Censorship And Portrayal Of Women

[OutlawTorn81]

I've been around but not posting a whole lot lately. For me, this has been happening on a lot of Metallica forums in the past couple of months. I enjoy listening to Metallica's music a lot, but I've not really been enjoying interacting with a lot of Metallica's fans on issues that aren't related to the band or its music. A lot of the problem boils down to immense disrespect towards women demonstrated by some fans. I'll pop into a forum, one of the top topics will be something derogatory about Britney Spears or another female celebrity, and it just really turns me off from wanting to associate myself and spend my time at that site knowing that such hate speech--and make no mistake, some of the things said about these women are said because they are women, thus making it misogyny, which is as vile and repugnant to me as racist or anti-Semitic speech--exists there.

There is something deeply disturbing, in my view, about the relationship between heavy metal and misogyny. No matter what form it manifests itself, be it the vile "groupie culture," the coarse and dehumanizing lyrics in some songs, or--as I've read about popping up in England--"metal lap-dancing clubs," there's this feeling that I get that being a metal fan and having respect for women can often be mutually exclusive concepts for some people. That feeling also applies to a lot of Metallica's music videos, many of which I dislike because the band has decided that they need to have at least one practically-naked woman in them in order to make them appealing; in addition to the blatantly obvious examples of Turn the Page & Whiskey in the Jar, there's The Unnamed Feeling, Frantic, and Hero of the Day. What really grinds my gears on that subject is the number of threads that came up (on PPM) with people complaining about the "censorship" in Turn the Page. The video portrays a woman getting raped by her john and these guys are pissed off because they don't get to see her titties while it's happening? THAT is the outrageous thing happening?

When I see entire threads dedicated to hating Britney Spears because she got a haircut, and see some of the people commenting in them and the things they're saying, I lose respect for those people and thus lose interest in talking to them. There's no need, any time a public woman's name comes up, for people to refer to her as less than human by calling her a "bitch" or any of the other vile terms that come up to describe women. The absolute lowest moment for me as a member of the Metallica Club came a couple weeks ago when a very woman-hating thread went to the next level of misogyny and a "game" of Marry, Fuck, or Kill broke out. That seriously had me questioning why I associate myself with some Metallica fans online because I would never, in real life, want to hang out with people who had such a negative view of complete strangers that they would deem them to be objects in a game in which one of them would be killed and the other likely raped seeing as she probably would have no interest in having sex with the participants.

And, uhm, that about concludes my rant as to why I haven't posting a whole lot lately. Not that anybody really asked me specifically.

[Fadingtoblack]

<snip>

And, uhm, that about concludes my rant as to why I haven't posting a whole lot lately. Not that anybody really asked me specifically.

And that's totally fair enough!


Luckily (I think), we don't get too much of that here, and if we do it's stomped on pretty quick!


And as for Britney, well she's hurting herself way more than anyone else could I think!

[OutlawTorn81]

<snip>

And, uhm, that about concludes my rant as to why I haven't posting a whole lot lately. Not that anybody really asked me specifically.

And that's totally fair enough!


Luckily (I think), we don't get too much of that here, and if we do it's stomped on pretty quick!


And as for Britney, well she's hurting herself way more than anyone else could I think!

That's true, this place does do a better job than some of the others out there, and for that I am glad.

[porcelmc]

Outlaw, I respect you views about men and both being treated with equal respect. But I think whether or not a video or DVD compilation is censored is not being disrespectful to women or the girl in it. The videos are entertainment. If you are against the points of the videos than obviously thats your choice. I however disagree with censorship as a whole in all regards, whether its fiction or nonfiction. Censorship, to me, is just a simple way to hide or disguise reality. And there is not a single thing in this world that I think adults should not watch on TV. I really don;t. If people don't like something they can change the channel, skip to the next chapter or hit eject. But I dont think some suits who sit in the FCC should have that choice. I think the consumer should ultimately have it. Whether their point is drama or comedy is up for the viewer to decide.

I watch things on TV knowing they are fake. When me and my wife watch horror flicks I am normally sitting there laughing my ass off why she jumps. Again, I see it as entertainment.

But I don't neccessarily care about what people say about celebritites. Whether they are male or female. However I do respect their right to say what they want to say, whether right or wrong. Somtimes people talk behind people's backs or show blatant disrespect to others on msg boards. Yeah it sucks but what can you do. I do understand your frustations on PPM, as I have them as well. However my complaints are of a different realm.

