I just can’t even stand the personality of someone who’s first fucking instinct when they see violent or sexual media is “If I don’t like it no one should be allowed to see it.” Fuck off.
That’s a rehash episode they did years or even decades later (hard to say with the simpsons offhand) when the writing got a lot more “phone it in”. The episode they tweet references an episode from the second season and she’s mad about itchy and scratchy, the meta cartoon inside the show.
As others have said though this argument predates the simpsons by basically the entirety of modern human existence
itchy and scratchy, the meta cartoon inside the show
Where’s Poochie?
He died on the way back to his home planet.
Sorry you had to find out this way.
The comments on that are pretty awful. Bunch of reactionaries using it as an excuse to dish on marginalised groups.
The worst are the people who are ok with their kids watching extreme violence or gore, like a SAW movie, but freak the hell out if their kid might see some exposed breasts, let alone a sex scene.
That’s victorian era morals super charged by protestant evangelical puritanism. Kids are perfect innocent angels that become hyper corrupted by the sin of nakedness and the flesh.
The USA never seems to get past this in particular.
$0.02: Whenever it’s an immediate gut reaction with a disproportionate response like that, it’s un-diagnosed trauma; the stimulus is a trigger. Sad part is, “fixing” that involves access to really good healthcare, and a strong will to change one’s self in order to not feel like that anymore. What’s worse is that, statistically speaking, the abuse is usually perpetrated by someone they know (e.g. family member), which makes it extra hard to accept and overcome.
Meanwhile, we have free support systems (e.g. “religion”, TV, Social Media) that encourage and directly exploit mal-adaptive behavior and triggers.
I hate that this meme makes it sound like “can you believe we’ve been talking about the same thing since 1990?!” completely ignoring the Moral Majority movement of the 80s and even all censorship efforts in the decades prior to that.
Yeah, there’s nothing new under the sun. These conversations are likely as old as humanity. It’s an ongoing and living discussion about societal boundaries. I don’t see it being “resolved” any time soon either.
That Venus of Willendorf, all with her big ol titties hangin out like smdh fr fr.
What a shame that the efforts of Frank Zappa, John Denver, and Dee Snyder are all but forgotten.
Dee Snider’s speech at the Senate Hearing is a fucking banger.
Or, you know… the Nazis.
Kind of a dumb reason to hate it. Because it doesn’t include the entire breadth of this issue?
I guess that’s one way to read it, but the Simpsons is still in living memory for most people since it’s still running so it’s more relatable thread for people
This was a common trope in TV and comedy going back to at least the 1970s. And it echoed the long and storied tradition of US efforts at censorship even in the face of constitutional protections. These disputes had reverberations, with the censorship encouraging illicit consumption and the protests helping define what future censors focus in on.
George Carlin had a famous act - 7 Words You Can’t Say On TV. Curiously enough, this resulted in Rep. Doug Ose (R-California) introducing H.R. 3687, the “Clean Airwaves Act”, in 2003 that sought to codify a derivative list of Carlin’s Dirty Words as legally designated “Profane” by US code.
“The Filthy Fifteen” was a list of 15 songs compiled by Parents Music Resource Center (PMRC), a project lead by Tennessee Senator and future US Vice President Al Gore’s wife Tipper, which the organization demanded be banned from the airwaves back in 1985. This kicked off an extended back-and-forth between artists and congresscritters, as they argued over what constituted infringements on speech.
“Banned in Boston” is a phrase that was employed from the late 19th century through the mid-20th century, to describe a literary work, song, motion picture, or play which had been prohibited from distribution or exhibition in Boston, Massachusetts. During this period, Boston officials had wide authority to ban works featuring “objectionable” content, and often banned works with sexual content or foul language. This even extended to the $5 bill from the 1896 “Educational” series of banknotes featuring allegorical figures that were partially nude.
One could go so far as to describe it as a kind-of Hegelian dialectic cycle
So you’re telling me it didn’t completely change society immediately after airing?
I still have that nagging impression that we’re going backwards, that we were already further ahead a few years ago than we are now. The 90s and early 00s weren’t perfect, but they felt more like good things are possible.
