First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  Next  Last
Post Reply "It's Not Censorship When WE Do It!"
35017 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
F
Offline
Posted 10/25/15 , edited 10/25/15
I'll open with this: based on the synopsis, the art sample provided in the article, and the fact that only two chapters got out I question whether these criticisms were sound. The work seems to have a perfectly good premise, and I actually think it might be able to do a lot of good if it's as harmless as it seems.

With that said, a manga artist offers their work up for public criticism when they decide to submit it for publishing. That readers are critical of published works isn't a problem whether their criticisms are ultimately valid or not, and how a manga artist responds to the criticism they receive is ultimately their own decision to make. This artist withdrew her work from publication and began modifying its plot voluntarily. She decided that modifying the plot was the best way to respond to the criticisms she was receiving, and even assuming she did so under pressure from Kodansha she (like every manga artist who submits a manuscript to a publisher) understood full well that she may have to do so in response to either public reception of her work or the expectations of her publisher. Editors and writers have this sort of back and forth every day, and everyone involved keeps the commercial viability of the work in mind. I don't see what all the fuss is about.
179 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23 / F
Offline
Posted 10/25/15 , edited 10/25/15
Well, considering Mark Twain purposefully wrote stories of actual moral value that were designed to offend everybody at the same time, I am pretty sure he is quite proud that his works are still doing just that. I mean, the guy was brilliant. Huckleberry Finn, with a rebellious brat helping a runaway slave run away from evil white slavemaster while calling him degrading names? South Park hasn't even gone that far yet. And Shakespeare was, well Shakespeare. A man of his times who still bent the rules as much as he could without getting his head cut off, and he did a darn good job too. It's dangerous to be an author
Trust me though. When too many in the government says reading books is dangerous...and suppression of ideas becomes the norm...so do holocausts...just sayin'.
6373 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
31 / M / The Abyss of Time
Offline
Posted 10/25/15

BlueOni wrote:


I agree with you and I'd say the 'fuss' is usual over-reaction to any perceived censorship of any kind (cause having set bounds is such an atrocious thing /sarcasm).
14733 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 10/26/15 , edited 10/26/15

maxgale wrote:Why is it that when the world of Fahrenheit 451 comes around, those who brought it about don't think their books will join the flames as well?


I remember seeing Fahrenheit 451 on a list of "Ten Classic Books Everyone Always Gets WRONG."
In F451's world, books aren't burned because they're "banned", they're burned for being "unnecessary", as society has moved past reading for TV. (Remember, people, this is the future! )

And yes, single Japanese males are TERRIFIED of the social stigma of doing their own "women's work" of keeping their apartment and doing their own cooking. On one news segment about "Cooking for Bachelors" classes, those attending were afraid to be shown on screen, and insisted on having their faces mosaic'ed out.
Given that any male in anime who happens to be a good part-time cook (like Sakura's dad in CCS, or Chiaki on Nodame Cantabile) will be depicted doing his ace cooking in a frilly apron, Himozairu's new Japanese idea that it's not a bad thing to be a capable bachelor, in a society where more women want to be single, is revolution that would scare even Galileo.
toxxin 
43361 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / In my own little...
Offline
Posted 10/26/15 , edited 10/26/15

Rujikin wrote:

Everything is insulting to someone. Everyone on here are watching things that someone finds morally corrupt or offensive. Therefore ban everything to avoid offending anyone.


You say that jokingly but there are progressives who truly think that way and its disturbing how willing administration entities and public figures are to subserviently give them everything they want for fear of social media repercussions.

Nothing should be sacred and everything should be up for debate; plain and simple.
Posted 10/26/15
Yeah, I wanted Nymphet too.
10831 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
13 / F / California
Offline
Posted 10/26/15

Ejanss wrote:


maxgale wrote:Why is it that when the world of Fahrenheit 451 comes around, those who brought it about don't think their books will join the flames as well?


