What Use Are Decency Laws?
moultano
Creator of ns_shiva. Join Date: 2002-12-14 Member: 10806Members, NS1 Playtester, Contributor, Constellation, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue, Reinforced - Shadow, WC 2013 - Gold, NS2 Community Developer, Pistachionauts
Creator of ns_shiva. Join Date: 2002-12-14 Member: 10806Members, NS1 Playtester, Contributor, Constellation, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue, Reinforced - Shadow, WC 2013 - Gold, NS2 Community Developer, Pistachionauts
I just read <a href='http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=televisionNews&storyID=6803548' target='_blank'>this.</a>
So lets see. In recent history, the FCC has kicked Howard Stern off FM radio, fined several companies $500,000 over a nipple, chastised Bono over saying "f**king Brilliant" about a performance that deserved the accolade, and now network stations are scared to air Saving Private Ryan on Veteran's Day.
This is rediculous.
So lets see. In recent history, the FCC has kicked Howard Stern off FM radio, fined several companies $500,000 over a nipple, chastised Bono over saying "f**king Brilliant" about a performance that deserved the accolade, and now network stations are scared to air Saving Private Ryan on Veteran's Day.
This is rediculous.
Comments
They're quite useful: I don't get to see some huuuuge lady with almost no clothes cursing at the top of her lungs at her three children at work. Well, that happens somewhat anyways, but the laws make sure she curses less and has to wear a little more clothes. <!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/biggrin-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
I don't see what this election had to do with decency laws. Even if you construe that to include homosexual marriage both candidates were against it.
Anyways, on topic, I think such things are more or less outdated. They are most certainly taken WAY to seriously. Its one of America's many hipocracies: Bad words: no, Nudity: no, Sexuality: no, Violence: hell yes, Dangerous weapons: you'd better believe it! Mirijuana: no, Booze: DEAR GOD YES!
Example:
Here in South Dakota, there is a small town called Salem. Outside of town, about 10 to 15 miles, there is a gentlemen's club. Obviously, if you don't know what a gentlemen's club is skip to the end of this post. Since that club has been opened the town of Salem has tried to shut it down for simply allowing nude women to dance and allowing people only 18 to enter. (They do NOT serve alcholol.)
In June of this year, they decided to hold a random county vote on an ordinance. The ordinance passed, since the majority in the county are your typical close minded republicans. In addition, no one outside of the county could participate in the election. Which left it to about 1,500 people to decide. Subtract about 200 or so for the children who are not old enough and you have around 1,300 adults, subtract another 200 or so, and you have the ones who voted against the ordinance. (edit) (Voter turn out was a record 98%) However, since it did pass they banned nudity, in all places except where it was normally expected. This is where it gets amusing. Right.. back to the topic.
Locker rooms, Theatres, Doctor's office, and swimming pools are where they allowed nudity to take place because it was "common place". Yes, you read that right, they banned nudity in your own home. Hehe.
Right anyway, so the gentlemen's club shut down, then about two weeks later it re-opened, "What? How did it do that?". It was an ingenious idea, they added six big screen televisions, and show independant films, thus labeling them as a theatre. In addition to having women dance as extra entertainment. No, they do not show pron movies. Just the ones that are not normally released in the larger theatres around here. I actually went to see one, it was quite good.
Anyway, in conclusion, they county now has to wait a full year, so next June, before they can vote again to chance the ordinance, yet if they ban nudity in theatres, then they have to shut down the ONLY theatre in the county aside from the gentlemen's club.
That folks is why some of the deceny laws really are bad, for everyone.
Oh, on a side note, down in the town of Vermillion, if you swear in front of a girl, child, or baby you are fined, yes FINED, $250 dollars. In addition to be being listed as a misdemeanor. lol :-)
Just thought I would share these amusing stories with you all.
(edit) (Holy long post batman) :-) (Refined paragraphs to make it easier to read)
The answer, of course, is lock your kids up in a closet and don't let them out till they're 18.
There is an extremely fine line between squashing freedoms and preventing unlawful decadence.
