C*NSOR*H*P

C*NSOR*H*P

If there’s one thing I was never been able to understand in my whole entire life, it’s how a large majority of the public can still be squeamish about language or nudity. What confuses me further is that the ONE thing I feel people may have a right to be squeamish about, violence, is the thing people don’t mind so much.

The FCC just proposed fining 1.4 million dollars against more than 50 stations that featured an NYPD Blue episode that showed a woman’s bare butt.

I repeat, a woman’s bare buttocks were shown and it’s going to cost 1.4 million dollars. That adds up to 700 grand per cheek. For that price you could probably rent your favorite celebrity to be your sex slave for the night.

Also, excuse me all to hell, but how could anyone be offended by the sight of a posterior?  Seriously… how? We all have one. Think about it for a minute, it’s true. Hell, I wouldn’t care if tiny little, wide-eyed, innocent, freckle faced kids saw a naked ass. They can see naked ass any time they want anyway. All they gotta do is go to the bathroom, drop trou in front of a mirror and VOILA! Asses ahoy!

The same can be said of every single other so-called “naughty” bit. Remember the brouhaha about Janet Jackson’s nipple? Did any of these geniuses who got all insulted by it bother to think that a) The female breast is basically a mound with a nipple on top and that everyone just happens to have nipples, so how can it be offensive to see something you see every day? And b) That even the cheeeelllllllllldren who saw it have seen female breasts before when they were, you know… BREASTFEEDING, especially those born from the very same simple rural folks who supposedly raised their young in the simple rural ways (which include not weaning the little assholes until they’re five) yet were 99.9% of the fucking people who complained?

It doesn’t make sense to me.

Vaginas? How can THAT be offensive? It’s the most anonymous looking thing in the world. If a vagina was a person it’d be Bruce Jenner. It literally looks like, well… nothing. If a woman doesn’t lie back and spread open her legs there’s really nothing to see and she might as well just be wearing flesh covered (or mohair if she’s going for a 70′s look) panties. Couple this with the fact that 50% of your viewing audience HAVE vaginas, and that at least another 25% see vaginas on a semi-daily basis (Especially if they mowed the lawn and took out the trash like she goddamn told them to.) And finally, if my understanding of the human gestation process is correct, a full 100% of them were real intimate with one when they POPPED out of the fucking thing when they were born.

So asses, tits and pussies are all things we’ve all seen and continue to see ALL THE TIME.  What”s next? Being offended by the sight of a hand or an ear? Even more ironic is that the people who cringe at the sight of this stuff on TV or try to protect their kids from seeing it are the first ones to babble about the cruelty of them Ah-rab Burkas on duh Afgahni wimmen when trying to justify the cool little wars going on right now. As if the Fundamentalist Muslim disgust of the human body differs at all from their own, except for its larger scope.

So what are we left with?

Oh yes: The penis, the nastiest one of all. The friendly weapon, The shotgun barrel of fun, The angry missile, The spitting fireman, The flute that everyone can play, The schlong, The rod, The yardstick, The big Kahuna hot-dog, DA COCK-A-DOODLE-DONG! True, many a young baby girl has been semi-traumatized while taking a bath with her dad when they both stood up to dry off and, because of the height difference, she’s suddenly face to face with what looks like Fidel Castro smoking a flesh colored cigar.

But nonetheless, it’s an innocent organ; the math for vaginas applies equally to penises. 50% of viewers have them, 25% more have seen them, and if you live in a household that isn’t filled with a bunch of repressed religious assholes, 100% should have seen them because all men eventually end up naked on a hammock in the backyard “passed asleep”, as the kids say.

So what’s the big deal?

It’s just the naked body, and a naked body is to sex what an unloaded gun is to murder. One does not equal the other, no matter what the non-thinking ideologues say. So there you have it. My perfectly logical and sensible argument about why the human body should be okay to view for anyone at any time; and anyone who disagrees with me is a hysterical, irrational psychopath AND OUGHT TO BE KILLED!

Sooooo…

What are my thoughts about bad language?

Well, I think that Dick, Cock and Pussy, filthy words who have perfectly clean sounding homonyms that mean Richard, Rooster and Cat, do a really good job at killing the argument that a word is dirty because of the way it sounds. I mean, do you really expect me to believe that Snatch is only dirty if it means a vagina and not the action of stealing or taking? Please. If it’s clean enough to say “”I saw that man snatch your bible Father!” then it’s not any dirtier to say “”That bikini looks a little tight around the snatch.” to the wife, okay?

“But Jeremy! It’s not the word itself, or its spelling or how it sounds; it’s the sinful meaning BEHIND it.”

Ohhhhhhhhhhhh….

So why is dang, darn, shoot, fudge, a-hole, heck, flippin’ and dork okay? Because, if I may call you on your shoot and shatter your gosh darned illusions, your flippin’ euphemistic swears mean the exact same thing in your heart than the real thing; so it’s not the intent that truly bothers people either apparently.