I remember seeing Fahrenheit 451 on a list of "Ten Classic Books Everyone Always Gets WRONG."
In F451's world, books aren't burned because they're "banned", they're burned for being "unnecessary", as society has moved past reading for TV. (Remember, people, this is the future! )

And yes, single Japanese males are TERRIFIED of the social stigma of doing their own "women's work" of keeping their apartment and doing their own cooking. On one news segment about "Cooking for Bachelors" classes, those attending were afraid to be shown on screen, and insisted on having their faces mosaic'ed out.
Given that any male in anime who happens to be a good part-time cook (like Sakura's dad in CCS, or Chiaki on Nodame Cantabile) will be depicted doing his ace cooking in a frilly apron, Himozairu's new Japanese idea that it's not a bad thing to be a capable bachelor, in a society where more women want to be single, is revolution that would scare even Galileo.


I think the weirdest anime I saw was pretty much "How to wash your prick and other things to keep from being a sick slob"

I'm not sure if that was the real title, but yeah.
3059 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 10/26/15 , edited 10/26/15
I can't really comment on the response to the manga, since I don't have enough information to properly form an opinion. My initial reaction was along the lines of "Seriously? God-dammit." But until I can see the actual complaints I'll withhold any opinion.

On the second issue, with the books in college/university, I did watch a cool video about it. So here it is!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XvoYtUhjRWM

Is an Idea Channel video about how trigger warnings could possibly further conversations about material, instead of shutting down any discussions of them.
Posted 10/26/15 , edited 10/26/15
Reminds me of this quote:

"Where they burn books, they will also ultimately burn people." Almansor, Heinrich Heine Written by a Jewish man...who lived in Germany years and years before anything happened. Ah, irony!
27451 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
28 / M / USA! USA! USA!
Offline
Posted 10/26/15 , edited 10/26/15

mlchanges wrote:


maxgale wrote:

....or to be more accurate, the right groups of those on the Left.......


Why try to make this into a left/right, con/lib thing? You know good and well both sides have their pet issues they go nuts over, be it racist language in a period novel or women's anatomy in a health book. A true Liberal or Libertarian should abhor censorship of almost any kind.



Because that is where the censorship is coming from.


What is wrong with correctly identifying where it is coming from?


If you don't, how else are you supposed to address it?




Buckerss wrote:


mlchanges wrote:

Why try to make this into a left/right, con/lib thing? You know good and well both sides have their pet issues they go nuts over, be it racist language in a period novel or women's anatomy in a health book. A true Liberal or Libertarian should abhor censorship of almost any kind.


They're not liberals, they're authoritarian leftists. The issue is that they like to pretend they're liberals. It makes actual liberals look bad.



It might be a cultural thing.

Noticed you're from England, in the States what are basically Socialists have adopted the label "Liberal", even though it is in complete opposition to Classical Liberalism as is known in Europe, and as was known in America itself until the 20th century.




marklebid wrote:

Or of course, you know, maybe it's intended as a product for mass consumption and enough complaints indicate a presentation problem with the publishing vehicle it's in. Butt hurt or not, if people complain about the product you're trying to sell, you fix it to sell. Anyway the article says it's only on hiatus.'

EDIT: from Jisho.org dictionary: Himo: man who is financially dependent on a woman (such as a gigolo or, in the case of a prostitute, a pimp); pimp

Depending on tone and presentation, yeah it would be easy to see the product may turn off some of the male audience by emphasizing that they're training to be leeches rather than "house husbands."




It was a Josei comic, which leads me to believe that men were not even the intended audience, so a market-based evaluation would not apply here.



GrandmasterCoolio wrote:


And while a classroom conversation about emotionally fraught subjects would seem not only advisable but also just part of any decent teaching method, slapping a trigger warning on classic works of literature seems a short step away from book banning, a kind of censorship based on offenses to individual feelings.

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/slippery-slope

I feel that it's an extreme stretch to argue that trigger warnings for books will lead to the banning of books or the censorship of literature. I read through the entire article and failed to find any evidence for this. What I did find was fearmongering and the making of absurd, overwhelmingly egregious claims.