It's time for the FCC to get an overhaul. And these laws that attempt to fine affiliate stations for broadcasting national programs is reminiscant of the robber barons. Let the public decide with it's viewing (or lack of) and complaints to advertisers. That usually gets the attention of broadcasters long before the government ever has to.
Why do we feel as a culture that seeing nude people is harmful to children? So much hell was raised over Janet Jackson's nipple. Most babies see nipples from the day they are born, and it doesn't seem to have any adverse effects . . .
I'd speculate that a hell of a lot of eating disorders are the result of us not seeing nude people all the time. If we all saw on a regular basis how real people look naked, I suspect we wouldn't have such inflated standards for what makes someone attractive.
Well i was always curious wheter the US is really that prude, but it seems so.
Can anyone answer the following question: Why does a land that is obviously against nudity has the biggest porn industrie in the world, as well as the most sold porn-movies per person?
Why do we feel as a culture that seeing nude people is harmful to children? So much hell was raised over Janet Jackson's nipple. Most babies see nipples from the day they are born, and it doesn't seem to have any adverse effects . . .
I'd speculate that a hell of a lot of eating disorders are the result of us not seeing nude people all the time. If we all saw on a regular basis how real people look naked, I suspect we wouldn't have such inflated standards for what makes someone attractive. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
One word - sexual context. A guy ripping another womans clothes and exposing her breast comes under the category of erotica - it should not be done on national television during a sporting match. Lots of kids watch sports.
A young boy who was breast fed when he was little has seen a breast before. He has a ****, so he's seen that before. However, watching his parents go at it in the shower is .... more than the sum of its biological parts. That's why I have no problem with the statue David but hate Stern and his animal friends.
Spooge - I dont follow the video game line of reasoning. Games must be purchased and brought back to the home, then played on a PC or xbox/ps2 etc - thats a lot difference to fiddling with the dial on your radio and having oversexed maniacs trying to convince people to hump wherever they can get away with it in public.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Its one of America's many hipocracies: Bad words: no, Nudity: no, Sexuality: no, Violence: hell yes, Dangerous weapons: you'd better believe it! Mirijuana: no, Booze: DEAR GOD YES!<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
It is a hypocracy - I'd like to take all the yes's and end them (save dangerous weapons), while you'd simply like to reverse the hypocracy to yes, yes,yes, some, no, yes, yes
First of all, I have to chuckle at this. <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo-->
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->A guy ripping another womans clothes and exposing her breast comes under the category of erotica - it should not be done on national television during a sporting match. Lots of kids watch sports.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The content was sexual, overwhelmingly so, whether you saw her nipple or not. If you want to take sex out of primetime television you've got a hell of a lot of work to do.
Personally, I don't have any problem with sexual content. However, if that is the nature of your issue, why does seeing a nipple warrant a fine of a half a million while the entire rest of the act is perfectly acceptable? The FCCs problem is the nipple, not the sex. That's what's retarded about it.
Most laws governing entertainment content is basically a bandage for inadequate parenting and no common sense. If you don't want to see violent television, maybe the D-Day scene in Saving Private Ryan is something you should change the channel for. Virtually every television has a remote now, so it's not like you're placing a terrible burden on the viewer.
There's clearly a difference between showing a breast accidentally and airing <i>Hot Anal Sluts Vol. IX.</i> Let people regulate what they watch. If shows are really offensive, people will stop watching. But people like offensive shows. That's why Jackass and Viva La Bam are so popular. You can call Howard Stern immoral all you like, but millions of people love his show. If you don't like it, don't listen to it.
Yeah we get to see 'action' violence on the news, not real war violence. We have a watershed on tv here, after 9:30 in the evening anything goes, except hardcore porn.
Why is the four letter word beginning with F so naughty? Because we're told it is. Why do children want to say it? Because they're told not to. If no one has a problem with it, if it's not "one of those words", then there'd be no reason to use it in the first place (or at least, no taboo associated with using it), so no one would be offended.