Thank you I have some reading next time I want to be depressed
1990 was 35 years ago. How exactly do you define “immediate”?
1990+1
Wow. I just realized how old I am.
Well, not that chocked. Probably not all society was paying attention at the time. Or since.
Ah, the 90s, so long ago. I can’t believe those ancient, backwards people understood censorship.
Well, civil right were invented in 2000 (shortly after the internet came along) but I guess some people are just ahead of their time.
Isn’t that the Bioshocl character
Impossible. The apolitical gem BioShock?
Hey. Don’t bring politics into my BioShock.
Relevant Onion article https://theonion.com/you-cant-even-watch-a-movie-anymore-without-seeing-some-theme-explored/
Where did Hollywood go so wrong? I thought movies were supposed to be an escape from reality, a chance to put your worries aside and not have to think about any underlying ideas or concepts. Well, not anymore. Take this Sonic The Hedgehog 3 movie they got out now: I watched it expecting to be dazzled and entertained, and instead I had to sit there as they introduced a big, central theme and then spent nearly two hours exploring the living hell out of it. Who wants that?
The only freedom which counts is the freedom to do what some other people think to be wrong. There is no point in demanding freedom to do that which all will applaud. All the so-called liberties or rights are things which have to be asserted against others; who claim that if such things are to be allowed, their own rights are infringed or their own liberties threatened. This is always true, even when we speak of the freedom to worship, of the right of free speech or association, or of public assembly. If we are to allow freedoms at all there will constantly be complaints that either the liberty itself or the way in which it is exercised is being abused, and, if it is a genuine freedom, these complaints will often be justified. There is no way of having a free society in which there is not abuse. Abuse is the very hallmark of liberty.
Lord Hailsham, Lord Chancellor of England
Censorship isn’t recent. It’s been with us since the dawn of civilization.
Socrates, while defying attempts by the Athenian state to censor his philosophical teachings, was brought charges that led to his death. The conviction is recorded by Plato: in 399 BC, Socrates went on trial[8] and was subsequently found guilty of both corrupting the minds of the youth of Athens and of impiety (asebeia,[9] “not believing in the gods of the state”),[10] and was sentenced to hemlock.
Censorship is another way to wield power, and all of civilization is about power.
Agree with your thesis. We don’t live in some society disconnected from the ancient past. We aren’t any smarter, self aware or capable of better discernment. Everything is about power and always will be.
Episode name ?
It was “Itchy & Scratchy & Marge”, S2E9
Ty
You’re right! Here I was thinking it was the season 15, Marge vs. Singles, Seniors, Childless Couples and Teens and Gays
To be fair to Marge, she only cared about violence being a bad thing after Maggie (the baby) got influenced and beat up Homer.
So it was less that she just doesn’t like it, but it actually affected her negatively, which is still on point.
I’m committing to Godwin’s Law:
Mike Godwin: “By all means, compare these shitheads to the Nazis”
But also, the qualification of certain types of art as “degenerate” is a symptom of second feature of Ur-Fascism, “traditionalism.”
Traditionalism implies the rejection of modernism. Both Fascists and Nazis worshiped technology, while traditionalist thinkers usually reject it as a negation of traditional spiritual values. However, even though Nazism was proud of its industrial achievements, its praise of modernism was only the surface of an ideology based upon Blood and Earth (Blut und Boden). The rejection of the modern world was disguised as a rebuttal of the capitalistic way of life, but it mainly concerned the rejection of the Spirit of 1789 (and of 1776, of course). The Enlightenment, the Age of Reason, is seen as the beginning of modern depravity. In this sense Ur-Fascism can be defined as irrationalism.
Umberto Eco, Ur-Fascism
Godwin’s Law stopped applying when the internet became overrun with literal Nazis. Don’t let them use that shit as cover.
Imagine thinking anyone with a different view than you is a Nazi
I know right, that would be crazy
I should hope I have different views to Nazis.
Youre probably an alt right fascist
Because I’m not a nazi? Fascinating conclusion.
And the horse I rode in on?!?!
Itchy, Itchy, Itchy, Scratchy, Scratchy, Scratchy! The Itchy and Scratchy Show!!!
