Sunday, 15 May 2011


In an age where the media is everywhere comes control of the media. We aren’t as bad as China and Korea’s censorship rules but it’s a slippery slope. Censorship is a concept I don’t fully understand (note: by understand I mean I don't understand the reasoning behind why things should be censored, the reasons seem illogical to me) and far from agree with. Why censor anything? Censorship never existed before and never hindered progress but because it can be seen everywhere, does it mean it should be stopped? No, not really.

In the past, we were violent and sexual. In other words, we were natural. Now, we’ve developed into unnatural, controlling, conscience beings who want to live in sheltered existences, denying any wrong doing in the world. This is unnatural and it won’t help, it’ll hinder progress. We’d become naive, curious and unknown to the consequences. It feels like that would only cause more problems rather than solve them.

Lately, I’ve been revisiting a classic game which may be one of the best games ever - Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas. There’s something enjoyable about going around with guns, driving recklessly and BMX-ing around cities. I enjoy that, does that mean I’m going to go that outside of the game? No. Do you know why? Because I have morals, just like 99.9999999999999999999% of all gamers. We are not all psychos who search out for violence and strive for sadistic agony of others.

For example, blaming games on murders, rape and all other bad things in our world is like blaming a salad bar for obesity. All of these things have existed before hand and they’ll, sadly, continue to exist forever. Stopping games will not stop these tragedies. No matter how much you want them to stop and you want to pin the blame on something, you can’t. It’s natural and the people who commit murders lately are actually unnatural as they usually have some mental problems. Whether it’s something as simple as a chemical imbalance or a gland which doesn’t release the endorphins which make us feel guilt and remorse - or something similar, I can’t really remember and I don’t have the literature at hand so take this with a pinch of salt.

There’s an infamous serial killer who had a - pardon the pun - killer childhood. Richard Ramirez, also known as “The Nightstalker”, was beaten by his father, sexually abused by his teacher, saw photos from his “hero” uncle which were his rape and murder victims out in Vietnam (he also took a piece of them as a “trophy” and showed Richard Ramirez these as a child) and also witnessed this same uncle murder his wife. Richard Ramirez was only a child as he saw this, a pre-teen. By the time he was thirteen, he spent nights at cemeteries and looked to evil in the form of Satan. That’s what made him a brutal murderer.

Then there’s the ideal that we’re “sexualising” children when I don’t see how we can be. The media has stayed the same. For example, the “Carry On…” films were made from 1958 to 1978. They made rude and crude jokes, insinuated a lot of sexual things and had thin women running around in underwear. What’s so different now? We actually have certificates and “do not broadcast until 9” now so how can we be sexualising children now and not then? That’s why I do not understand the idea that children are more at risk now than then.

Then there are the protesting parents. The parents who protest because their child turned onto Scrubs instead of some Disney programme and parade around trying to stop “filth” and “smut” from polluting kids. If they put half as much effort into parenting as they do into protesting and stopping everything bar Elmo, Blue’s Clues and Dora the Explorer, they’d actually be good parents and would stop these atrocities from happening. But no, they’d rather ruin it for everyone by making sure that there’s nothing “inappropriate” on television. We’ll have nothing left but white screens and then they’ll be protested against for not being racially diverse and other odd and random things. You can’t please these people.

I believe in labels and warnings. When you click the information button on your remote and there are warnings about sexual content, swearing and so on. I agree with that because then the parent has the knowledge to pick and choose what their children watch. I do not agree with the fact that McDonald’s not having adverts because parents blame it on their kids being obese. No, it’s not McDonald’s fault. It’s your fault for not being a good parent and saying yes to their every demand. Instead of hindering everyone’s demands, how about you grow a pair and stop ruining the world for the rest of us because you can’t say no to your child without some hassle. Your causing me a lot of hassle by being so irresponsible.

Let’s move onto the Glenn Beck of censorship, Jack Thompson. For those who don’t know Jack Thompson, he is a disbarred attorney who attempted to sue record labels, game distributors, retailers and so on for vast amounts of money for pedalling filth. He’s famous for attempting to get N.W.A.’s albums “Straight Outta’ Compton” and “Efil4zaggin” banned and even more famous for disagreeing with most Rockstar Games outputs like the Grand Theft Auto series, Manhunt and Bully. This is the man who has now been banned from the Florida Bar association for making outrageous claims.

