Political Correctness

[Nekusagi]

Seriously, I'm annoyed with how obsessed this country (America) is with "protecting the children" and therefore being PC. What set this off is my hearing that Disney is editing all scenes of smoking out of its movies. Now, when I was really young, my favorite movie was 101 Dalmatians (the animated one from the 60s.) EVERYONE in that movie smoked. Roger smoked, Cruella smoked, I'm pretty sure Horace and Jasper smoked too. I probably watched my tape of that a good 50 times or so. And am I an addict now? No. I think smoking is disgusting and support any laws banning/restricting it. Throw in all the edits we got in Pokemon whenever alcohol was involved (I'm sorry, Giovanni does NOT drink milk), the way Warner Bros. is yanking all the old cartoons involving smoking, and countless other "OHNOES THE CHILDREN!" problems, not to mention the fact that practically every American-made Saturday morning cartoon these days is bland, inoffensive crap (remember Animaniacs, anyone?), that there's talk of giving R ratings to ANY movie with smoking, and in general, just the fact that parents apparently can't be parents anymore and OMG it's the industry's fault if kids do something stupid (thanks, Jack Thompson), and...

Wow. It just enrages me in general, and I had to rant about it here. I mean, Japanese kids see worse than we do in their shows, and they're okay. So, what's the deal?

 

[Habunake]

I like how bastardized Halloween has become thanks to it.

Wow. It just enrages me in general, and I had to rant about it here. I mean, Japanese kids see worse than we do in their shows, and they're okay. So, what's the deal?
__________________

Ironically, they actually abhor violence more then Americans (No More Heroes is a good example).

 

[UtterAddict]

Refresh my memory, is Jack Thompson that dude who raised some video game's rating and tried to ban the sims 2?(I mildly remember the simming community spazzing about it, but I haven't been there since I got back into Pokemon. If I had both Pokemon and Sims 2 ruling my life my parents would go insane.XD)

 

[Nekusagi]

Ah, you mean, happy pumpkins and witches and Family Trick Or Treat nights in churches instead of dead things and kids walking around the neighborhood actually (God forbid) having fun? We have 9/11 to thank for that one. Death's not supposed to be funny anymore-although in my part of the country, it's improving- KMart was selling heads on pikes and rubber body parts when I went in there yesterday to buy some plushies. Which I never thought I'd see in a KMart. Hell, even Wal Mart is selling that robotic guy that takes his head off now (and nearly got sued for it, too). Yeah. Leave it to the religious whackjobs to ruin The Most Wonderful Time of the Year for us antisocial types.

And I know Japan gets freaked out over violence- I remember reading how the Japanese RE4 was censored all over the place. I mean about sex and stuff. Hell, if they even tried a gag like inflatable boobs (I think we all know what I'm talking about) on primetime TV in America, you know the TV police would be screaming bloody murder. But in Japan, to have a guy on a kids' cartoon inflate them and crack jokes about it (around an 11 year old girl, no less- someone call Chris Hansen), it's A-OK.

 

[Misty]

Mostly it's the fault of the Christian Right, which has resurged in recent years as a backlash against growing liberalism (gay rights, abortion, etc.) and atheism. My guess is, the result will be a counter-backlash of even greater liberalism in the coming decades - so who knows what you'll see in the television of the 2020s or the 2030s.

 

[Jo-Jo]

Ooooo. *eagerly awaits the 2020s and 2030s*

My general experience of political correctness is groups of white heterosexual middle-class men sitting around in pubs complaining about how oppressed they are now that they aren't allowed to say offensive things about minorities. America and Britain must have different cultural problems.

 

[GrnMarvl14]

Seriously, I'm annoyed with how obsessed this country (America) is with "protecting the children" and therefore being PC.

There's a difference between the "protecting the children" stuff and political correctness. While they CAN overlap, political correctness is more about trying to ensure equality, usually carried out by groups like the ACLU (who are, nowadays, largely insane). Those who feel children need to be protected are more often Christians (usually leaning towards the Christian extremist groups), who feel that movies/television/video games/music is corrupting the youth, while forgetting their own acts of youthful indiscretion and how it had nothing to do with any of those things.

What set this off is my hearing that Disney is editing all scenes of smoking out of its movies

Almost ALL movie and television production companies are doing that with current films and television shows. Going back and undoing them from the past is...nothing at all. It's not like any Disney film is based around a character smoking. So what if it's removed? Will Cruella seem any less cruel? And cutting out smoking isn't a political correctness move, it's from the anti-smoking, public health advocates who feel that ANY smoking will result in EVERYONE smoking and dying of cancer.