Unfortunately, it's not likely to happen. I'm talking about bad language here, btw. Not violence. I don't want the Teletubbies getting into firefights with rival gangs and limbs flying everywhere on childrens TV (although i want to see the teletubbies DIE!) i just think that if there was no censorship for "bad" language, in a few generations, "bad" language wouldn't even exist (after all, you only take offence to it because you've been told it's offensive since day one, if you weren't told, you wouldn't be offended by it, it's just a word).
Dude, their ratings would skyrocket!
I've seen plenty of violent movies in my younger years and blown up more aliens and terrorists than I can count.
And I'm not screwed up...
Uh...
Not THAT screwed up.
First of all, I have to chuckle at this. <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo--> <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Argh - this should be a warning to all of the dangers of proofreading. I went back, saw that I'd used erotica twice and edited Erotica to Sexual Content.
/hangs head in shame
See my point?
Just imagine seeing a bus drive by with a Tubgirl or ol' redeye advertisement.
Decency laws need to be reworked so people get an idea of what will occur in a broadcast or program. Just as long as you are not going to try to take me by surpise while I am eathing my dinner and watching the evening news I am fine with that.
I think it has somthing to do with the fact that if you cover anything up, it becomes desireable. Be it literaly with clothes, or figuratively with laws. And often enough, one brings about the other.
If a society were to wear elbow pads in public, eventually that society might find elbows quite desireable. A law would be made outlawing public showing of elbows, and people will go out of their way to see some.
You can't say Ahole on the radio now, that was a new addition. Loveline's hosts self censor themselves, and any callers who swear are cut out [they run everything on an 8 second delay] I think the deceny laws make it so things can't get overly wrong, but they keep a certain aspect of civilization in the show.
[edit]
oh yeah, swiftspear: best double post ever
oh yeah, swiftspear: best double post ever <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Screw you, I am perfect, it was a flaw in reality not me.
<span style='color:red'> <span style='font-size:14pt;line-height:100%'>
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. </span> </span>
For those of you playing the home game the above is our loveable and living First Amendment.
I see sooooo many instances of the above being squished by the very people that are supposed to fight to keep this bad boy intact(police, local government, and up to the national level)
Back when this was written there was; NO radio, NO TV, and NO intarweb(OMG!!) So these areas are always questionable, HOWEVER this Moogle's interpretation of our beloved first amendment is this:
<span style='font-size:14pt;line-height:100%'>
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; </span>
The US will never have a national religion... this is pretty to the point, we must respect all faiths and denominiations, they are a persons faith, and they deserve to have faith in a higher power, this is deserving of every person. A person without hope/faith is lost, say what you will I know I am right on this, and faith does not mean just in Christ, Allah, God, budda, the Goddess, or David Koresh. It can be in yourself, your wife, or the guy next door, simply put religion is more than just Bibles, and Torahs, people need to respect that.
<span style='font-size:14pt;line-height:100%'>
or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble,</span>
These guys get trampled worse than ants under oni. Any time you can be fined for what you say, something is wrong!(save purgery) I am a firm believer in the philosiphy that, while the wording is important, the MESSAGE is far more important.
70 to 80 percent of human communication is non-verbal, the wording may be BY FAR the least threatening or offensive part of a discussion.
I truly believe that the laws should be revamped, to cover things like television, it cracks me up that, while congress will never pass a LAW that abridges our freedom of speech, they will make a commission that fines the living crap out of people over what they "deem" indecent. The FCC is single biggest infringement on the first amendment, since... well ever. Armed with a list of "potty" words and a high sense of what is wrong and right... well at least they posess the aforementioned list. While I understand that parents are trying to shield thier kids from the horrors of indecency, there are better ways. We live in a high tech world, in the next few years, you will have COMPLETE control over what media you decide to partake in. I think that it is on the people, and NOT the goverment or any of its little buddies, to decide what we view/listen to, and what we think our kids should listen to/watch.
