I love the smell of censorship in the morning

I thought that smell was just PAD. :D

They ban the word "snowman" from school books because it's sexist.

My dad went "The carrot would have to be elsewhere before we talk about sexs".
 
The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) on Wednesday upheld complaints by members of the public that the phrase promoting the game "Vietcong Purple Haze" was offensive "particularly because napalm had killed civilians."
Click to expand...

What logic! Now we have to delete any references to any military equipment, lightning, natural disasters, humans in general, or anything else that has killed civilians. Yay!
 
While I don't agree with censorship, I have to say that as far as censorship goes, I agree with this one. Someone mentioned that they are removing any reference to atrocities, this wasn't used to condemn an atrocity. It very well could be offensive to anyone who knows of someone, or had been directly affected, by napalm. It is using it as something "cool", as a marketing tool. "Napalm never smelled this good" looks like they are making a joke of the war crime that killed thousands (anyone know the total number?) of innocent civilians. Though, on a related and somewhat positive note, that little girl in the picture actually survived the war. I didn't realize that until my university gave her an honorary degree a few weeks ago.
 
Alonzo, yes it is tasteless. However tastelessness is not grounds for complete governmental censorship in a free society.

I don't think your avatar is tasteful, in fact it goes too far for me. I'm sure there are alot of kids on this site who don't know why that poor girl is wrapped up in leather straps (or whatever). But I'd be the last person to call for censorship. It's the cost of living in a free society, and being able to say something that others might find offensive.
 
[quote name='camoor']Alonzo, yes it is tasteless. However tastelessness is not grounds for complete governmental censorship in a free society.

I don't think your avatar is tasteful, in fact it goes too far for me. I'm sure there are alot of kids on this site who don't know why that poor girl is wrapped up in leather straps (or whatever). But I'd be the last person to call for censorship. It's the cost of living in a free society, and being able to say something that others might find offensive.[/quote]

I agree my avatar may not be the most suitable, but in a way I'm just following the crowd. I wouldn't have it if others didn't have even more provocative pics in there signature (which is more visible due to its size). This site also seems to attract an older crowd than most game sites. Also, the website it was taken from (suicidegirls.com) isn't hardcore, the girls decide entirely on their own what they do and don't do, including finding their own photographer (the positive attitude is one of the reasons I liked it, as I was getting sick of degrading stuff), and I assume the girl wrapped herself in the electrical tape. Take a look around the site, look at the words used even. It doesn't degrade women, unless you find nudity itself degrading. But my main point, I don't agree with censorship either, but I just think that if I'm going to attack censorship this is not where I'd start. I'd probably start with everything that happened due to janet jacksons "wardrobe malfunction". Basically, I don't think the censorship should be forced, I don't think they should have been ordered to remove it. At the same time I think they should have had the decency not to even use that to begin with.
 
[quote name='alonzomourning23'][quote name='camoor']Alonzo, yes it is tasteless. However tastelessness is not grounds for complete governmental censorship in a free society.

I don't think your avatar is tasteful, in fact it goes too far for me. I'm sure there are alot of kids on this site who don't know why that poor girl is wrapped up in leather straps (or whatever). But I'd be the last person to call for censorship. It's the cost of living in a free society, and being able to say something that others might find offensive.[/quote]

I agree my avatar may not be the most suitable, but in a way I'm just following the crowd. I wouldn't have it if others didn't have even more provocative pics in there signature (which is more visible due to its size). This site also seems to attract an older crowd than most game sites. Also, the website it was taken from (suicidegirls.com) isn't hardcore, the girls decide entirely on their own what they do and don't do, including finding their own photographer (the positive attitude is one of the reasons I liked it, as I was getting sick of degrading stuff), and I assume the girl wrapped herself in the electrical tape. Take a look around the site, look at the words used even. It doesn't degrade women, unless you find nudity itself degrading. But my main point, I don't agree with censorship either, but I just think that if I'm going to attack censorship this is not where I'd start. I'd probably start with everything that happened due to janet jacksons "wardrobe malfunction". Basically, I don't think the censorship should be forced, I don't think they should have been ordered to remove it. At the same time I think they should have had the decency not to even use that to begin with.[/quote]

This is the primary problem with censorship.

I think that girls in electrical tape are utterly tasteless, but as long as they do not do proven harm to anyone they are completely acceptable. I also think that this game has a valid if tasteless portrayal of the war that should not be completely censored by the government.

You have a different opinion about the game, which I completely respect. However if you censor it, you're as bad as the people who would censor your image because they are afraid that it does not instill good moral values.
 