The firemen aren't coming for your books. Calm down, take a deep breath, and think rationally about the situation.

Anyway, the article's criticisms of trigger warnings (ignoring its cries that they will be the downfall of mankind) are something I personally agree with. People shouldn't flee away in terror from sensitive subjects and controversial topics, as far as I'm concerned. Hiding from your past won't make it go away or heal your wounds. If anything, it just makes your situation even worse. If you're constantly worried about shielding yourself from the horrible truths of this world then it'll only hurt all the more when that shield is shattered and your blindfold is ripped away from your eyes by force.

Though you may see no evil, it still exists. Though you may hear no evil, it still exists. Nothing has changed and the world remains as cruel as it did before you attempted to escape into your fantasy-realm. In your endeavor to avoid being "triggered", you've most likely only opened yourself up to the risk of it even more.

That being said, however, people will do as they please. The oversensitive and the misguided will still put the book down when it begins to touch on subject matters not to their liking. Ultimately, the only difference trigger warnings make is whether or not they'll read the story to begin with. Cautionary notices change nothing in the grand scheme of things and the only people they drive away are the ones who probably would have stopped reading anyway once they reached the section pertaining to the controversial subject matter(s). Hence, I find it pointless to get so riled up over them.

They're here to stay, so we might as well just shrug it off and continue on with our lives.



Yet, strangely enough, put a sticker saying "Evolution is just a theory" on textbooks and the crowd applauding trigger warnings find it unacceptable that they be permitted.


Which what I was addressing in the original post. The sheer double standard of the Left when they do or do not consider something censorship.




marklebid wrote:

Yeah, no trigger warnings! I want my media just like I want my food: Absolutely no warnings about what ingredients it may contain.

I mean, real life isn't so nice as to label all the ingredients right? People with shellfish or peanut allergies can easily google the information before digging in to a new food product. Why does everything have to be right there on the box for them!?! Damn lazy liberals ruining everything. I'm not allergic to peanuts, so slapping peanut allergen warnings on things is just ugly text getting in the way.

"Oh, but my face might swell up or I could be sent to the hospital if I accidentally eat peanuts!" What a wuss right?

This is also why I advocate removing the movie and video game rating system: It only panders to those easily offended or scared. If a kid sees Nightmare on Elm Street thinking it might be related to Sesame Street, and consequently can't sleep alone for years, it's simply Darwinism.

/sarcasm



That is a terrible comparison.


Food labels are required because people may be harmed when consuming certain products.


Psychologists have the view that trigger warnings are more harmful than helpful:


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/books/11106670/Trigger-warnings-more-harm-than-good.html




In a world increasingly mediated by images and content that we have no control over, does he think it’s advisable for the media to issue trigger warnings?

“There would be no point,” he said. “You cannot get a person to avoid triggers in their day-to-day lives. It would be impossible.”

But, given a chance to think it over, Basoglu went much further than that. “The media should actually – quite the contrary… Instead of encouraging a culture of avoidance, they should be encouraging exposure.

“Most trauma survivors avoid situations that remind them of the experience. Avoidance means helplessness and helplessness means depression. That’s not good.

“Exposure to trauma reminders provides an opportunity to gain control over them. This is the essence of the treatment that we are using to help trauma survivors. It involves encouraging the patient not to avoid reminders of trauma, but in fact to make a point of exposing themselves to reminders of trauma so that they can develop a tolerance.

“I liken it to a vaccination. You get a small dose of the virus so that the body can develop immunity towards it. Psychologically it’s the same phenomenon.”

When asked why he thinks the subject is rousing such strong emotions, Basoglu laughed down the telephone from his office in Istanbul. “Any form of anxiety and distress is impermissible in Western culture,” he said. Then, very soberly, he added: “Anxiety is not an undesirable emotion. It’s a human emotion.”