In closing let me say this:
I am a gentle soul, ask anyone that knows me, I am fair and and kind(not to toot my own horn) I however use so much profanity, that sailors and truckers accuse each other of having William mouth(my real name is William). Does it make me a bad person for dropping more F bombs than Chris Rock? Of course not, what is moral, and what people have been spoon fed as moral, are two VERY different things.
I am tired, so for now I will call it a night.
<!--emo&::asrifle::--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/asrifle.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='asrifle.gif' /><!--endemo--> + <!--emo&::hive::--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/hive5.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='hive5.gif' /><!--endemo--> for me please,
<span style='font-size:14pt;line-height:100%'>
SM5
</span>
PS: I am pretty far out on the left so I expect some good rational arguements tomarrow, but for now I sleep.
also they show any movies and things.
Denmark rox <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo-->
Why do we feel as a culture that seeing nude people is harmful to children? So much hell was raised over Janet Jackson's nipple. Most babies see nipples from the day they are born, and it doesn't seem to have any adverse effects . . .
I'd speculate that a hell of a lot of eating disorders are the result of us not seeing nude people all the time. If we all saw on a regular basis how real people look naked, I suspect we wouldn't have such inflated standards for what makes someone attractive. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Having been living in Spain for almost two months now I'll tell you a bit about their censorship.
One day I was having my breakfast. Having poured myself a cup of overpriced tea my eyes were suddenly drawn to the screen as a strange advert began. It was advertising see-through, adhesive, circular pads to pull up the more senior ladies' appendiges that were succumbing to the effects of gravity. As far as sexual context, I'd find it hard to believe that anyone could get off on this but-. The advert continued and lo and behold a topless woman proceeded to demonstrate the application of these pads, not to mention their effectiveness!
This was the first 'excessive' nudity this English prude saw on television. Now when I think about it, it's perfectly acceptible to see non-sexual nudity on our television screens. I was only shocked because of how our decency laws prohibit this outrageously saucy exposure. The next example is slightly stronger in sexual content, but I have also decided that it's not too extreme for my fragile, English mind.
Come the early morning in Barcelona the TV programming goes a bit... well a bit XXX. Having come back from a night out somewhere I stuck the telly on as a distraction for me while I waited for some food to cook. I wanted smething fairly light and hoped I'd be able to find it by channel surfing. In this case the opposite of light is HARD! Almost half of the fifteen or so channels was showing porn in varying degrees of picture quality, and I'm not talking softcore. This was in your face ultra-closeups with all the trimmings added. I sat there utterly shocked as near deafening moans and groans echoed around the living room, threatening to wake up my housemates.
The latter example doesn't only extend to those channels showing porn though. Another night I was watching a film with a housemate and the commercial interlude reared its ugly head. As I recall it was around 23:00 or 24:00 (bear in mind that Spaniards eat dinner at 22:00) and almost every advert was for a 'talkline' numbers. In England these are advertised showing the young hopeful ringing up the hotline and meeting up with her for 'talk, a date, or perhaps more?'. The Spanish 'talklines' leave no room for suggestion bombarding your senses with more of what was described previously.
As far as I can tell this lack of censorship has resulted in neither sex-crazed maniacs nor ultra-conservative Spaniards, they seem perfectly normal to me. This makes me wonder why UK has decency laws on advertisements for shower products and the like.
I don't care whats in the media so long as I'm not forced to view it, I don't care if people wanna get high, have sex and/or attack each other, as long as all participating parties get hurt and there are no negative repercussions for others (by this I mean that it is done in a private place where again, noone is subjected to it and that noone else gets hurt (playing with rocket launchers on a motorway is baaad) then its fine by me.
I advocate legalising... well everything to be honest, you'd never find tubgirl on a bus as you can't change the channel on a bus. Besides which what would it advertise?
PS, you just have called it Moogle Mouth, alliteration ftw <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/smile-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
Honestly, decency laws are pretty stupid in most cases. When I visited France, I saw a TV ad where a NAKED (OMGZ!) woman was depicted. Guess what? French kids aren't screwed up any more than American kids.