You know what bothers them? I’ll tell you. It’s a handful of words in their very limited vocabulary that have been labeled taboo. That’s it. That’s all it is. That’s all it ever will be. If someone had told them that the word “hair” was dirty we’d all be bald THX-1138 fuckers and hair would be called “improper follicule growth”. To put it simply, they don’t like people saying things that they don’t like to hear. Right or wrong has nothing to do with it. What’s more, unlike nudity, they can’t blame their aversion of language on religion because God doesn’t speak English and there’s no list of bad words in the bible, and even if there had been they would have all originally been in Latin and no one’s spoken that bloody language since the Romans suddenly realized that there seemed to be a whole shitload of Germans coming their way with swords drawn.

What’s especially amusing is that because these rules about what words are dirty and what words are clean are so ill-thought out, haphazard and arbitrary, you can easily run circles around them.

Let me illustrate: imagine that you’re watching one of those godawful reality TV shows about people… doing… something or other… in a wacky… place… and the rapper dude who’s on every one of these things to give them “street cred” looks at the blonde whore with the fake tits and says “Hey baby, why don’t you come to my room so you can Shozzle my Nozzle?”

You immediately knew what it meant didn’t you? Yet, there’s nothing wrong with any of those words. Nozzle is not really specific slang for anything, Shozzle isn’t even a word. Yet you know he wants her to Luncheon on his Truncheon, to Snack on his Flack, to Riddle his Biddle, to Woowoo his Choo-choo, to Gazaga the Nuhglnuff.

I dare the FCC to give a million dollar fine to a show for saying that last one. I fucking dare them.




Posted on February 5, 2008 in Blogs by
Buffer


If you liked this article then you may also like the following Film Threat articles:
Popular Stories from Around the Web
9 Comments on "C*NSOR*H*P"

  1. Felix Vasquez Jr. on Tue, 5th Feb 2008 11:22 am 

    Ay! America is crazy these daze. I don’t get the power of FCC. Bravo, Jeremy.


    Report Comment

  2. Phil Hall on Tue, 5th Feb 2008 1:01 pm 

    Jeremy, is there a Canadian equivalent to the FCC?


    Report Comment

  3. Mark Bell on Tue, 5th Feb 2008 3:40 pm 

    Cleaning up dirty language is no better. Best example? Patton Oswald’s challenge to replace talking dirty to your wife with “I’m gonna fill your hoo ha with goof juice!” Clean? Yes. Creepy? Fuck yes…


    Report Comment

  4. Jeremy Knox on Tue, 5th Feb 2008 4:16 pm 

    Goof Juice from my Shozzle Nozzle hehehe… There is no exact FCC equivalent in Canada. Although the “Canadian Broadcast Standards Council” comes close. Here’s the Wikipedia entry: “In contrast to the fines imposed by the Federal Communications Commission in the United States, the CBSC has required at most that a station broadcast a council-approved citation on-air during peak viewing hours. Citations have been issued not only for violations of the content guidelines themselves but also for failing to provide sufficient information to viewers, i.e. missing or inadequate viewer advisories, or missing ratings icons. However, the CBSC–and for that matter the CRTC–have a broader mandate than their U.S. counterpart. Both organizations have content jurisdiction over subscription-based services, such as cable specialty channels, which the FCC lacks. Moreover, the CBSC considers not only so-called “indecency” complaints but also complaints dealing with hate speech, sponsorship issues, and journalistic practices.”


    Report Comment

  5. Phil Hall on Wed, 6th Feb 2008 6:08 am 

    “I’m gonna fill your hoo ha with goof juice!” Oh, God, I looooooove that!!!


    Report Comment

  6. Nathaniel on Wed, 6th Feb 2008 12:51 pm 

    I can’t believe they’re are fining stations for showin a woman’s bare buttocks on tv. When FX shows “The Punisher” Frank Castle shoves a knife up into a guys mouth and it shows the knife in the guys mouth.Know I want to ask the FCC, which is going to screw up a kid more?


    Report Comment

  7. Matt Leon on Thu, 7th Feb 2008 9:47 pm 

    its ironic that tv censorship is so damn high when anybody, and i mean anyone with half a brain, could go to a P.C. google “girl” in google images and see some hardcore shit. until “they” censor EVERTHING then isnt partial censorship just like allowing porn on local tv with the sound cut out? (extreme example but you catch meh drift)


    Report Comment

  8. Mike Watt on Fri, 8th Feb 2008 10:03 am 

    I’m going to see if I can get Amy to “Gazaga the Nuhglnuff” tonight. I’m terrified to know what will happen if I mispronounce it, though. Will the Book of the Dead appear?


    Report Comment

  9. Scratches on Tue, 12th Feb 2008 6:18 am 

    Censorship under the guise of taste is still censorship, changing the name doesn’t change the situation. Check out “This Film is Not Yet Rated” for the MPAA in action.

    There is “ratings” on films, television, radio, but notice that books are left out. Why? the bible would get an NC-17 (which it SHOULD). More hypocrisy at work.


    Report Comment

Tell us what you're thinking...





Comments are governed by the Terms of Use of this Site. Click on the "Report Comment" link if you feel a comment is in violation of the Terms of Use, and the comment will be reviewed appropriately.