Why I Oppose Censoring Art

What's the purpose?

Why I oppose censoring art.

There is none. Perhaps it would be better to say there is no logical purpose. Regardless of ones own views on the subject of the art for you to have the right to have those views the artist must in turn have the right to have their own views and make the art. Even if that wasn't the case where's the harm in someone seeing a dick or a vagina? Where's the harm is someone hearing what some people deem in their own subjective opinion as bad? I don't see any. And what about violence? As for that I can kind of understand having an age limit on however as long as one has the mental maturity to differentiate fantasy from reality then once again, where's the harm? I don't find that there is any.

BUT WHAT ABOUT THE CHILDREN?

Other people shouldn't have to make everything suitable your your children. If it's not intended for them and they don't have the mental maturity for it THEN DON'T LET THEM WATCH IT it's that simple. An artist should never have to change their art just to please anyone but themselves.

But I don't like when they do stuff I think is wrong.

Morality is a subjective concept. While many people can agree that some things such as killing are wrong there are some people who truly believe that it isn't wrong. Because of that morality cannot be objective. That being said why should someone change their moral opinion for you? It's pretty ridiculous thing to ask of someone.

Final thoughts.

What this all boils down to is things are censored because some people don't like those things. Not liking those things is perfectly fine for the most part so long as it's not inherently harmful. However expecting everyone to pander to your opinion is selfish. You wouldn't change yourself for a complete stranger so why should an artist have to change their hard work for a complete stranger?


1|0
3|5

Join the discussion

0/2500

Submit

What Girls Said 3

  • *clap* I agree with you. I listen to Blink-182 and Green Day, as well as A7X and Of Mice and Men, so I have a lot of songs with swears in them, and the big E next to my songs. I honestly think that the parents that care about cursing should better research the music, because a lot of songs without the explicit or parental advisory labels have very adult themes.

    0|0
    0|0
  • Congrats friend, your first successful MyTake (Soon to be followed by more, because you're amazing)

    0|1
    0|0
  • *round of applause*

    I agree completely. :)

    0|1
    0|0

What Guys Said 5

  • It's one thing to censor broadcasted music like over the radio, but I especially feel this way about games and movies

    Why the hell are you buying your child shit they shouldn't play/watch?

    0|0
    0|0
  • you're definitely missing the point. parent advisory is as much for censoring as it is for advising them what a show or movie entails. it's for parents and kids to know ahead of time what they can expect. my mom didn't know what game of thrones was until i was packing up to go back to college. she thought how cool it looked and literally out of left field 2 chicks were fucking. she was shocked. i was a college student so she couldn't have really cared if i was watching it, but for a 7 or 8 year old, that shit won't fly. moreover, that gives me warning to know if i should turn cause there ain't nothing more awkward than watching a sex scene when your parents are there

    0|0
    0|0
  • I don't necessarily support censorship, but I do support advisories on music and movies. Parent have the right and the RESPONSIBILITY to know what their child is listening to and watching. Advisories, be it an "explicit content" label or a movie rating are aids in that. That's not censorship.

    Regarding morality being subjective, you can't really argue that effectively. Relativism uses absolute statements to say that there are no absolute. It's self-refuting. Even so, a sincerely held belief about something won't change whether it's right or wrong. If what you say is true, then why bother with police officers, judges, or courts? With a system of law and order? If I'm a cop or a judge, should I let someone go free because he "truly believed" that killing someone wasn't wrong or that rape or robbery wasn't wrong? Should people have to live in fear that their lives, families, and property are only worth what someone feels about them?

    There's also to consider the matter of private property, which means that a citizen, not the state, owns that property. That means that if you're out at the mall and you decide you want to paint a naked picture in the middle of the food court or blast a song with vulgar lyrics, you're at the mercy of the people who run the mall. It would be the same thing for me if I wanted to have a group of people audibly praying the Rosary.

    Even so, in light of all this, there's the simple matter of personal respect, common courtesy. That means that if there are ten people in a room, they all ought to respect each other. If nine of them start making offensive jokes and that tenth person speaks up, then the other nine, provided that they all have good rapport with each other, ought to say "okay, we'll cut it out". On the other hand, one person can't just start singing a vulgar song and pay no mind at all to anyone else.

    0|0
    0|0
  • This very much incorporated into the Freedom Of Speech argument. The two sides are basically (1) The artist has the right to express themselves no matter how uncomfortableit is, if you squash it could be used to suppress legitimate protest against say a corrupt government (2) Some things can be offensive if you let it be totally free really offensive stuff can get through.
    I agree with your argument about excessive censorship and maybe we should let people decide whether the should experience the artwork or not but on the other hand we could go to the extreme should an artwork by an artist who genuinely believed his ideas be let through with the caption "All (insert colour here) haired people are ugly so should be aborted" - By any stretch of the imagination that is offensive and the extensive debate that would arise gives aa airing to a noxious idea.
    What is the answer, I don't know - I go straight into the "Who Guards The Guardians" argument - I believe in Free Speech but with some limited controls to prevent outrageous abuses of that freedom but whatever route you take it leaves the door open to people to abuse the trust placed in them.

    0|0
    0|0
  • Why wouldn't a person change for a complete stranger?

    I do kind of agree that censorship has problems, but do you really think that anyone has the capacity or maturity to differentiate reality from anything else--be it fiction, fantasy, subjective experiences, or even human existence?

    There can be some really nasty and uneasy truths (and lies) out there, could people, society, and systems really handle all that there is without complete break-down?

    0|0
    0|0
Loading...