatable to an audience by modifying or covering something that is deemed not appropriate. This is actually really broad, and is not limited to porn: cultural shocks such as onigiri (rice balls) were censored, both visually and textually, here and there because American localizers didn't think they were appropriate for the American culture. No one was aware of that food, and thus many attempts to adapt them were made. Of course, profane words are also censored out with bleeps or minced oaths.
Anyway, back to porn. As I said, censoring something modifies or covers something that is deemed not appropriate, and no one wants to get hard or wet when watching a casual movie or TV show. Censorship used to be more harsh back then actually, and even manboobs were censored ages ago (this was the case in Brazil at least). Even a really loose or implied depiction of sex in movies were entirely cut off. However, culture changes and some things considered taboo may end up becoming minor.
I suppose that the reason female breasts are still censored is that it is stimulating to many men (and even women) and it's even considered a fetish thing. Tits just have that charisma, that enchanting factor that I can't even begin to explain. It's hot.
Addendum: If clothes didn't exist and everyone lived in a nudist community, most stimuli from them would be nullified. Much like a button with 'DON'T PRESS' written over it makes us want to press it, a covered body makes us want to uncover it. Censorship is a vicious cycle of the modern civilization and I don't know if those things will ever stop being taboo, but yeah. That's what I think.
Of course, breasts are... appealling to the eye
But, at the same time, if they would never have been censored, they would probably lose some of its charm.
Also, theres some country where the topless beaches are pretty usual, there are nudist camp about everywhere and lets not forget the indigene tribe, so yeah it always depend on the cultures and where you were born.
But what i find particularly funny, is when they blur the lips of someone saying something bad, or when someone flip the bird. Thats just overkill.
(04-30-2015, 09:42 AM)Koh Wrote: [ -> ]For example, why is it okay to say ass and hole separately, but not okay to say asshole?
Because it has a different meaning. In this particular case, putting the two words together has a meaning which is commonly seen as an offensive insult, while separately they mean different things. The word "deadline" has a different meaning than "dead" and "line".
Anyway, one strange censorship I experienced was on an Arab TV station in Qatar. They were showing Master Chef Australia, but the word "pork" was cut out. Like the audio track was literally blank for any space where "pork" would be said. Although most people in those regions don't eat pork (Islam is the most common religion there afaik), I have no idea why they don't want it to be
mentioned.
Here's the weird thing. Its not the entire breast that is censored, its just the nipple. And honestly its kind of silly. Its just one small part of a whole breast that is otherwise considered acceptable to see. A woman can wear a bikini that shows most of her chest but as soon as there's a nip slip, its a huge deal. How silly! You've seen most of it, what's the big deal? And the poor gal will have to endure unnecessary embarassment.
(05-01-2015, 06:30 AM)puggsoy Wrote: [ -> ] (04-30-2015, 09:42 AM)Koh Wrote: [ -> ]For example, why is it okay to say ass and hole separately, but not okay to say asshole?
Because it has a different meaning. In this particular case, putting the two words together has a meaning which is commonly seen as an offensive insult, while separately they mean different things. The word "deadline" has a different meaning than "dead" and "line".
True, but dick, which is a synonym for asshole, isn't censored. I'm generally anti-censorship, because if you really were offended by something that's featured in a TV program, all you'd have to do is change the channel and move on with your life, but if there's going to BE censorship, I just ask for some consistency, lol.
Look up the definition of synonym, because implying a dick is a synonym for asshole implies that you can have an asshole on your crotch and a dick shooting out of your ass.
Anyway, I think the main problem with saying "just change the channel" is that there are also children out there, and certain kinds of things can be traumatizing to younger kids. There is also the parents' own responsibility to consider, but at any rate I feel like SOME level of censorship is warranted when it comes to violence and sexual content on TV.
Well that's just the thing of course, it IS the parent's responsibility to...parent their kids. If they don't want them watching certain things, there are tools available to them that can block non PG-G things or whatever. It shouldn't be a producers job to make sure that there isn't anything a kid shouldn't see in their show. That's what the rating system is for.
Also, dick IS a synonym for asshole. The more common usage of it that isn't a synonym for penis. By that literal logic, asshole is a synonym for butthole, and it'd still have no business being censored, because a butthole isn't offensive.
(05-01-2015, 06:30 AM)puggsoy Wrote: [ -> ]Anyway, one strange censorship I experienced was on an Arab TV station in Qatar. They were showing Master Chef Australia, but the word "pork" was cut out. Like the audio track was literally blank for any space where "pork" would be said. Although most people in those regions don't eat pork (Islam is the most common religion there afaik), I have no idea why they don't want it to be mentioned.