I don't think having a near-naked woman on a website is on the same level as making light of an act that, rather painfully, injured/killed many people. It's the internet. If kids havn't seen a naked woman yet, they would have eventually. There's not really that much harm done other than an awkward conversation with the folks at most.

That quote wasn't exactly in the best taste but I can see where they're coming from (i.e. an emphasis on the game's realism). Should they have wrote it? Probably not. Should they have been censored for it? Probably not. It's just that council trying to make it seem like they're doing something after that Kill JFK game came out. I really don't see any harm done. Sure censorship is bad. I don't think they're trying to restrict free speech and I don't think they had malice in mind when doing it. Given the chance, Take Two probably wouldn't have used the phrase anyways.
 
Just to point out, I've changed the girl in electric tape to one of the most irresistably cute girls I've ever seen. Now there should be no more complaints :D . Though I still don't understand what was so bad about my old one (I like the new one better though), when others have huge sigs of near naked, or even naked girls who just position themselves so nothing is shown. And again, most of the people on this site seem to be either over 18, or within a few years of 18, probably because this site appeals mainly to people who actually buy their own games.
 
[quote name='camoor']Alonzo, yes it is tasteless. However tastelessness is not grounds for complete governmental censorship in a free society.

I don't think your avatar is tasteful, in fact it goes too far for me. I'm sure there are alot of kids on this site who don't know why that poor girl is wrapped up in leather straps (or whatever). But I'd be the last person to call for censorship. It's the cost of living in a free society, and being able to say something that others might find offensive.[/quote]

But would you feel the same way if a resounding majority of the public voted to ban or censor games?

If you think this is bad you should google all the things the Australlian government bans from it's markets.
 
I think it was in bad taste to use it in promotional materials. But, if it was just used a few times within the game itself, I don't think it would have been as bad. It's similar to a quote from "Apocalypse Now." That was fine to say in the 80's...but not now?

I'm for industry self-regulation rather than government regulation and I think a lot of people need to get off of their religious high horse.

Ever notice that the people who complain the most about morals are usually the people who have the least? (EDIT: I mean that in general, not directed to a certain country).
 
[quote name='SadieDee']I think it was in bad taste to use it in promotional materials. But, if it was just used a few times within the game itself, I don't think it would have been as bad. It's similar to a quote from "Apocalypse Now." That was fine to say in the 80's...but not now?

I'm for industry self-regulation rather than government regulation and I think a lot of people need to get off of their religious high horse.

Ever notice that the people who complain the most about morals are usually the people who have the least? (EDIT: I mean that in general, not directed to a certain country).[/quote]

I agree with self regulation, but not in the normal sense. Basically there's not much I think that should be even self censored, but when you start making a joke about innocent people dieing, that's too far, and that's not a case of morals that's just common decency. Though to say that those who complain about morals have the least, that's all relative. Often those people you're complaining about simply have different morals, but they're still morals (IE. those who oppose gay marriage are considered moral but those who support it, that is not considered a moral belief, though to the person it probably is).
 
[quote name='SadieDee']I think it was in bad taste to use it in promotional materials. But, if it was just used a few times within the game itself, I don't think it would have been as bad. It's similar to a quote from "Apocalypse Now." That was fine to say in the 80's...but not now?

I'm for industry self-regulation rather than government regulation and I think a lot of people need to get off of their religious high horse.

Ever notice that the people who complain the most about morals are usually the people who have the least? (EDIT: I mean that in general, not directed to a certain country).[/quote]

Apocolypse Now was an R-rated movie shown in theatres.

That Purple Haze commercial wasset to air on television.

Big difference.
 
Gov't censorship is such crap. I don't want the gov't to ever tell me what to say. If you don't like it, don't listen. If you don't want your kids to see it, then see that they don't. It's not the responsibility of the gov't to rear children or enforce good taste.
 
[quote name='evilpenguin9000']Gov't censorship is such crap. I don't want the gov't to ever tell me what to say. If you don't like it, don't listen. If you don't want your kids to see it, then see that they don't. It's not the responsibility of the gov't to rear children or enforce good taste.[/quote]

:applause:
 
Sadly though we have put censoring television on the goverments back because most parents set their child down in front of the tv and walk away, subjecting them to whatever amount of violence, sex, drugs, or abuse that is shown outweighs having to sit there and actually watch their child. I am not a parent, thankfully, but I see parents do this alot. Maybe its the region, or the type of parents but I imagine this is a worldwide phenomenom ever since the "boob-tube" and cable were invented. The goverment noting this have felt it is their duty to censor everything down as much as possible to protect those children whom are unsupervised. I certainly agree this isn't right and it has gotten out of hand, but since the wheel is in motion all its going to do is keep on rolling.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top