I like how bastardized Halloween has become thanks to it.

That's the result of Christians getting pissy about schools changing their "Christmas breaks" to "Winter breaks" and similar things.

Mostly it's the fault of the Christian Right, which has resurged in recent years as a backlash against growing liberalism (gay rights, abortion, etc.) and atheism. My guess is, the result will be a counter-backlash of even greater liberalism in the coming decades - so who knows what you'll see in the television of the 2020s or the 2030s.

Keep in mind, political correctness was pushed into the mainstream by liberals. And there's always a push back. Look at all shows aimed at teenagers and how they're practically all just softcore porn (the writing's sure on par).

 

[The Big Al]

101 Dalmations who because butchered if they removed the smoking scenes. Cruella would be removed almost completely because she's never without her lit cigarette holder. Oliver and Company would suffer the same fate because Sykes ALWAYS had a cigar between his teeth. They can take out smoking from their new movies, however, this is silly.

But why can't parent teach their kids to not smoke. Because trust me, smokers are everywhere. As soon as I leave a study hall someone lights up. You can't edit that. The parents need to teach them it's wrong.

 

[Nekusagi]

101 Dalmations who because butchered if they removed the smoking scenes. Cruella would be removed almost completely because she's never without her lit cigarette holder.

And Roger. He holds a pipe almost constantly. (My brother listens to talk radio a lot, and he said they were just going to digitally alter the scenes, a la 4Kids I guess. Which should be interesting.)

And what about Pinocchio? I mean, there was UNDERAGE smoking (and drinking, too) in that, but it was really pretty cautionary- they all ended up becoming donkeys. So how are they going to treat THAT?

This is insane.

 

[Zeta]

Yeah, smoking in most Disney movies is done by THE VILLAINS. It's mostly a sign of how evil they are . . . so I really don't see the point in removing it.

 

[Bartholomew Kuma]

I guess this is a different complaint to political correctness than I was thinking. I think my answer is still about the same though:

I don't think that the US and countries like it are ready for that. While I agree that old programs shouldn't be edited to today's standards, I do think we need political correctness.

If it isn't obvious now, it'll never be obvious in the future that it's the parent's fault. However, I do believe that showing in force that it is the parents fault should wipe the creator's hands clean.

That's basically why I'm for the ESRB. If Cindy Lu Who wants to buy her kid, "Grandma Kills the Babies with a Chain Saw 4", when it is clearly marked with the ratings on the front and the back, then they can't turn around and sue because they feel their child is emotionally damaged.

Pardon my language, but that is fucking stupid! You don't see things like parents suing alcohol companies for their kids becoming alcoholics because they let them do underage drinking! Why should it be any different for any other product!? That's why I hate Jack Thompson, I'm sure he knows the same crap, but he's taking advantage of his followers because he knows they don't! It's a penny chaser, like selling Dinosaur Insurance to people coming out of a Jurassic Park film!

That said, kid shows should stay kid shows. Pokemon shouldn't just start allowing Ash and friends to curse and show Jessie, James, Meowth, and Giovanni with alcoholic beverages in the American version. The rating system is in place, parents should expect the show to stay in that range. Sure it'd probably get higher ratings with an older audience, but that still a bad idea. Just like Toonami should stay a teen/pre teen block, and Adult Swim a young adult/ adult block. Warnings should be established, AS shouldn't go back to PG and TV14 rated shows only.

It's just not possible to control what a kid does 24/7, but you can at least control their environment.

I guess, though, I can be conflicted because I don't believe letting people smoke and drink on screen makes kids want to smoke all the time. I think it has more to do with the role model factor. Showing superman smoke= bad, showing Dr. Doom smoke = not so bad. I think this should be case and point in one piece, making Sanji a smoker will probably influence kids to smoke, but making smoker smoke isn't. I guess I should also add that I like how they handle alcohol in the new one piece. Kids don't need to be told that it is juice, they'll believe that it is juice or something non-alcoholic if nothing is said. If someone points out that it is milk, people will get suspicious, just censor the sign don't shovel ideas down their throats.

Some of the old cartoons really are designed to influence kids to smoke, or at least view smoking in a good light. (I don't mean like in 101 Dalmatians or the Rescuers, but in old cartoons showing characters like Bugs bunny or Daffy Duck smugly enjoying a cigar or something) still don't believe they should be censored, I just think it should be something shameful that the company should live with. I mean, there are tons of old cartoons that are banned, and boy do they deserve to be, but it shouldn't be something they suddenly should hide.

