Self censorship

darthmongoose · Oct '22

TAMAnnoying:

I really think you need to rethink you definition of "censorship" @darthmongoose

CENSORSHIP is NOT "I will not indulge and fuck children" it's "I will not tell people I'm a pedophile" which is 100% bad for not just the person but for society.

The idea of not being allowed to talk about things cause its "ugly" or "uncomfortable" is how we get to the point where we tell our gay cousin "look just don't tell Grama cause then everyone has to deal with her feeling weird and you don't want that!" Rather then having a god damn conversation and just getting your baggage out.

Does it need to be in their books? Maybe!? Who knows its gonna really depend on what the book is about! Is it about dealing with being a pedo and NOT being a shit head and confirming to society without endangering either yourself or children? I think that's great! But if people say it can't be in book stores because the soccer moms are upset about it then no one's really able to have a conversation then.

But this is the point. The topic is "SELF-censorship"; it's about what we, as creators, choose to put in our work, right? And that might be something about our beliefs, or something we believe is important to discuss, or to present as potentially sympathetic in the face of often being presented as problematic, disgusting or wrong.

So, for example, CLAMP, a manga circle I'm actually generally a fan of, have made quite a few comics that involve pairings between adult characters and minors. A noteworthy one is that in Cardcaptor Sakura, there's a subplot between side characters in which a teacher and one of his students, who is aged 11 are betrothed to be wed when the girl is old enough, and they act like a couple. It's presented as though this is fine, harmless, even beautiful.

The question is, "is that okay? Should they have included that in their work? Or is that glamourising grooming?"

That's the question we as creators have to ask ourselves about this stuff, especially when it's around a subject like paedophilia. There are plenty of other anime and manga with similar themes or sexualised-looking depictions of underage characters. The whole point of this thread is to discuss where the responsibility lies: With the creator...or the audience? And there's no one right answer. I personally believe creators have responsibility but... obviously other people have different ideas, but I don't think my comment on Paedophiles not reflecting their feelings in their work was in any way off-topic just because your belief (which by the way is the same as mine) is "no, they shouldn't because that stuff is awful and wrong."

But_a_Jape · Oct '22

If conversation is important no matter how stupid, ugly, or uncomfortable it is, then why is bringing up a writer's unfiltered thoughts about a controversial debate considered "off topic" in a thread about self-censorship?

Azifri · Oct '22

But TAM didn't continue on the off topic, they went back to the topic of censorship, which is what the thread is about

BOMB · Oct '22

I wouldn't censor it, but I do find it an annoying and grading topic regardless of what side people stand on, it's been talked to death but keeps popping up and killing conversations in a lot of places.

I would never tell anyone they can't talk about something, but would I perhaps suggest they filter how much they talk about it? Maybe. But there is a difference between censorship and filtering.

Junohugger · Oct '22

And what was the part that was "off topic" Azifri? Write it out for me.

Azifri · Oct '22

Gosh, no! I stopped writing long responses on forums long ago ^^ But you can re-read.

BOMB · Oct '22

Because the conversation was beginning to be more about JkR and Trans stuff than it was about censorship.

NellieVP318 · Oct '22

Anyway, getting back on topic. Self-censorship is a tricky area period. The bottom line, it's too much of a guessing game to figure out what to censor at this day and age. Your mileage will vary depending on audience.

NickRowler · Oct '22

This. I feel like JKR is a perfect example of how just running your mouth can lead to a lot of people being turned off by their work. I guess it is the catch-22 of a creator, do you state your opinions or stay quiet so you don't upset people. I feel like social media and bad press has lead to people avoiding media and boycotting stuff.

Like the whole Captain Marvel is another example of this. The statements the actress made pissed people off and a lot of people avoided watching the film.

I think it's also the thing I sort of dislike about social media. Everyone feels entitled to put their two cents into every topic no matter how misinformed they are on a topic. And I think it just causes the spread of a lot of misinformation. When the conversation about transpeople is being dominated by people who know nothing about transpeople or hate them it leads to people parroting back BS.

Junohugger · Oct '22

This is the thing? Like, her whole deal that Darthmongoose detailed is a GREAT example of the dynamics of self-censorship, be they arguments for or against. This idea that just because it's a flashpoint for heated opinions doesn't make it any less apt a case study. But because it has "Trans stuff" in it oh now it's out of bounds and us queers can't be trusted to behave when talking about it... it's so very interesting how all of a sudden a bunch of people are like "HOW DARE YOU BRING THIS UP WE WERE HAVING A LOVELY DAY" it's just like... uh huh.

But_a_Jape · Oct '22

But @darthmongoose was using J.K. Rowling as an example to bolster her argument about how she feels about self-censorship - this was still on topic. If the topic then steered towards arguing about trans-issues specifically, wouldn't it be more productive to say, "Let's stick to discussing how JKR is relevant to the self-censorship conversation," as opposed to, "If we're going to talk about JKR at all, I'm getting the mods to shut this down"?

Freemints30 · Oct '22

Finally someone said it, very sus. I dont agree with darth fully on the ideas of self censorship. But she made solid arguements, dont agree but that's neither here nor there

But yeah I would say weird how people jump to defense of very bad misinformation with "urg bring up the tran ideology "

Very hmm...

RobertBMarks · Oct '22

Oh, I've said my piece and I'm out of this thread - I've got it on muted now. People will agree with me or disagree with me, and both are fine.

BOMB · Oct '22

Hey, again I don't have a problem with anyone talking about what they want to. I just find it funny that Trans stuff seems to work its way into most conversations today.

Also I should clarify, I'm not saying thar anyone was actually getting off topic, but you asked why he would want us to stop talking about those things and I was giving you an answer I thought was his reasoning more than my own.

