- Nov 7, 2000
- 16,403
- 3
- 81
I would argue no. First of all, in edited movies, when I hear a guy say "bullfrog" but read something completely different on his lips, what do you think comes to mind? I immediately make a mental substitution of the "offensive" word for the edited one. This is not because I am overly coarse, but because I realize that the situation the man was in was NOT a load of bullfrog. The point is, even with this type of editing, the offensive thought and intention is still conveyed.
Another example concerning the censorship of profanity can be seen here in AT. When someone writes sh!t, fsck, or even !*&$ I know exactly what they are trying to say and interpret it as so.
I will concede that there are examples of censorship that are done WELL. Such as some radio edits for songs, and movies on TV with scenes completely cut out. But, this brings up a different point. Is it really somebone's responsibility (someone who doesnt know me, my values or opinions) to "protect" me from this?
Another example concerning the censorship of profanity can be seen here in AT. When someone writes sh!t, fsck, or even !*&$ I know exactly what they are trying to say and interpret it as so.
I will concede that there are examples of censorship that are done WELL. Such as some radio edits for songs, and movies on TV with scenes completely cut out. But, this brings up a different point. Is it really somebone's responsibility (someone who doesnt know me, my values or opinions) to "protect" me from this?
Facebook
Twitter