Think of the children

I fail to understand indecency laws in the is country (or elsewhere, for that matter). In the land of the free and the home of the brave, it's indecent--and illegal--to show women's bums between the hours of 6am and 10pm. ABC has been fined $1.43 million for an episode of "NYPD Blues" that aired in 2003. To quote the FCC Commissioner Deborah Taylor Tate: "Our action today should serve as a reminder to all broadcasters that Congress and American families continue to be concerned about protecting children from harmful material..."

Yes, the children, always the children. For if children see women's bums (sexual and excretory organs, mind you) then they might be corrupted, and therefore... I can't even complete this sentence. I have no idea what a 9 year old would do if they--God forbid--saw the backside of a naked lady. They might become juvenile delinquents and engage in all sorts of risky behavior. Like sex, or rock and roll, or Unitarianism.

No one has ever been prosecuted successfully for a charge of corrupting the youth(EDITED TO ADD: Except Socrates, see comments) It's nearly impossible. It's all a farce. Children have already seen a woman's backside many times before (even before there was the Internets, Oh Noes!) Fining ABC is beyond ludicrous. It's transparently obvious that no children were corrupted by the viewing of the episode. I think the FCC should be required to find one--just one--child who is no tainted beyond redemption for having seen that episode. And when they do, I'll show them a unicorn.

This is Orwellian. A child *could* have been corrupted, so ABC caused a potential thought crime, not actual one. I thought that thought was not a crime. Oh hello there Big Brother, yes of course war is peace and up is down.

Look people, let me make this clear: no child in the long history of humanity has ever been *corrupted* (what ever that's supposed to mean) by seeing naked lady bits--or man bits for that matter. A child has actually (not potentially) died from not wearing a safety belt. These are totally different realms. Protecting children from bad drivers who actually do bodily harm: good. Protecting children from seeing, much less thinking about, rear ends: very, very, reprehensibly, impiously, heinously evil. Fine for not wearing a seatbelt: ~$60. Fine for showing of some T or A: $1.43 million.


At 1/27/08, 6:57 PM, Blogger Les said...

"No one has ever been prosecuted successfully for a charge of corrupting the youth."

I think you're forgetting Socrates.

At 1/28/08, 4:54 PM, Blogger Crinis said...

The larger claim of impiety carried the capital punishment. Besides, it's well known that he was prosecuted for being Alcibiades teacher, which was illegal under the Spartan amnesty, so the Athenian state invented a charge they could prosecute him for.

But point taken. I should have stated that it's extremely rare, and usually involves ritual suicide with hemlock. Maybe we should mandate that the board of ABC all drink hemlock. That's law i could get behind.


Post a Comment

<< Home

   Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)