[OutlawTorn81]

Outlaw, I respect you views about men and both being treated with equal respect. But I think whether or not a video or DVD compilation is censored is not being disrespectful to women or the girl in it. The videos are entertainment. If you are against the points of the videos than obviously thats your choice. I however disagree with censorship as a whole in all regards, whether its fiction or nonfiction. Censorship, to me, is just a simple way to hide or disguise reality. And there is not a single thing in this world that I think adults should not watch on TV. I really don;t. If people don't like something they can change the channel, skip to the next chapter or hit eject. But I dont think some suits who sit in the FCC should have that choice. I think the consumer should ultimately have it. Whether their point is drama or comedy is up for the viewer to decide.

I watch things on TV knowing they are fake. When me and my wife watch horror flicks I am normally sitting there laughing my ass off why she jumps. Again, I see it as entertainment.

But I don't neccessarily care about what people say about celebritites. Whether they are male or female. However I do respect their right to say what they want to say, whether right or wrong. Somtimes people talk behind people's backs or show blatant disrespect to others on msg boards. Yeah it sucks but what can you do. I do understand your frustations on PPM, as I have them as well. However my complaints are of a different realm.

Mark, I'm not sure you exactly got the point that I was trying to make there. Any time that violence against women is being portrayed--real or fictional--it is harmful to women. What's worse, is that when that violence is being displayed and being partially censored so that people can't see the woman's breasts, people are complaining that they don't get to see the breasts. Why is it so important to see them? In a world in which there is more pornography available to consume in five lifetimes, why is it so absolutely necessary for these individuals that they get to see that woman's breasts in that situation? This is a truly serious question with potentially grave implications.

Does it kill their buzz because they don't get the full sexuality to go with their violence? I don't really expect you to fully appreciate the extent to which violence & sexuality are increasingly harmonized in today's popular culture; unless you've read the studies or have much interest in actively preventing further violence against women, it's something that most people are (and I would say luckily) ignorant and unaware of. There was a commercial promoting a movie not too long ago in which all but two of the scenes featured acts of violence--not against women, but brutal violence that would shock the hell out of someone in real life. The other two scenes that were sandwiched in between? A half-naked woman seductively walking towards the camera. Note also how many slasher flicks out there feature (naked) women being killed either during, slightly before, or soon after having sex. There have been studies conducted that strongly suggest a causal relationship between violent pornography and violent attitudes and behaviours towards women. There is a video game out there in which one of your objectives is to rape a woman enough times that she actually begins to fall in love with you.

What I was getting at in my post above is that the people who are objecting to the "censorship" of the Metallica videos are doing so, quite possibly, on the grounds that they aren't getting the full sex-and-violence bang for their buck.

Ultimately what you say in your post acquiesces in violence against women. If people are making snuff videos and wanting to put them on TV, you are saying that you would object to the government saying no to that. If people don't want to see snuff films, they can just change the channel and *poof* it disappears. But what about the women who were harmed in the making of the snuff videos? Here's a newsflash: supply doesn't create demand, demand creates supply. Someone wanted to see a woman actually get killed and put out for commercial distribution. Other people who are curious about such a repugnant act will want to check that out. Soon, you have a market for that because now there is a demand to see women getting hurt, degraded, raped, and killed. That leads to more people getting killed. But hey, you can just change the channel, stick your head in the sand, and act as if it's not there. And if the government steps in to protect the safety of women by saying that they won't allow that on TV, you'd actually say no? I have a seriously hard time believing that to be remotely true, especially if the next episode were to feature someone that you know and love.

What can we do? That's easy. We make a stand and say that we will not stand idly by and accept forms of targeted hatred and discrimination. I'm in the process of axing my membership at MetFuk because I am thoroughly disgusted by the Britney Spears thread ongoing there, in which there is a post saying that all Britney needs to be "cured" is an appearance on the BangBus. What a completely vile thing to say, and so typical of an outright misogynist that he actually believes all this young woman needs to get her life back in order is a bunch of men taking turns raping her. That is unacceptable, and to me, if I were to stay there, continue posting and contributing, leeching & seeding, that would be saying that I'm OK with that kind of talk and expression of hatred. Well, I'm not. People may have "the right" to express hate speech--and that is certainly a point which is up for debate--but I have a responsibility as someone who wants a better society not to be complicit in perpetuating hatred against women. With rights come responsibilities, and that's some that citizens in democratic societies tend to forget.

Hope that clears up what I was trying to get across.

[porcelmc]

Mark, I'm not sure you exactly got the point that I was trying to make there. Any time that violence against women is being portrayed--real or fictional--it is harmful to women.

I disagree. I don't think movies out there that promote violence against women actually are the root cause of the violence in real life. To me it's the person, and the choice that person makes. What inspires them is irrelevant to me cause at the end of the day, I am not gonna point the finger at anyone or anything except the person who commits the violence in real life.