BOMB · Oct '22

I still stand by my initial response to the main question.

I think it's important to draw a line between censorship and filtering.

I don't think creators should censor their work. There will always be a group of people out there who don't like what you have to say or how you say it. Yes, we want people to enjoy our work but I believe we have to first tell our stories for ourselves. Censoring our work, in my opinion, waters it down and dilutes it from the heart of thoughts were probably trying to paint.

That being said, we as creative also need filters. We need to know how far is far enough, not because someone else will be offended, but because at a certain point we start to become counter productive. We have to know what is necessary. And that's not censorship.

Censorship is like throwing away ingredients. Filtering is like having ingredients but choosing what to use and how much of it to use so your recipe turns out right, and sometimes that means very little or not at all.

I think our responsibility is to tell an honest story and introduce new ideas. And we can do that with tactic without censorship.

Now, will people be happy? Will everyone agree? Probably not. But every story isn't for everyone. Every idea doesn't need to cater to the masses. It's better to be bold and authentic and hated than it is to be watered down bland and possibly liked...in my opinion anyway.

mx_Jinn · Oct '22

It's bloody hilarious that people are attempting to censor others by claiming things are off-topic and then refusing to engage in the conversation when they chime in.

I think Darthmongoose gave some great examples that discuss the nuances of self-censorship and the power our works have in the world. You have to be responsible with what themes and messages you put across, and if you're an asshole that doesn't care and claims that freedom of speech allows you to say anything you like, then I'd like to direct you to a lot of legal laws around defamation and libel.

Before I peace out I'd like to confirm one thing.

JK ROWLING IS A TERF. Thank you for coming to my ted talk. Have a blessed day all.

TheLemmaLlama · Oct '22

I also stand my my initial response: 99%^ of these cases could've just been dealt with via content warnings

Want to make a tweet explaining why you think gender = sex? Sure, do that - just tag it with (cw: gender critical) so people can ignore it if they want to.

Want to write a book about your experience as a pedophilie? Sure, do that - just tag it with (cw: pedophilia) so people can ignore it if they need to.

In so many of these cases, there's no good reason to prevent the information from existing. All the harms could be dealt with via a simple warning. Am I missing something or is it really not that complicated?

It's annoying, but I don't think that constitutes censorship - claiming something is off-topic or not engaging doesn't prevent the other person's argument from existing, and they're not stopping them from making a new topic where they can discuss the off-topic stuff.

For instance, calling out 'whataboutism' is essentially just claiming that something is off-topic. If, for instance you're talking about women's issues and someone comes in and are all like 'but men have it hard too', telling them to take that discussion elsewhere isn't saying they should shut up about men's issues or that they're not important - only that it's not what you're talking about right now, in this space.

For another example, I once discussed the merits of IP with @RobertBMarks and he ended the thread essentially saying I shouldn't have brought up my anti-IP ideas into that thread because it was off-topic.3 I was salty about it and was tempted to call him out on hypocrisy when he expressed an anti-self-censorship stance in this thread, but it would've been wrong of me to do so since he technically didn't ask me to self-censor - he just said I was 'hijacking' the thread we were discussing in and he probably wouldn't have minded if I made my own thread talking about my beliefs.

(Since there's plenty of salt in this thread already, figured it couldn't hurt to add my own two grams onto the pile :'D Besides, Robert has muted the thread already so it's not like he's gonna see this XD

And incidentally, as much as I've got a bone to pick with the guy, I can't help but notice that as soon as he brought up J.K Rowling^^, everyone focused on that part of his comment instead of the actual core of his argument:

I honestly want to know what pro self-censorship people's solution to this is, if they think some things should never be said. (Again, my solution is that everything should be allowed to be said - just some things should be tagged with a content warning.))

^ again, jokes are a difficult area, but stories and opinion pieces are 100% amenable to content warnings

^^ Just for the record, I'm not in camp 'Rowling did nothing wrong' - I'm in camp 'Rowling was wrong but allowing her to be wrong is a necessary consequence of a free society, and if she tags her incorrect speech, that already eliminates 99% of the negative consequences of her saying those wrong things'

rajillustration · Oct '22

If you look at the op's quote it is about how we censor ourselves online, it's not about censoring our work, it was about social media. And I ask of you: Whomst among us posts who we really are and what our real complete opinions are online?????

whomst?

Twitter doesn't give us enough characters to do that, it's not possible if we tried, so we must censor ourselves constantly because there's no room to properly discuss and defend your position. So the best model is to just never get in a fight.

And in that context, it changes what censorship even means in regard to our online works. That isn't self-censorship at all, that is just desperately trying to fit our works into a mold our audience can easily digest so the algorithm will prop us up. Is that story too spicy for tapas? That's just the tapas company/audience telling you what to do, isn't it? That isn't even about the ethics of what you're writing, that's just trying to be as appealing as possible and trying to remain on a site that is also on the Apple store.

I personally think you can only self-censor if your works aren't on the internet, and what 'can' exist and 'should' exist on the internet is constantly evolving.

thepenmonster · Oct '22

Sigh. This is always followed by a fire hose or two of brain diarrhea and it definitely sprayed.

Lensing · Oct '22

My question and why I started this topic was
"do you self censor your own work and then not write it even if you would want to?"

I was just interested how other creators handle this because I´m dealing with it a lot
and I have the constant feeling of self censoring my original ideas a lot and I wanted
to know if other people do that too and how they deal with it.

I don´t want to judge other creators or tell other creators what to do and what´s wrong
or right. I honestly don´t have an opinion on that

Self censorship

Welcome to Tapas Forums!

Forum Guidelines 2022

Please meet your forum moderator team!

Welcome to Tapas Forums!

Forum Guidelines 2022

Please meet your forum moderator team!

share a link to this topic