Tuesday, December 4, 2012

Censorship

For me, censorship is an individual choice not a societal responsibility. Censorship also has another side... privacy. I'll address both of those in a minute but first a word from the dictionary...

Censorship: The official practice of examining media with the purpose of finding and suppressing undesirable material. 

Privacy: The state or condition of being free from being observed by other people.

In this context, to be seen is to be judged as ok or not. The ever present "they" will tell you it is meant to keep what "should" be private, private for the protection society and it's structure. I think maybe more often it is to protect some idea that if it isn't talked about, questioned and examined it doesn't have to be dealt with, or recognized. Why some things and not others? And who has the right to determine this for everyone. Is a coarse expletive dangerous or offensive in and of itself without some understood meaning? Or is it the meaning that is the problem? If I say fuck for no reason in particular without inflection, one only has it's implied meaning to go on. If I say FUCK!! when I am angry it means something different than if I were to scream it during sex. Is it offensive because sex and anger have no place in "polite society"? Or is it that there are more useful and less offensive words to get the point across? Why are some words offensive and others are not? Asparagus is a pretty innocuous word if we start screaming asparagus when angry or having sex won't it then, over time, become a "swear word"?

 Censorship is the sense that we should somehow make society responsible for the safety and protection of our personal agenda and sensibilities. In other words, making the world a more comfortable place by allowing some other system to make choices about what is acceptable and then imposing this on everyone on our behalf. This then absolves us of the responsibility of making those choices actively for ourselves and our children in a situation by situation basis. The problem with this type of idea is that you then, have to force or coerce everyone to agree about what should be censored, who has the right to do that for you? Me? Definitely not. 

Look at what is censored, swear words, notably, the misuse of the divine for the profane, and many topics related to sex and orientation and their expression, are considered sensible for censorship. What I find offensive may differ from what society finds generally offensive, for example, cruelty, and violence. The thing is, I don't have to watch those things that give me nightmares. Sufficiently warned of content, there are things I don't engage in. If I find myself uninformed and am caught by surprise I can turn it off, put it down, walk away, and move on. I don't have to ban slasher films because I don't feel ok with them for myself. I don't watch the news or tv in general for this reason.

I don't watch religious programing or affiliate with a group because I feel religion is and should be a private thing. I can't ban open practice of religion or shut down network television but there are those who would actively quell any expression of love. 

A less political example, but one that particularly gets on my nerves, is the Walmart tantrum. Some of you are nodding, I know. The parent who will allow a three year old to be left two aisles away screaming but will stop children from laughing and cutting up. I can't stop the parent from behaving this way in the face of an out of control child but why should one state have preference over another? Because one is easier on those around them? I have left a theater because of a screaming baby. Is it wrong for the child to scream? No, babies cry. Can I expect a parent to remove themselves from a situation for the comfort of others? Not realistically, especially since there is a sense of elevated status from being a parent in our society such status that brings with it a sense of entitlement. 

If censorship is meant to keep some things hidden from view then what about privacy.
Why are some things held private rather than public? Censorship of self is inherent in the concept. Why censor all or part of one's person for the comfort of others? Why is it so important to wave some kind of identity flag? Are we less private to force some universal acceptance even of things we ourselves would not choose?

Has our society been victim to so much secrecy in the past that now, nothing is held as private? Do we rail against observing such privacy because the stakes for "being seen and accepted" are now so high? Must we go to ever more radical ends to be seen and validated. And how much of that is about being seen as special or unique? 

I've heard privacy touted as being about self respect. I can see this in some ways but is it really the reason? Could it be that it's about shame and control. There are just things it is deemed inconsiderate to others to share because it is shameful or embarrassing to the listener. A note here on personal respect and privacy. I personally believe that there are things that should be private, sex, some of my choices and the reasons for them, and my religion if I have one. These reflect personal ideals that really are no one's business and are therefore not subject to scrutiny and acceptance of others, all things being equal. 

If I masturbate once a day it's not someone else's right to know or censor unless we have that arrangement between us. If I pray and meditate everyday it's between me and the power I subscribe to. My innermost thoughts are private. Why? Because a judgement of whether they are right or wrong is not up for debate. They are right or wrong for me, that is what privacy is for. My ideas and beliefs change periodically but less because of outside approval than because I have examined them for usefulness and adjusted as necessary but I am introspective not everyone is interested in such activity.

Some claim without censorship society would fall apart. I would say to those people to trust humanity and stop being so offended all the time. I also ask how much is that offense manufactured? How much of what we are "offended" by is how we really feel or pretense for others? How much of what is supposed to be censored is because it is censored rather than because it is right or useful?

Then there is the question of privacy and security. We, at least in America, have slowly by degrees given up our rights to privacy for the sake of the illusion of security. Like a frog who gently boils to death, we gradually sell ourselves out. Being frisked in the airport or being scanned in a machine to prove we are eligible to fly in a plane without risking the safety of other passengers. Many have railed against the indignity of it but still fly. Or when someone throws a rock through my window with slut written on it after I have clearly advertised my sexual behavior do I have a right to feel offended? It seems our whole problem is based on "see all of me and accept me" on one side and "shut up and we will leave you alone on the other". Always us vs them. So a happy medium, be responsible for your own choices, be considerate of yourself if not of others and don't wave a flag you aren't willing to go fight for, if you don't want to be judged don't share so much and extend to others the kindnesses you hope for yourself. 

What should be seen? Well, injustice and abuse in the system, bigotry and prejudice of all kinds. The more we expose these things the more we have the ability, as a society, to make decisions and reinvent what is acceptable without right and wrong having to be in the control of the government or religion. Certainly, think anything you like, believe it if you must, but once that belief becomes an action that seeks to limit the behavior of another person especially if their behavior isn't harming you personally it is no longer useful to cohesive and harmonious living. You can't cry peace and use a baseball bat to achieve it. The truth is much that has become socially acceptable has disappeared from the offensive scale. Interracial marriage, once a great offense to some, is rarely talked about except in the most bigoted of circles. Kink in general is another place that seems to be gaining ground, marijuana use and alternative family structures will too. Soon it will only offend the most rigid religionist to see two men holding hands in public or shopping together with their children. Maybe one day war and violence will fall out of vogue in our society and there really can be peace.

No comments:

Post a Comment