Does it kill their buzz because they don't get the full sexuality to go with their violence? I don't really expect you to fully appreciate the extent to which violence & sexuality are increasingly harmonized in today's popular culture; unless you've read the studies or have much interest in actively preventing further violence against women, it's something that most people are (and I would say luckily) ignorant and unaware of. There was a commercial promoting a movie not too long ago in which all but two of the scenes featured acts of violence--not against women, but brutal violence that would shock the hell out of someone in real life. The other two scenes that were sandwiched in between? A half-naked woman seductively walking towards the camera. Note also how many slasher flicks out there feature (naked) women being killed either during, slightly before, or soon after having sex. There have been studies conducted that strongly suggest a causal relationship between violent pornography and violent attitudes and behaviours towards women. There is a video game out there in which one of your objectives is to rape a woman enough times that she actually begins to fall in love with you.

On the topic of movies and video games I have to disagree as well. These are froms of fictional entertainment and its up to the viewer to distinguish between fiction and reality.

What I was getting at in my post above is that the people who are objecting to the "censorship" of the Metallica videos are doing so, quite possibly, on the grounds that they aren't getting the full sex-and-violence bang for their buck.

I see it as entertainment and I like my entertainment as dirty and foul as possible at times. If we are talking about breasts being censored in a fictional video, again I am against the censorship. I really see no point.

Ultimately what you say in your post acquiesces in violence against women. If people are making snuff videos and wanting to put them on TV, you are saying that you would object to the government saying no to that. If people don't want to see snuff films, they can just change the channel and *poof* it disappears. But what about the women who were harmed in the making of the snuff videos? Here's a newsflash: supply doesn't create demand, demand creates supply. Someone wanted to see a woman actually get killed and put out for commercial distribution. Other people who are curious about such a repugnant act will want to check that out. Soon, you have a market for that because now there is a demand to see women getting hurt, degraded, raped, and killed. That leads to more people getting killed. But hey, you can just change the channel, stick your head in the sand, and act as if it's not there. And if the government steps in to protect the safety of women by saying that they won't allow that on TV, you'd actually say no? I have a seriously hard time believing that to be remotely true, especially if the next episode were to feature someone that you know and love.

Ok here I have to agree with you. When acts being displayed on TV are nonfictional crimes, then yes I would have a problem with that. If we were watching actual footage of motorcycle crashes with limbs and heads flying everywhere than I would say show it on TV. Thats what I was referring to. But yeah, illegal acts, I would say I am against those without question.

What can we do? That's easy. We make a stand and say that we will not stand idly by and accept forms of targeted hatred and discrimination. I'm in the process of axing my membership at MetFuk because I am thoroughly disgusted by the Britney Spears thread ongoing there, in which there is a post saying that all Britney needs to be "cured" is an appearance on the BangBus. What a completely vile thing to say, and so typical of an outright misogynist that he actually believes all this young woman needs to get her life back in order is a bunch of men taking turns raping her. That is unacceptable, and to me, if I were to stay there, continue posting and contributing, leeching & seeding, that would be saying that I'm OK with that kind of talk and expression of hatred. Well, I'm not. People may have "the right" to express hate speech--and that is certainly a point which is up for debate--but I have a responsibility as someone who wants a better society not to be complicit in perpetuating hatred against women. With rights come responsibilities, and that's some that citizens in democratic societies tend to forget.

Personally I cannot say that I have read the thread over there. I really am just not interested in that kind of stuff. I come to these boards to talk about music primarily but do talk about other stuff on occasssion. But if people are cracking jokes or whatever and there is nothing illegal about it I have no problem with it. Most of the time they are just talkin trash. And I don't take that stuff seriously. If she was in the thread herself posting maybe it would be a problem. But comedians do this same thing all the time against celebrities. Not sure if thats your cup of tea but to me its the same discussion just in a different venue. I am OK when comedians do it so I am also OK when internet strangers do it.

And yeah I understand what you are saying however I disagree with alot of it. Nothing personal as always dude.

[OutlawTorn81]

One thing that I think we can agree on is the topic/issue of personal responsibility and being able to distinguish between reality and non-reality. You and I and many reasonable people are clearly able to do that, but many also cannot. A lot of people describe their porn consumption as "purely harmless fantasy," but then there is the truly awful tale I read last night about a guy that violently raped his girlfriend simply because she asked him to turn the volume on the the porn down, and acted out one of his rape "fantasies" on her. The young woman, while going through PTSD, committed suicide. It's pretty clear in that example that the man was heavily influenced by his usage and consumption of pornography to commit an act of violence against her, one that ultimately resulted in her death.