Based on his research, Basoglu believes trauma should not be treated with methods that seek to prevent anxiety, but rather the regaining and reconstruction of a sense of control. He referred to a study carried out after a 1999 earthquake in Turkey, for which thousands of survivors were interviewed, their recovery monitored over a period of time. It showed unexpected results at the time.

“To our amazement, those that came across greater opportunities for exposure to trauma reminders recovered faster.” The study showed that the single most important factor that contributed to decline in PTSD and depression among survivors was the return to living at home or in concrete buildings (as opposed to camps where survivors were living in tents). The report stated that living in concrete housing after an earthquake “leads to self-instigated exposure to feared situations, such as staying alone in the house… Exposure helps survivors overcome their earthquake-related fears and to recover from PTSD and depression.”

This stands for many victims of rape and abuse too. One of his patients, a woman from Congo who had been gang-raped, was unable to go to the hairdresser because the men who raped her had dragged her on the floor by her hair. “Of course she was in total avoidance of male hairdressers,” Basoglu told me. “Her treatment – her homework – was to go to a male hairdresser and have her hair done. She recovered. Completely.”



asmalt wrote:

I see way more people whine about trigger warnings merely existing than I do people who ask for them. Just saying. Moreover, I don't get why people complain so much about other people saying "hey, can you put up a warning for rape/child abuse/(insert traumatic content here) please? Thanks." It's really not a big deal. It's similar to movie ratings in that it gives you an idea of what you're getting into.

I don't have PTSD, but that doesn't mean I want to read about that kind of traumatic content, and I appreciate warnings like that so I know to avoid them if I don't want to deal with that sort of content that day. Avoiding that sort of content or even wanting to avoid it says nothing about you as a person, and it also doesn't mean that you suddenly become oblivious to the fact that these things happen in real life. (In fact, the people asking for these warnings are often people who have been victimized by rape/child abuse/other traumatic events, so they are especially aware that these things happen in real life!)

Not touching the censorship thing with an 1000 foot pole though. "Censorship" is yet another word that the internet has ruined.





Like I showed above, it might do more harm than good for the people it ostensibly is meant to help, and seems more to serve as a way to just censor material that is "problematic" for Liberals in America.
Posted 10/26/15

teallerina wrote:

Reminds me of this quote:

"Where they burn books, they will also ultimately burn people." Almansor, Heinrich Heine Written by a Jewish man...who lived in Germany years and years before anything happened. Ah, irony!


Is it irony? I expected it to happen.
Posted 10/26/15

PeripheralVisionary wrote:


teallerina wrote:

Reminds me of this quote:

"Where they burn books, they will also ultimately burn people." Almansor, Heinrich Heine Written by a Jewish man...who lived in Germany years and years before anything happened. Ah, irony!


Is it irony? I expected it to happen.


Well, it's ironic to me as he hit the nail on the head despite not knowing or living to see what would become of Germany. Made even more ironic as he was Jewish.
27451 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
28 / M / USA! USA! USA!
Offline
Posted 10/26/15 , edited 10/26/15

BlueOni wrote:

I'll open with this: based on the synopsis, the art sample provided in the article, and the fact that only two chapters got out I question whether these criticisms were sound. The work seems to have a perfectly good premise, and I actually think it might be able to do a lot of good if it's as harmless as it seems.

With that said, a manga artist offers their work up for public criticism when they decide to submit it for publishing. That readers are critical of published works isn't a problem whether their criticisms are ultimately valid or not, and how a manga artist responds to the criticism they receive is ultimately their own decision to make. This artist withdrew her work from publication and began modifying its plot voluntarily. She decided that modifying the plot was the best way to respond to the criticisms she was receiving, and even assuming she did so under pressure from Kodansha she (like every manga artist who submits a manuscript to a publisher) understood full well that she may have to do so in response to either public reception of her work or the expectations of her publisher. Editors and writers have this sort of back and forth every day, and everyone involved keeps the commercial viability of the work in mind. I don't see what all the fuss is about.



