(american) censorship

i'm interested, really.... what dya all think of a censorship, the made-in-USA one, that condemns anything that natural like nakedness and sex, and doesn't apply the same censorship to violence?
examples occurring in movies are welcome !
and what about you girls, dya really get up in the morning (especially after a passionate nite) taking all the bedsheets with ya??

Are you serious? at the last question.

But as to your first question, it seems to me that you are not condemning the censorship yourself, but more so the inequitable (is that what I read between the lines) of the choice of what they censor (sex v. violence).

You want them to get rid of the violence?
Or do you want them to get rid of the clothes?

__________________
something witty goes here......

Keep violence and get rid of the clothes. thats all I have to say on this matter. Other than to keep naked men in gay porn, I dont wanna see that on my screen. HORRORS!!!!

__________________
"Lets Hop On The Good Foot And Do The Bad Thing!! YAAAA BABY!!!! YA!!!"

Donate blood, move to Houston in the summer.

OOOOOO I wish I was an Oscar Meyer Weiner, because that is what I truly want to be, And if I was an Oscar Meyer Weiner Everyone Would be in love with me!!!!!

Censorship sucks. People are such sheltered pussies nowadays.

__________________

Amen to that. I watched a movie yesterday that I think was made in the 60's called Hellfighters. Rated G, today it would be rated at least PG-13.

Why? Does John Wayne show his pecker?

__________________
"Film is a disease. When it infects your bloodstream it takes over as the number one hormone. It bosses the enzymes, directs the pineal gland, plays Iago to your psyche. As with heroin, the antidote to Film is more Film." - Frank Capra

Un-sheltered pussies get the mange.

__________________
Review: Cabin in the Woods 8/10

well, yeah, a precision: i don't like censorship as a whole and i don't believe violence in movies makes serial killers. i believe censorship makes potential rapers. i just pointed out the hypocrisy of American censorship, if they wanna apply some, at least it should be consequent and not based on damned bloody most conservative hypocritical evangelical Christianism imported from Europe AND conserved as it was in Europe in the 17th century!
and yep, i'm serious, come on! do they really take all the sheets with'em?? hehe :-)
so, Mack, nope, i don't wanna them to get rid of violence and yep, sometimes (i say sometimes) i'd want them to get outta their clothes when it's logical to do so (or aesthetic, why not?) - come on, gimme some examples i'm sure u remember from movies: i remember Julie Delpie in whatdyacallit (American) movie (in the French ones, she is usually naked all the time...) taking a shower and she gets outtav it wearing underpants! and the list is long, i'm sure...

There is a broader issue that you have embarked in posing your aforesaid questions chicagofrog; Why is America so traditional about sexual implications, relations and the censoring of sex?

In every other aspect along with the one just mentioned, America is very traditional opposed to the rest of the world (moderately speaking), except in the manner of free speech. America has the largest variety of news, biased, non-biased, anything is allowed (which doesn't mean it is not without consequence). Americans have been able to express in ways that are only un-realistic dreams to some places. Our free speech is what shows what the active citizen wants. What do they want in their movies? The horrors of World War II and Vietnam (along with the cultural revolutions) have made violence an accepted part of human nature. We see it everyday. You don't necessarily see people having sex in public now do you? Basically people want to have their cake and eat it too. It is a morality issue, everything controversial almost always is. Take not though, the United States is 228 years old, how old is Europe, how old are all these other countries in which people really will have sex in public? Examine each and every fledging country, younger than 300 years, and you'll see they are facing the same sort of morality issues that we in the United States are.

__________________
I am moved by fancies that are curled
Around these images, and cling:
The notion of some infinitely gentle
Infinitely suffering thing.
T.S Eliot, "Preludes"

We need a movie where evreyone plays naked serial killers.

__________________

“The gladdest moment in human life, methinks, is a departure into unknown lands.” – Sir Richard Burton

The whole entire plot would be centered around the political intrigue in washington brothels, nevermind that would be a movie about naked assasins.

I don't buy your reasoning here. World War II and the Vietnam war wasn't fought on american ground, correct? So how did americans get their information about these war? Through movies and television. So, using your logic, by now, after a considerable long time with pushing of "the sex boundaries" on tv and in movies, it should be ok to show sex as well. War isn't happening in your streets either but war is often thought of as something necessary for american freedom and something glorious and clean and beautiful - and worth showing on tv! - while sex is nothing but the human reproduction act, and further exploration of it is sinful and dirty. This isn't about what we are used to see, but what we, determined by traditions and morals, are allowed to see.

The point with art isn't to depict only what happens in public, but about depicting Life and all sides of it. Including sex, which is a big part of life (although size doesn't matter ).

I don't feel there's anything wrong with having age limits on movies, it is necessary in a place where the expression through art is supposed to be free. But in America it has led to a censorship system that discriminates NC17 and Unrated movies. Directors that touch on controversial subjects, including subjects that in some way involve sex, have a much more harder time getting their movies out than say those like Mel Gibson that can turn Christ into minced meat and still get away with it with an R rating.

If a scene involving full nudity or realistic lovemaking, this scene will be completely taken out of context and the entire film will be graded out from this scene alone. A scene depicting very realistic and cruel violence will, firstly, not be considered controversial at all, and secondly, will be treated as just part of a greater picture.

__________________
The novelist does not long to see the lion eat grass. He realizes that one and the same God created the wolf and the lamb, then smiled, "seeing that his work was good".

