darth_ender said:
ATMachine said:
For my part, I think that true respect for the human body would involve not being disgusted by its mere appearance on screen.
But then, I clearly don't run the MPAA.
On the other hand, I agree with you to the extent that "less is more".... that is, restrictions on creativity often force filmmakers to be more clever and entertaining than they would otherwise have been.
Still.... I really hope you're not advocating that filmmakers submit themselves to moral censorship based on Christianity. You do realize that doing so means, in effect, going back to the bad old days of the Production Code and the Catholic Legion of Decency?
I've heard stories about how Hays Office censors objected to films about the Holocaust because they feared the nudity of emaciated concentration camp prisoners would somehow be titillating.
Faced with the specter of censorious bureaucratic fools, I'll take Game of Thrones any day.
You don't know me too well, but I don't recall saying that I am disgusted with the human body. I am a nurse who just got off shift. I probably have seen more people naked than you, and I'm not just talking about movies or particular websites. Real people with real privates that I at times have to examine closely. I do not find the human body repulsive.
Am I advocating moral censorship? Only self-censorship. I don't believe in taking away people's rights, but I do believe that their right is still wrong (clever pun there, eh?).
Thus, with you better understanding my views, as well as the obvious intent of trying to treat sex and the human body disrespectfully, do you think that respectful art or the Holocaust would somehow be included as not appropriate? For children it probably is not, but for mature adults, certain things remain in fact preferable. Who'd want to see the Holocaust as anything less than horrifying. And speaking of which, why were those Holocaust victims so often forced into nudity? Because it was humiliating, disrespectful, degrading, another opportunity for Nazis to exert control over others?
Good for you for standing up to censorship and getting an erection while you're at it.
Apologies if I offended you.
I'm very glad to hear that you don't actually advocate the sort of external censorship that led to the Hays Code. And I quite agree that a certain amount of restraint in filmmaking is welcome.
The trouble is, of course, that censorship is a slippery slope. I cited that Holocaust example for a reason.
A real person, in a position of power in Hollywood, actually thought that a movie about Holocaust victims might be dangerous to show--because it might turn the audience on!
It seems to me, therefore, that lewdness is in the eye of the beholder.
And as far as this discussion goes, I think it would help if you remembered that atheists are people just as much as religious believers.
Do you discriminate with medical care in your hospital based on a patient's religion? I'd hate to go to a hospital where they did.