/end rant

 

[GrnMarvl14]

101 Dalmations who because butchered if they removed the smoking scenes. Cruella would be removed almost completely because she's never without her lit cigarette holder. Oliver and Company would suffer the same fate because Sykes ALWAYS had a cigar between his teeth. They can take out smoking from their new movies, however, this is silly.

But why can't parent teach their kids to not smoke. Because trust me, smokers are everywhere. As soon as I leave a study hall someone lights up. You can't edit that. The parents need to teach them it's wrong.

...They can take out the smoking without taking out the character. Check out One Piece.

Yeah, smoking in most Disney movies is done by THE VILLAINS. It's mostly a sign of how evil they are . . . so I really don't see the point in removing it.

If ALL an evil character does is smoke...then how evil can they really be?

 

[Nekusagi]

This isn't about ratings. Ratings are a good thing. It's the morons in Congress who are trying to ban stuff based on them that's the problem.

However, your argument contradicts itself.

The problem with that is, kids see their parents drinking or lighting up a smoke in real life. And if you take a kid to almost any sporting event held outdoors, there's gonna be drinking/smoking there. So are we supposed to censor real life, as well? Should we ban children from NASCAR races and football games because you see beer ads all over the stadium? And the only character on Pokemon we've ever seen drinking IS Giovanni. Guess what? He's... a villain! But this wasn't meant to be a dub vs. original discussion, just one about puritanical US standards. Either way, if kids see their parents doing it themselves, you can't claim you're trying to protect them. And do you have any evidence that they were trying to promote smoking in the old Looney Tunes cartoons? Cigarettes are props- they can be used to describe a character. Speaking as a writer, the habits you give characters can say a lot about them, and they're a huge part.

 

[Nekusagi]

...They can take out the smoking without taking out the character. Check out One Piece.

The point is, they're butchering CLASSICS.

Is that really worth "protecting the children" over? I mean, it's an outrage when they do paint edits to anime, but not Disney classics?

 

[The Big Al]

The problem is many scenes depnded on someone smoking. Sykes blew smoke in Fagen's face in one scene of Oliver and Company. Not to mention it would look weird for him to be talking with his teeth clenched for no reason. And in 101 Dalmations (since this is being used as the example the most) Cruella puts out her cigarette in a muffin one scene and Jasper flicks his cigar ashes into Horris' sandwich. Good God, I know these scenes by heart X(

Pokemon has only occasional and light swearing (like damn and hell). Which can be lightened to darn and no one cares about people saying hell anymore. As you don't have Pokemon characters falling down drunk (at leat not anymore but even 4Kids kept Bulbasaur and Meowth drunk as skunks even though they removed them drinking). So the editting isn't needed.

People forget cartoon shorts weren't meant for just kids at first. They were wedged between the week's news reel and the second feature. They were meant to entertain the entire audiance.

I don't see why some people are so obssessed with denying the existance of our entertainment history. Things have changed over the past century. What was acceptable in the 1940's is not acceptable now. However, they still happened and we should learn from them, not run away from them.

 

[GrnMarvl14]

The problem with that is, kids see their parents drinking or lighting up a smoke in real life. And if you take a kid to almost any sporting event held outdoors, there's gonna be drinking/smoking there. So are we supposed to censor real life, as well? Should we ban children from NASCAR races and football games because you see beer ads all over the stadium?

That's why most of these places are moving to ban cigarettes, and quite a few are banning alcohol.

And do you have any evidence that they were trying to promote smoking in the old Looney Tunes cartoons? Cigarettes are props- they can be used to describe a character. Speaking as a writer, the habits you give characters can say a lot about them, and they're a huge part.

Actually, most television shows from the 50s WERE promoting cigarettes. It was the norm. So the cartoons followed suit. You also had extremely racist characters. Should we bring those back because they're classics?

I think the removing of cigarettes from cartoons is ridiculous, but there's no really good argument against the removal.

The point is, they're butchering CLASSICS.

Show me ONE cartoon that would be "butchered" by it. Show me ONE that would lose out on the plot, or would make a villain any less a villain. If you can, then I can show you a cartoon that wasn't any good to begin with.

Is that really worth "protecting the children" over? I mean, it's an outrage when they do paint edits to anime, but not Disney classics?

I don't see the problem in either one. Take 'em out. Leave 'em. I don't care. If the inclusion or exclusion of a cigarette makes or breaks ANYTHING, then it was crap to begin with.

The problem is many scenes depnded on someone smoking. Sykes blew smoke in Fagen's face in one scene of Oliver and Company.

Would taking that scene out REALLY make him less of a villain?