As I said in an earlier reply, the ones offering feedback on this work were men. The work was a Joesei manga. It wasn't a work for that audience and therefore it isn't a valid framework to view it as actors within the market making their views known when they weren't participants to begin with.


The "fuss" is over the power of a whiny mob to interfere with the free market, or the marketplace of ideas.



xCrimsonEX wrote:



I agree with you and I'd say the 'fuss' is usual over-reaction to any perceived censorship of any kind (cause having set bounds is such an atrocious thing /sarcasm).


See above.



Ejanss wrote:


maxgale wrote:Why is it that when the world of Fahrenheit 451 comes around, those who brought it about don't think their books will join the flames as well?


I remember seeing Fahrenheit 451 on a list of "Ten Classic Books Everyone Always Gets WRONG."
In F451's world, books aren't burned because they're "banned", they're burned for being "unnecessary", as society has moved past reading for TV. (Remember, people, this is the future! )

And yes, single Japanese males are TERRIFIED of the social stigma of doing their own "women's work" of keeping their apartment and doing their own cooking. On one news segment about "Cooking for Bachelors" classes, those attending were afraid to be shown on screen, and insisted on having their faces mosaic'ed out.
Given that any male in anime who happens to be a good part-time cook (like Sakura's dad in CCS, or Chiaki on Nodame Cantabile) will be depicted doing his ace cooking in a frilly apron, Himozairu's new Japanese idea that it's not a bad thing to be a capable bachelor, in a society where more women want to be single, is revolution that would scare even Galileo.



Bradbury literally included in the work a closing monologue about how censorship came about due to banning books which offended people, which cascaded into the current society in the novel..


I am well aware of the critics and academics who say, "But really, it was about television, because there are a couple off-hand comments that the protagonists wife isolates herself by literally building a wall of TVs around her!" but from a literary perspective as well as Bradburys' own admission the work dealt with both.


And that's ignoring that the title, and the occupation of the MC and several key characters, is a reference to the burning of books.



Crylliac wrote:

I can't really comment on the response to the manga, since I don't have enough information to properly form an opinion. My initial reaction was along the lines of "Seriously? God-dammit." But until I can see the actual complaints I'll withhold any opinion.

On the second issue, with the books in college/university, I did watch a cool video about it. So here it is!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XvoYtUhjRWM

Is an Idea Channel video about how trigger warnings could possibly further conversations about material, instead of shutting down any discussions of them.





It's PBS.

Also know as the (Far Left) Propaganda Broadcast Station.
2270 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / F / Southern US
Offline
Posted 10/26/15

maxgale wrote:

It's PBS.

Also know as the (Far Left) Propaganda Broadcast Station.


Really, though, can you go five minutes without making some comment on how evil you think the left is? Really, it doesn't even make sense - there is ample diversity of opinion. Hell, I'm as far left as you can really get (Communist) and I don't advocate this sort of stuff.

I could easily make digs on how the right wants to bomb everything outside their country, let companies do whatever they want without consequence and enforce "family values," but I don't. I'm not blind or bigoted enough to think that people are so one dimensional... I'm surprised you can see it that way at all.


PeripheralVisionary wrote:

Yeah, I wanted Nymphet too.


I feel ya, man.
Posted 10/26/15 , edited 10/26/15

Schmooples wrote:


maxgale wrote:

It's PBS.

Also know as the (Far Left) Propaganda Broadcast Station.


Really, though, can you go five minutes without making some comment on how evil you think the left is? Really, it doesn't even make sense - there is ample diversity of opinion. Hell, I'm as far left as you can really get (Communist) and I don't advocate this sort of stuff.

I could easily make digs on how the right wants to bomb everything outside their country, let companies do whatever they want without consequence and enforce "family values," but I don't. I'm not blind or bigoted enough to think that people are so one dimensional... I'm surprised you can see it that way at all.


PeripheralVisionary wrote:

Yeah, I wanted Nymphet too.


I feel ya, man.


I agree with everything you said.
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.