"The whole problem with this idea of obscenity and indecency, and all of these things "” bad language and whatever "” it's all caused by one basic thing, and that is: religious superstition. ... There's an idea that the human body is somehow evil and bad and there are parts of it that are especially evil and bad, and we should be ashamed. Fear, guilt and shame are built into the attitude toward sex and the body. ... It's reflected in these prohibitions and these taboos that we have."
Mix that with TV or radio, and you've got a problem, he said.
"What I always remind people is, radio and television and "” as it happens "” newspapers and magazines too, are advertising media. ... When you have commercialism involved you have the kind of fear that advertisers are very afraid of offending some potential customer. They don't want to lose a sale. So they have this need to inspect and clean up and watch the content in order not to hurt their own sales. It's based on success at the cash register.
"And yet, they're very inconsistent_ on that Super Bowl broadcast of Janet Jackson's there was also a commercial about a 4-hour erection. A lot of people were saying about Janet Jackson, 'How do I explain to my kids? We're a little family, we watched it together ...' And, well, what did you say about the other thing? These are convenient targets."
commercialism played a huge role in the Janet Jackson Incident...The people have spoken, the networks listened...And what have we to show for it? Hula dancers and Conch shell blowers...oh boy! I cant wait
__________________
Rico, The fastest Bow in Texas.
VC to me it seems a lot of folks don't know the difference between being a animal and a man. A thinking man. Because to me it doesn't sound like George Carlin didn't put much thought into his remarks.
Mr-Pirk
__________________
A proud owner of a Flying Vee. Bestowed by the fine Gentleman VC1111 himself.
Seems to me like he makes a good point. In many other countries/cultures Janet Jackson's flash would have been passe. You can see much worse on regular TV in europe and south america, or at city parks or at beaches. If this was so horrible, then why did so many people view/download it from the internet? I'm more outraged and offended that they thought I would believe it was an accident. Sure.
Yes, some people were offened, and they made a lot of noise. But there are millions of people in the US that just don't care about someone making a fool of herself, and thus don't say anything. I don't stand up and shout everytime something doesn't offend me. I'd get tired and hoarse.
And the advertisers were upset that instead of taking about their commercials, everyone was and still is talking about that incident. Less attention for them means less money. And as we should all know by now, money is what makes America go 'round.
Forget the commercials for erections, what about the commercials for "feminine hygene products". How do you explain that to your young children?
It seems that we need something negative to focus on, and that was the item of the moment. And of course it all worked just as Janet planned. She was the center of attention.
You guys are ignoring the core of his argument and focusing on the Jackson comment. At the heart of his argument is a very pathetic premise.
It is hard to know where to start. First, Carlin has lost favor in my book in the last 10 years or so for a variety of reasons. Like a news anchor, he begins to think that instead of simply reporting the news, or in his case making fun of it, that he is the news, that somehow because he's been commenting on it for so many years that his opinoin is somehow more valid than others. He's a wrinkled, balding version of loud-mouthed Jeanine Garafolo in that respect. Therefore at the outset, I reply so what? Who the hell is George Carlin anyway?
As to the particular comments referenced:
Most societies set standards that promote a wholesome attitude toward "family." This is done in a variety of ways. One way is by preventing the overt display of sexuality until such time as the younger members of that soceity have reached a level of maturity that enables them to procreate and nurture the resulting offspring. Sex is discouraged until a certain age because humans tend to mature sexually prior to maturing in a variety of other ways. They can procreate prior to acquiring job skills to feed the kids that are born. Apparently Carlin sees this as using shame to achieve that result. In a way, he is right. It is shameful to encourage the birth of children that will not be properly cared for, that will be born into unstable relationship wherein one or both parents are incapable of nurturing and protecting them.
Many things give signals to the opposite sex that one partner or the other is ready to engage in sex. Manner of dress, movement, dialogue, makeup and so on all send messages to the opposite sex. Those "signals" are discouraged at certain times and in certain places. Taboo? Maybe. Call it what you want. Label it as he might, Carlin infers that there should be NO limits. I disagree. I have no problem with limits for children.
Children need to learn discipline. They need to learn that some things are not apparent, that urges are not necessarily to be answered each and every time they are felt. We accept that "children" cannot give consent to sex for valid reasons. The idea of marriage and stability are not evil, not things to be ashamed of, not founded in any sort of guilt.
Every society has experienced rebellion against the ideas and parameters of that society. We see it in music, and art, and elsewhere. That those ideas and parameters are the target of rebellion does not necessarily render them invalid or illogical.