The general reason has to do with the broadcasters/political rulers deciding to censor all that which is haram in the media, for fear that acknowledging pork/alcohol/substances will, somehow, tempt people into wanting those things. It's mostly just religious guilt, after all those nations aren't exactly fans of individualism or personal choice.
In fact, when I went to Dubai, I noticed a lot of general media censorship that covered everything from cigars to humanoid robots. It was weird.
(05-01-2015, 08:43 AM)Koh Wrote: [ -> ]Well that's just the thing of course, it IS the parent's responsibility to...parent their kids. If they don't want them watching certain things, there are tools available to them that can block non PG-G things or whatever. It shouldn't be a producers job to make sure that there isn't anything a kid shouldn't see in their show. That's what the rating system is for.
The thing is that over half the things on TV these days either contain violence, sexual content, harsh language or some combination of them. There are only so many things that parents can lock and it can get pretty tedious to unlock each channel you want to watch only to have to re-enter the password once you leave the channel and return. Personally I would find watching some random movie with family and find that there were several uncencored nudity/cursing scenes. That would totally kill any mood and force someone to change the channel. I get how stupid cencorship can be sometimes, especially the comments that Koopaul and puggsoy made, but it really depends on what the cultural views of the audience is and whether something is acceptable or not and whether it should be pixelated or muted.
Personally, I'm of the stance that I get it but I ain't happy.
(05-01-2015, 12:45 PM)BlueBlur97 Wrote: [ -> ]There are only so many things that parents can lock and it can get pretty tedious to unlock each channel you want to watch only to have to re-enter the password once you leave the channel and return.table or not and whether it should be pixelated or muted.
That's what you'd have to deal with for being sensitive to stuff like that. Why should everyone else have to deal with censors just because YOU (not talking directly about you, but in general) don't like what you're seeing?
Think about it this way. Someone's offended by pink clothes for whatever reason. So they protest clothing stores to censor pink clothes by covering them with a tarp or something, which also prevents everyone else from seeing the pink clothes. It's about as silly as that.
I get what you mean. Most people aren't offended by swearing/nudity/violence (by offended i mean "Holy crap I saw blood! Better go and sew FOX because I'm traumatized." type offended) and usually watch uncensored content, but the majority of people who are okay with it usually aren't at a casual level like in the above situation I mentioned. So to make the TV content viewable to a wider audience and to get more acceptance more than the uncencored version...they cencor it.
Take DBZ for example. The original has copious amounts of blood and some nudity. I'm okay with that, but if, say, my younger cousin came to watch it, I would pop in DBZ kai in my dvd player. I wouldnt want him to see blood spew out of Goku's mouth when Frieza punches the shit outta him. At least until he's old enough to get it. Thats what TV companies do. They cencor content to get a wider audience to rake in $$.
THEY ALSO SELL UNCENCORED CONTENT ON SHELFS OF VIDEO STORES TO SNATCH SOME EXTRA CASH FROM YOU. BUSINESS 101!!!! TV COMPANIES ARE ALSO COMPANIES!!!!
Being a Simpsons fan, the show suffers from censorship in Australia on Channel Ten. Which is pretty much why i have the DVDs.
They treat the show like it's for kids, and it really shows with any of the more adult jokes or dialog cut out ruining them as well.
Watching the old seasons on DVD, i was shocked with how much funny jokes or scenes were cut out, half of them for no reason.
Even worse is Ten hasn't repeated season 1 episodes since 1996 making new fans miss out and be confused with the clip shows.
For example: Lisa Vs Malibu Stacey. The scene with the men putting heads on the dolls has an obvious and dodgy edit so bad it jump-cuts to the Leroy character unclogging the chute, all because the dialog before it has "ass" and "shut your hole" in it.
Censorship is also the reason i bought the Adventure Time and Regular Show DVDs as they suffer worse than The Simpsons.
If anyone who watches it, only watch it on the the channel
GO as they're left intact unlike the Cartoon Network AUS airings.
Same goes with the other Cartoon Network shows when they're on DVD or when they air on GO.
(05-02-2015, 02:39 PM)dolphman Wrote: [ -> ]Being a Simpsons fan, the show suffers from censorship in Australia on Channel Ten. Which is pretty much why i have the DVDs.
They treat the show like it's for kids, and it really shows with any of the more adult jokes or dialog cut out ruing them as well.
Revenge for Bart vs. Australia, surely.
![[+]](images/collapse_collapsed.png "[+]")
Long personal opinion that tries to explain this type of censorship