Anti-censorship Speech


Let\'s deal with language first. Personally I despise the term "bad language". Language is the protocol we use to communicate. Possibly language could be called bad if it was used in the wrong context or was ineffectual in communicating an idea to another person or persons, but this is not what people mean when they say bad language. They mean swearing. But why is swearing bad? Maybe it\'s blasphemous, but surely people have freedom of speech, or maybe it\'s sexually explicit, but the world revolves around sex and anyone who does not realise this is living with their head in the sand. No, the reason people complain about the language of others is that it offends something that has been instilled in them through successive generations, the idea that certain words are "bad" and should not be used, particularly before children. This is sad. They\'re just words, strings of letters, to be found in any good dictionary, and if they get the idea across, who cares? Besides, swearing is fun, but I do agree that someone who swears all the time can be annoying. Expand your vocabulary by reading. What really annoys me about printed language (magazines, newspapers) is replacing letters with asterisks. Really, what is the point? I suppose newspapers and books have guidelines about printing swearwords and so have to use asterisks, but why are such guidelines in place? Also, why is it that books can contain as much \'filthy\' language and sex as they like and no-one bats an eyelid, but if a film has the same content, there is an uproar. I suppose the people who make the rules have decided that no one reads books, which is true to a large extent.


Sex and pornography. (Note: I lump the sex act itself, pornography, erotic thoughts/fantasies etc. into one category. Some people would argue that pornography is just a cheap commercialisation of the sex act, and in many cases this is true, but there it is.) Many viewers are disgusted by sex on the television, and complain. The reason for this is that it is easier to do than to admit that they themselves are just the same as everyone else (note: by everyone I mean the vast majority of the population. Of course there\'s always going to be someone who isn\'t thinking about sex most of the time, and this person is abnormal. By the way, don\'t fall into the easy trap of thinking that I\'m a pervert) when it comes to sex. But they cannot admit this, because pornography, thinking about sex etc. is bad. The point is that people are caught in their own trap, swearing and pornography are branded bad, wicked and immoral, but everyone\'s at it. So they have to become two-faced hypocrites, and I hate this. While I\'m on this subject have you ever wondered who invented anal sex? Someone must have.


Violence. Alright, many people believe that violence depicted on television and in the movies can make a person viewing it more violent. They look at the sort of characters who commit crimes such as the school shootings in America, and see that they play games such as Quake and watch martial arts movies, and then draw the "obvious" conclusion that violent games and movies caused their action. This is a classic confusion of cause and effect. The truth is, they play games like Quake because they are violent individuals, it\'s not playing the game that makes them violent. You would hardly expect murderers to be watching Bambi. I would be very surprised if such people did not play violent games. So people who commit crimes or copy violence on the screen are likely to do violent things anyway, and this is a problem with our society, not with television. If people are made more violent by watching violent movies, surely it must work the other way round, i.e. people are made saintly by watching Bambi. This is ridiculous. People are able to distinguish between violence on the screen and real life, although having said this, I wanted to kill someone after seeing Natural Born Killers. (Great film though.)


I am strongly against all censorship in movies or anywhere. Movies should be seen as the