Not to mention it would look weird for him to be talking with his teeth clenched for no reason.

Again, One Piece. There, you have a character with his mouth wide open with smoke coming out for NO REASON.

And in 101 Dalmations (since this is being used as the example the most) Cruella puts out her cigarette in a muffin one scene and Jasper flicks his cigar ashes into Horris' sandwich. Good God, I know these scenes by heart X(

And how does that help to move the plot along? How does its exclusion damage the overall plot?

People forget cartoon shorts weren't meant for just kids at first. They were wedged between the week's news reel and the second feature. They were meant to entertain the entire audiance.

But times change. Guns were meant to be used by militias to help against Indian attacks and packs of armed, roving bandits where there weren't police to assist. Now they're used for...well...every OTHER reason. Times change.

I don't see why some people are so obssessed with denying the existance of our entertainment history.

No one's denying, they're just trying to not make it blatantly racist/unhealthy.

However, they still happened and we should learn from them, not run away from them.

How does Cruella smoking help anyone learn ANYTHING?

 

[Zeta]

How does Cruella smoking help anyone learn ANYTHING?

Only evil people smoke. Like I said.

 

[The Big Al]

Would taking that scene out REALLY make him less of a villain?

Actually yes because the scene is what establishes Sykes' role in the movie. There's more going on in the scene than the smoking usually.

Again, One Piece. There, you have a character with his mouth wide open with smoke coming out for NO REASON.

And it looks like crap. Why do you think One Piece fans have wanted to kick Kahn's ass?

And how does that help to move the plot along? How does its exclusion damage the overall plot?

Fortunately in those cases no. However, it's not always the case.

But times change. Guns were meant to be used by militias to help against Indian attacks and packs of armed, roving bandits where there weren't police to assist. Now they're used for...well...every OTHER reason. Times change.

That's why modern cartoons are different from older ones. However, that doesn't justify editting them.

No one's denying, they're just trying to not make it blatantly racist/unhealthy.

How does Cruella smoking help anyone learn ANYTHING?

They reflect attitudes of the time they were created. Especially with cartoon shorts they were meant to be satire, saying things that people weren't willing to say. Many of the offensive cartoon shorts came at a time in which racism was not only acceptable but policy in much of our nation. To edit those cartoons to be more "politically correct" is like saying we were never like that. It's not only an insult to art but an insult to history and lessons learned from that history. And again, it's the parent's job explain what is right and not right, not a six minute cartoon. The cartoon's purpose was to make the people of the time it was created laugh.

 

[GrnMarvl14]

Actually yes because the scene is what establishes Sykes' role in the movie. There's more going on in the scene than the smoking usually.

Then, most likely, they'd leave it in. NO company would destroy a plot for something that mundane.

Fortunately in those cases no. However, it's not always the case.

And, honestly, how often is it? Hell, even editing the cigarettes out of (can't remember his name) that guy from One Piece didn't upset the plot or diminish his role as a villain. Sure, he looked a little silly, but his actions more than made up for it.

That's why modern cartoons are different from older ones. However, that doesn't justify editting them.

And, more often than not, they don't change them. They just stop airing them. Which would you prefer?

They reflect attitudes of the time they were created. Especially with cartoon shorts they were meant to be satire, saying things that people weren't willing to say. Many of the offensive cartoon shorts came at a time in which racism was not only acceptable but policy in much of our nation. To edit those cartoons to be more "politically correct" is like saying we were never like that.

But none of them ARE edited. They're merely not shown. Again, which is worse? A little edit or never seeing it again?

It's not only an insult to art but an insult to history and lessons learned from that history.

...No, it's not. Seeing them does nothing but dig up bad memories and, without an appropriate explanation as to why it's wrong (and, honestly, why include an explanation as long as the cartoon?), you risk kids thinking these things are okay. Does it make them racist? Of course not. But it does run the risk of them doing/saying something racist without them realizing it is racist, and then all KINDS of fun begin involving either severe beatings or lawsuits.

And again, it's the parent's job explain what is right and not right, not a six minute cartoon. The cartoon's purpose was to make the people of the time it was created laugh.

A cartoon shouldn't NEED an explanation. If it does, it's better off not being seen by children. There's a big difference between off-the-cuff humor and vast racism. What's good for one generation is not, necessarily, good for another.

 

[The Big Al]

Which is why they should be locked away and not editted. (Which they are fortunately.) However, if they are editted then it's basically saying "we're going to pretend the historical context these cartoons were made in never existed" which would be an insult to history. It one of those things you have to accept, warts and all.