major streaming platforms and the criterion collection stream and promote "birth of a nation" because "art".
What utter willful ignorance this is!
I use that example because that "work of art" is largely responsible for the revival of the clan.
Artists like to think art depicts life but the opposite is also true, art influences the world around us.
Even something silly like censoring curse words and nudity based on modern sensibilities is an attempt to control art's harmful influence on the world around us.
Speilberg's comments are the equivalent of a famous Chef claiming health regulations on restaurants should not be made by modern understanding of medicine and food safety.
argument by analogy is generally pretty faulty, but gosh, it's probably the absolute worst to make the analogy between food - a perishable thing that will go bad extremely quickly and directly kill people with food poisoning when it does - and artistic expression - non-perishable works that can theoretically last forever and that does not directly kill people unless the statue of Michelangelo's David falls on top of them.
I thought the KKK killed a lot of people? Lol. Argument by analogy is not faulty, analogies are an excellent tool to point out faults in rationale someone is using that has hidden or ignored biases.
You like movies by spielberg, that's nice. But gun culture in the US for example is the fault of hollywood including Spielberg. It isn't the 2nd amendment, it is media that promoted the idea that everyone should have automatic guns. It is media that spits out dozens of cop tv shows where cops are always the good guys and even more movies where cops can break the law and do whatever they want because they're the good guys and it was a TV show that popularized donald trump. The list is endless. To say content in artisitic material causes less harm than food poisoning at restaurants is incorrect.
There is plenty of media censored from even adults because of its harmful nature. The litmus test of censorship is harm that will be caused. If modern sensibilities determine that media will cause harm then of course it should be revised and censored.
If age of consent increases to 21 20yrs from now for example, isn't displaying nude images of 19yr olds a crime after that time? And wouldn't that be censored and removed?
evidently the concept of "directly kill people" as something that food poisoning does was lost on you, but to clarify art that inspires the KKK 'indirectly' kills people. Lol.
>You like movies by spielberg, that's nice.
And I guess you like making incorrect assumptions as the opening for a new paragraph? In case the meaning was lost on you - no not that much. Maybe 5 movies by him. I guess that is a reasonable amount, but he's made a lot of movies I don't give a damn about.
>If age of consent increases to 21 20yrs from now for example, isn't displaying nude images of 19yr olds a crime after that time?
well three things:
1. huh!??!
2. age of consent means one can consent to sex (and presumably be allowed to have it), displaying nude images is not the same thing as having sex.
To follow your style of passive aggressive response:
1. Don't attack the person arguing against you, you can argur the facts just fine
2. Having indirect impact as opposed to direct makes no difference here since we are talking about prevention and not accountability. If you censor less people die or get hurt, that's why censorship happens not to blame or punish the artist.
3. It is not far fetched to assume that a very popular film maker being defended by you implies you actually like his work.
4. If a Child cannot consent to sex yoy cannot take their image as art and release it to the public. It seems you have no actual argument so you have attempted to take everything I said and repeated it to appear as if it was all unfounded fantasy.
5. If you falsley yell fire in a crowd that is illegal because of the harm it causes. Analogies like this used to help people understand reason but it seems you are more interested in winning an internet argument at all costs than a healthy discussion.
6. I am alright, hope you are as well.
What utter willful ignorance this is!
I use that example because that "work of art" is largely responsible for the revival of the clan.
Artists like to think art depicts life but the opposite is also true, art influences the world around us.
Even something silly like censoring curse words and nudity based on modern sensibilities is an attempt to control art's harmful influence on the world around us.
Speilberg's comments are the equivalent of a famous Chef claiming health regulations on restaurants should not be made by modern understanding of medicine and food safety.