Jack Thompson is a wannabe celebrity, he craves attention and that could be from the attention starved childhood that he possibly had. See, maybe he blames the media instead of blaming his parents because he feels they wouldn’t ignore him unless it was for something else. Or maybe his parents sheltered him from a real childhood. Who knows? All I know is that he tries very hard to get in the public eye with his activism by making outrageous lawsuits which he would never win. He makes claims like a $40m lawsuit against Facebook because it didn’t remove every post insulting him. To be fair, that would take a lot of effort considering most people don’t agree with him and they shouldn’t.

People are always quick to blame the games, the music, the films, the magazines and every other outlet but never quick enough to blame the actual parents or the guilty person. People tried to ban Grand Theft Auto because it, allegedly, taught a six year old boy how to drive but they don’t blame the parent who gave this six year old an eighteen certified game. They blame Counter-Strike: Source for school shootings in Germany, claiming it taught them how to shoot a gun instead of blaming the schools for not stepping in and stopping the child’s bullying and harassment. People blame other people for their own mistakes because they’d rather blame a higher power than realise their own short-comings. Personally, I’d love to individually dump all of their short-comings on them so they realise that the real problems and the real mistakes stem from them.

Everything is getting censored. This isn’t fair. There’s no TV channel, no radio station, no book, no magazine, no films which don’t have to adhere to strict guidelines making them appropriate for audiences. Life isn’t censored so why should the media? The media should be a side part of life, it has become this, a necessity for us so why censor the media when you can’t censor real life? There should be no one accountable for these bad actions bar the people who committed them and the people who failed to stop their children from doing such things. It’s not our fault your children are easily influenced. Try being a parent for once.

The latest in the possible censorship guidelines is for no “sexual dancing” on things such as X-Factor and so on. Let’s take a trip back to the ’80s where Madonna sang Like a Virgin or to the gyrating women in leotards in the past. They weren’t banned but now they should be banned? “It’s a family show, this isn’t fair.” It isn’t fair that you’d rather hinder the pleasure of the majority of viewers so your child can watch auto-tuned tripe? Makes sense that WE should bend to YOUR children. If you don’t like what your child is seeing, don’t let them see it. It’s a simple concept which I’m incessantly chanting here and that is to be a good parent and instead of changing how we view things, stop your children from viewing things.

Another thing which possibly in the censor pipeline is the ban of homosexual kissing and erotic homosexual scenes in TV programmes. Now that is plain homophobic and wrong in terms of equality. Heterosexual kisses and erotic scenes are not banned but homosexual ones are? This has probably stemmed from the lesbian storyline in Coronation Street which has been deemed inappropriate. In fact, a disgusting 300,000 complained about the first lesbian kiss scene. It’s good to see that homophobia and bigotry is still here today. They claimed it “glamorised lesbianism”. Because of that one kiss your daughters will be lesbians and men will become gay as well because they saw it happen in a TV show and the human race will stop procreating and no longer exist. No, that’s NOT what will happen you pea-brained, moronic, insensitive bigots. Although, at this rate, I think it will be the best thing to happen to this cesspool.

Apparently, real things happening in the media shouldn’t be allowed. Guess what? These things happen. Man up and start to face reality and stop sheltering everyone from real things. Being naive is not a good thing. We should all have the power of knowledge and the standard moral fibre to know that killing a prostitute after having sex with her to get your money back is very wrong. If you don’t, check yourself into a mental asylum. Games are an escape, that is their real purpose. The media as a whole is a form of artistic escapism based on possible real events. They’re all hypothetical. Some we’d like to explore, some we’d gladly like to avoid. Either way, we should know of these things otherwise curiosity kills the cat.


  1. I really enjoyed this and completely agree. The X-Factor performance was Christina Aguilera's and it really wasn't that bad at all. It was hardly sex on stage. Plus, what's the worst that could have happened if a child had seen it?

    I remember reading the thing about how Coronation Street was "glamorising lesbianism" and I was most annoyed. The reason it got so many complaints was because the majority of people who watch it are of the older generation who are, quite frankly, homophobic. What does "glamorising lebianism" even mean anyway? Making it seem compeltely normal, and that not every gay person has to be miserable when they come out? Uccccch.

    Anyway, this was great. And a great escape from my revision 8)

  2. Thanks. I'm glad you agree, or I'd punch you! :P Well, kids will go out wearing the exact clothing and grinding on random backing dancers. NO, they aren't THAT impressionable and if they are, don't let them watch it!

    I read it and I was just disgusted with it. Yeah and they are homophobic, it's terrible.

    Haha, you should be revising. :P