--------

They had temporarily escaped the factories, the warehouses, the slaughterhouses, the car washes - they'd be back in captivity the next day but now they were out - they were wild with freedom. They weren't thinking about the slavery of poverty. Or the slavery of welfare and food stamps. The rest of us would be all right until the poor learned how to make atom bombs in their basements.

ohoh, many thoughts, really interesting.
Piddzilla has a very good point. more than politicians nowadays, it's controlling what people know, are supposed to know, are allowed to know (see war in Iraq and the ignorant audience discovering things in Moore's movies absolutely EVERYbody knew in Europe since the BEGINNING of the war!), should know... so yep, if TV (or theaters) doesn't show some aspects of life, these aspects are never gonna been accepted as such.
the problem is now, if there's a sex scene in a movie:
1) the movie is rated, discriminately so, in conservative hypocritical US
2) the scenes that may appear in a theater are cut out when they appear on a public channel, creating ridiculous situations where (i saw that) the plot is completely destroyed and/or the definition of characters given up
3) if the scene makes it thru, some Americans not used to seeing a breast or a butt will rush into theaters just to see that scene, and they and other people that saw that movie will concentrate far too much on and give that scene much more importance that it really has... forgetting the rest of the movie.
that's the problem with censorship, tell yr children beer (or whiskey or whatever) is forbidden, and u are making it something magical and magically attractive for them! tell them they can try it, and that beer is bitter and if u drink too much of it u may throw up, and well, they still may try it, maybe even too much a coupla times, but most will discover it's not worth drinking so much if all it does is making u throw up. and losing its forbiddenness and magics, it loses its dangers too.
statistics say/prove the USA ARE the country where people have most sexual partners (average is about 17! Poland, for an example, is 3...), and earlier than other countries, now compare with censorhip in movies! maybe it wouldn't be so and people would give relationships more time and thoughts and efforts rather than calling "next one" (*over and over*) or the rate of rapes and domestic violence wouldn't be 15 times what it is in northern Europe or people wouldn't look at u as if u're abnormal cuz u've been single for more than 2 weeks or are single when u r just 15!!........ if censorhip were not making everything sexual and nakedness etc etc so yummy yummy forbidden!
the bad thing in all that is hypocrisy. i prefer Mormons talking honestly and tell me cinema is evil (i'll just go my own way and decide then what is best for me, which is not considering movies are evil!..), rather than a state preaching against premarital sex and being the morally "lightest" country in the world in the facts.
and what dya mean, u see it everyday? violence? YOU see people tortured and shot in their head everyday on the street? or you HEAR ABOUT them thru TV? that the *big difference*! and no, i don't see people having sex in the streets here in Europe, but i do see women naked all the time, in the park, reading, in summer, with children and men, everybody naked without any fuss or sexual aspect about it (ok, that's typically German and u wouldn't see that in Italy) and in saunas everywhere, Finland, Norway, Germany..., where nobody would be as ridiculous as going in bikinis like i experienced in the US! RIDICULOUS! ffuuuucckkckk it! it's a sauna my gosh!! YES saunas can be mixed! no separation of genders!
plus, my last point for the moment, evolution, and it should be obvious for people that are into movies, doesn't follow one rythm since the beginning of times! movies, technology (look as well at medicine and nanotechnology etc etc.) and themes in them, have evolved more in the last 20 years than it had in the last century, and so has society. we now live in an accelerated evolutionary world, so the US have had plenty of time to evolve as much as Europe had in centuries, if there were not *certain conservative elements* (a powerful minority??) restraining the country from developping... intellectually developping, that is.
and, if i have to say that to make my opinions clearer, i'm not the "typical anti-american European", my fave authors, directors, actors, books, movies, and comics and music, all come from the US. and maybe they do cuz they have to react in some way to everything political correctness wanna forbid them.

Deadly obvious point: sex is taboo in america. Things are changing, but put simply not that fast. Bloodshed, on the other hand, isnt. Do we even need to descend into the christianity/moralistic aspect of our founding fathers and forebears? I agree that we are yet too new, too young a country to be so far removed from those strictures.

Bloodshed is timeless.
Sex is timeless.

But in times prior, the sexuality was always under wrap, lock and key. In a word: taboo. Other countries have already been through the evolutionary period that destroyed the taboo-ness (is that even a word? ) of sex. We havent, arent, and are still evolving.

It seems straightforward to me.

yep, obvious. yep straightforward. another thing is to behave so hypocritically about it. calling it land of freedom and that wouldn'tbe possible in Russia etc.. now this last is an interesting example, since there were no sex movies no sexshops no nudity on TV, but still after the end of official socialism there, it didn't take 20 years to evolve (sometimes, they even exaggerate, and since it's all new and fascinating, they fall into perverting that new freedom, if one looks at the rate child porn and prostitution develops there... but that's another subject), so why does the US need so much time? why is moral development there so slow? and like i mentioned above, if sex were taboo in general, then the US would not be number 1 in sex practice in real life! it's just taboo in *expression*, that is: medias (TV, movies, comics) and talking about it in public. it's real like "do it, do what u want, but don't tell me, i don't wanna know". like parents do with their children: they know what they're doing, but most often don't wanna hear about it.

You know exactly why. And youre steering the conversation directly to your point. It seems like you're determined to go there. Spit it out.

what dya mean? maybe cuz i'm a linguist addicted to comparing languages then it's become a real druglike addiction and i compare too much? but i can't help but finding taboos and various types of censorship fascinating, and why is it so and so on... like Japan with hairs and France with immigration and everything opposed to the Republic, and Spain with separatism... etc etc... and ok, we all know why in one word: history. but still, isn't it worth talking about and giving each other infos not everybody may have and exchanging infos no one has about all countries? for example i couldn't tell what a typical Australian taboo is, reflected in movies or whatever... and i thought i'd read more examples taken from movies, fascinating stuff to research and study...
what i'm gonna spit out is the bad coffee keeping me awake at work, yessir.

Damn I need to get out more often, heck even the Pols have a better average than I do.

:-00000 i don't know why, penguins are so cute! ;-)