If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Options
Just when is something too offensive?
Former Member
Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
People with disabilities
Is a joke ever too offensive?
Should things be censored because they're too sick?
Is a joke ever too offensive?
Should things be censored because they're too sick?
0
Comments
Jokes can be offensive, however I dont think we should censor them.
I'm not very comfortable with the idea of censoring comedians etc, its the kind of thing which you expect from North Korea. We are a free country which means people should be allowed to say things, even though others may not approve. It might sound harsh but its a price worth paying to live in a free country.
:thumb:
No.
No.
People need to lighten up, like.
Ok... So in the example of films being banned for too much violence.
PLEASE DO NOT READ ON IF YOU'RE SENSITIVE
Taken from a website about censored and banned films, examples of what led these films to be banned:
Caged Women: Rejected because of its exploitative treatment of the sexual abuse of women. An Italian women's prison film in which the prisoners were raped and abused by their gaolers, was redolent of the video nasty era in that the abuse was offered not for condemnation but as an erotic spectacle.
The Hash Man: The Hash Man is a one-hour video work offering the viewer clear and detailed guidance on the cultivation of cannabis plants. Under the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971, the cultivation of cannabis plants is illegal in the UK (without a license or other authority from the Secretary of State for research purposes), as is the ownership, use and supply of cannabis. Indeed, although apparently produced in the US, it is made clear during the video that the growing of cannabis is illegal in many parts of the word and advice and tips are offered on how to avoid detection. The intention of the work is clearly to assist people in breaking the law by giving detailed advice on how to cultivate an illegal drug. The work both constitutes an incitement to commit a criminal offence and, in contravention of the BBFC?s Guidelines, promotes and encourages the use of illegal drugs
Mikey: A 9 year old boy kills his foster family one by one, including the realistic drowning of his 3 year old sister. It was argued that this was a fantasy horror film and not to be taken literally, but three distinguished child psychiatrists advised us that the video was sufficiently realistic to have a dangerous impact on a significant proportion of vulnerable children.
Terrorists, Killers and other Wackos: Terrorists, Killers and Other Wackos comprises a compilation of uncontextualised clips showing real killings, executions, suicides, accidents, mutilation and torture (of both humans and animals) and other distressing images. The work presents no journalistic, educational or other justifying context for the images shown. Rather, the work presents a barrage of sensationalist clips, for what appears to be the underlying purpose of providing prurient entertainment. This is reinforced by the addition of a loud music soundtrack, which further trivialises the images shown. The trivialisation of human and animal suffering is further exemplified by the tasteless inclusion of occasional ?comic? captions. The work also contains a disturbing and distasteful undercurrent of racism and xenophobia. A significant amount of the material is taken from certain recurring geographic locations and could provide fuel for forms of racism which are hostile to non-white people.
Deported Women: A classic of Nazi filth & degradation according to one enthusiastic website. A particularly inventive scene involves a prisoner who knowing that she is going to be raped inserts a razor blade in her vagina. The commandant inevitably gets to suffer from a cleft shaft!
Should any of these be banned? What about films where the exploitation of people or animals has occured? Are these offensive?
As for jokes... I don't think the should be banned, but the problem is that on some topics, for example people with disabilities real prejudice does exist. Do comedians, film makers and documentary makers have a responsibility to the general public for taste or influence?
Edited to add: The website these are taken from
Again, no. If you're going to be offended by this kind of stuff, don't watch it. Noone has the right to decide what I can and can't handle, and what I can and can't watch.
not unless you're really big on communism. no.
If for example someone is profiting from the exploitation or suffering of someone / something (like happy slapping videos) then it should be bannfed immediately.
example: child pornography. (Unless I've missed the point)
But they are both illegal anyway :thumb:
I know, but some people are saying NO films should be banned, so I'm saying there is a line to be drawn somewhere.
No.
Just about everything in the world could be construed as offensive in one way or another so you can't start drawing lines.
I see your point.
But theoretically, in a few years, CG animation will be able to produce lifelike scenes on a computer. What if either of those two kinds of things were produced through CG to look real. The act of making it was as harmless as playing around in photoshop or something, but the content I would argue should still be banned / censored.
There is a link?
As for the OP, no they shouldn't be banned. There is no good place to start and once you have started down that route there is nowhere to stop... we end up banning any joks which pokes fun at anyone or anything for fear of causing offence.
If you are offended by a joke then that's your problem, not the tellers.
But again, why are we picking on film? What about literature with "undesirable" messages and stories about violent acts with no "artistic merit?" All attempts to force your opinion (because there are no factually based arguments for this censorship) on what someone else should be allowed to do. Frankly, I couldn't care less if someone decided to make a computer game where the aim of the game was to rape as many women as possible, because no-one is harmed. I just wouldn't choose to play it, and no doubt most places would choose not to stock such an item. That doesn't mean it's right to ban it for people who would want to play such a game.
But it would be banned, because it's immoral. It's gloryfying / trivialising rape isn't it?
Anime films.. can't say I have much experience. But as for other 3d films? If it's obviously fake, then it's distasteful but I'm not sure it can be banned, but if it's done to such a high standard it's almost indistinguishable then I just wouldn't feel comfortable with it being freely reproduced and distributed.
Not only would it only be your opinion that it is gloryfying/trivialising rape, but it would also only be your opinion that (assuming you were correct) such a thing was immoral. Therefore any attempt to ban such material, would be you attempting to force your opinion on other people. Unless you can come up with a logical argument as to exactly who is harmed by such material, there is no reason for it to be banned.
Meh, offence is relative. I say total freedom of expression!