Again, of course not all porn users commit rape, just as not every graphic murder one watches in a movie will result in that atrocity being carried out in real life. But it is painfully clear that there are those who cannot distinguish reality from fantasy and who are inspired by some of the things that they watch/play/engage in to commit them. The study that I referred to in my previous post demonstrated a very strong causal relationship between heavy consumption of violent pornography and negative attitudes and increased levels of aggression against women. In that case, it was found that there exists evidence that regular consumption of a medium that does not regard women as equal human being can result in a changed perception of real, actual women that regards them as less than human. There's an old saying about why they got rid of XXX theatres that goes along the lines of "If you watch a movie about ice cream for two hours, chances are you're going to want an ice cream cone afterwards." Well, apply that to a porn theatre and the sight of a young woman walking around by herself. Not everybody who used to watch porn in theatres raped women afterwards, but if you're a woman who was raped by a guy (or two or three) who just came out of that theatre, you're going to be lobbying really damn hard for that theatre to be shut down on grounds of posing a danger to women's safety aren't you?

Individual responsibility and accountability are two things that are very crucial in all of this discussion. Judging by the absurd and shockingly high statistics about the prevalence of rape and sexual assault, it is clear that not everybody is capable of--or willing--exercising personal restraint and responsibility to not cause harm to the people around them. How much value do we--and should we--place on personal security against the entertainment of others? This is a serious question that belongs more in a house of government than a Metallica message board, but nonetheless, how many people are we willing to tolerate being harmed and/or killed as a result of some forms of entertainment in which there is a demonstrated causality between consumption and violence? Whatever that number is, we haven't reached it yet as a society. It's a question that is right up there with preemptive/preventive confinement of potential murderers or terrorists in terms of numbers involved, ie. if the government acts against five people it believes may kill thousands, is it right for them to act preemptively, even though the evidence may not be concrete?

But now I'm waaaay beyond the scope of regular discussion of Metallica-related things.

[porcelmc]

Yeah that was pretty deep dude. But again, I see what you are saying, and they are points well deserved of expression. I just cannot agree with you though. It was very interesting to read through your point of view.

I don't know if XXX theaters still exist in the US or anywhere in NA, but they do still exist in parts of the world. As well as live sex shows. But one thing to remember, is that where these places exist, there are normally red light districts in the vicinity. There are still tons of red light districts that remain in full operation in the US and throughout NA. So one could argue that if the XXX theater was accross the street from a red light district, rapes would not occur as a direct result. And to be clear, I fully support what any women wants to do with her body. In many cases, no one is forcing it on them. But those who are forced to do it, well thats a different story.

[OutlawTorn81]

You've just opened up a whole new can of worms when it comes to personal freedoms and women's "choice" to use their bodies in the pornography industry. The basic reality is that, for many--many more than those who do freely choose the "business"--it is not a fair or free choice, but rather the option of last resort and the refuge for many young women who escape a horrendous personal situation at home (i.e. an abusive parent or relative) and have nowhere else to turn because they don't have a street address or a resume. The overwhelming number of women in pornography want to get out of it as soon as possible; same goes for prostituted women. If you feel so inclined, give a read to some of Robert Jensen's articles on pornography, for they will really help to open your eyes to just some of the problems that women face in, and getting out of, pornography.

This next point (and final one for now because I really have to get to work): Jenna Jameson, the most well-known of all porn stars, who represents the .01% of women who are at the top of the industry and is thus not even representative of what most women are like in terms of pay scale, options, etc., still cannot even watch any of her work. She has said this herself. The reason? She was gang-raped when she was 16 years old, and greatly fears that seeing her body used in the fashion that it is on-screen will trigger those horrible memories. What does that say about a person's ability to take pride in their own work and the extent to which pornography approximates rape? If it were "just sex on camera" as so many ignorant people claim it is, surely she would have little trouble watching herself enjoying sex. But it's not "just sex on camera." The Jensen articles, particularly "A Cruel Edge," dramatically reinforce what pornography truly is and why even its most famous female star cannot even watch her own performances.

Read what Jensen has to say, just one, and we'll go from there.

[porcelmc]

Well I may have opened that can of worms up, but I did it only to make a point. I am not as educated as you on the mental effects of this lifestyle for women. It does seem interesting though.

But back to the original point, of censorship, I retain my stance. Obviously it upsets you that people were anrgy that the Turn the Page video was censored. That was the reason why I originally entered this thread. And after all this discussion it has only made me realize more how stupid it is to censor that stuff. If the person didn;t want to do it, she shouldn't have to. We can go on and on about why people film pornography and the effects of it. But you're right, its another debate which I don;t think is really relevant to the topic of censorship as a whole. I don;t think people censor stuff specifically to appease the feelings of the person comitting the act being censored. Because if that was the case, they wouldn't or shouldn't have filmed it in the first place. Censorship is done primarily to appease the ratings,sales,televised prospects, and for viewer concern among other things.