Everyday we have people like Carlin stand up and tell us that the limits invoked by society are rooted in hypocrisy and contradictions and sometimes that is true. The limits imposed and outlined by society are not clear cut. Words like "maturity" and "discipline" are slippery; they mean different things to different people. Nevertheless, prohibition is necessary for a variety of what I consider obvious reasons.
I've read that the black community currently has a teenage pregnancy rate of about 70%. How can that be good? How can that not lead to instability for the children that are born? (Not trying to take off on a discussion of the black community but it is an obvious example of what can occur when promiscuity and carelessness is widely accepted within a culture or subculture).
The contradictions and warped values diplayed before during and after the Super Bowl are very interesting. Jackson's display was not the only thing that was questionable as Carlin pointed out. Using sex as a method of marketing is also very questionable. It sends some very screwed up messages to a lot of young people. But money is the only common religion in America, the only thing that people respect and admire regardless of how it is generated. People in this country respect mafia characters and rap stars, sports figures and high-profile arrogant thieves. It is no wonder that even the adults of our society turn a blind eye to one display of sex and condemn another.
We have unwritten rules about sexuality and money that are like the written rules in religion. We all seem to pick and choose those which suit us at a given moment in time.
Carlin's views have become bitter, twisted, and skewed. It is not nearly as one-sided as Carlin would have you believe.
_________________
VC, you seem passionate about this issue. I am too. My response is that we don't watch TV in my house. Nada. Zilch. Zero. Have'nt for 10 years. All of this is a non-issue for me.
George Carlin, is very liberal. His fame came in the early 70's... the peak of rebellion against all institutions, and accepted social moral values. I don't expect to gain wisdom from listening to George... I read Proverbs for that.
You sound like a sensible guy... if and when you have children I am sure, with your firm convictions, you will do a good job teaching them right and wrong.
George isn't an idiot... he's just wrong.
PS I see you are from the Land of Oz... does that mean Kansas?
__________________
AKA Dave Lingner ChristianOutdoorsman.com Equipping men for the Ultimate Destination[/size]
This is a subject which has intrigued me for many years. Is it the word, gesture or appearance which is obscene, or the attitude or the way it is expressed that makes it obscene? As an example, the words "Bitch" or "Bastard" when used in their true meaning can be no more offensive than "fence post" yet when used towards an individual are highly insulting and may be considered obscene and or inflamatiry.
Is the obscenity due to the insulting manner in which they may be used or to something else?
A hundred years ago, it was not uncommon and perfectly acceptable for girls as young as thirteen to marry men in their mid to late twenties. If this happened today a charge of statuatory rape would be facing somebody. Is this due to changing morals in the world or due to a change in the lifestyles and longevity of the human species?
Some of the raciest stories of all time are written in the Bible, yet they raise not an eyebrow, is this because they are not written in a prurient manner and because they only put the facts of a situation before us to form the basis of a lesson learned?
The art of Da Vinci and others from the Renaissance period leave little to the imagination when it comes to the human form and to various situations, some of them clearly of a sexual nature yet never a word has been spoken against them, on the contrary they are praised.
Random acts of violence as portrayed on television and in the movies, are to me far more obscene than the portrayal of a sex act when placed in the context of a loving relationship. How do you, as opposed to society, define obscenity?
coastie, some words like the two you mentioned almost can't be used anymore in the true way, as the slang has taken over in popularity. You're right about the news. I don't let my kids watch it. To me real violence is much scarier than fiction. They don't need to worry about those things yet.
The Bible stories are'nt explicit or graphic. Not meant to inflame lusts.
As far as the age of marriage issue, I think it is a couple things. One, I think children these days are more immature (emotionally... not physically)in the teen years than they were at one time in history. They don't have the responsibilities previous generations have had... Also, different kind of societies... agricultural, more primitive.
Again, I think the DaVinci was protrayed differently. However, I would'nt have my young ones looking at any naked body, DaVinci or otherwise.
__________________
AKA Dave Lingner ChristianOutdoorsman.com Equipping men for the Ultimate Destination[/size]
I had the dis-pleasure of watching him on TV just prior to deploying to the "first" fight in the sand box.(Iraq)
I don't really remember what all he said, or even what format it was, (news or a talk show) but he was so anti-war and full of crap that I quite litterally could'nt believe what I was hearing.
Since then, I have made it a point to change the channel whenever I see him.
I realize now that he is among the few in our society who strive to bring the art of stupidity to entirely new levels.
George Carlin is an idiot.
