Something has been censored. Let's get to those two obligatory statements.

[BarryMcCociner]

You know the Steven Universe thing? Well, it's time to hear those dumb statements people make that show they don't understand what censorship actually is.

You know the ones

"It's only censorship when the government does it."

When this statement was first originated, it was usually followed up with "Because the people would never censor each other, they're not total idiots."

"Nobody is trying to take your "X" away."

This is bullshit and even the people who are saying it know it's a paper thin shield at best.

 

[DoPo]

You know the Steven Universe thing?

What Steven Universe thing?

 

[EternallyBored]

You know the Steven Universe thing? Well, it's time to hear those dumb statements people make that show they don't understand what censorship actually is.

You know the ones

"It's only censorship when the government does it."

When this statement was first originated, it was usually followed up with "Because the people would never censor each other, they're not total idiots."

"Nobody is trying to take your "X" away."

This is bullshit and even the people who are saying it know it's a paper thin shield at best.

Uh, who the fuck says the second part after saying that only the government can censor. When that statement first originated? you have no clue where that statement usually comes from do you?

The best followup to that statement is that its because censorship initiated by private parties is part of their right to free association and speech, so forcing them to comply the same way we do the government would be immoral, i.e. if a company or individual decides to censor themselves, we can't ethically force them to stop in most cases unless it crosses other legal or moral boundaries. In individual's cases there are the conflicting rights to free speech going on, so while we can argue the ethics of the situation, the government is usually considered to be the primary focus as they are the ones with the monopoly on physical force in most of Western society.

I won't even address your second statement until you actually answer DoPo on what Steven Universe thing we are talking about. This isn't an SU fan forum, actually elaborate on your topic or face it getting derailed by people confused about WTF you are talking about.

EDIT: actually, what is the topic here? this reads like a personal rant, these forums aren't your blog.

 

[DefunctTheory]

What Steven Universe thing?

I won't even address your second statement until you actually answer DoPo on what Steven Universe thing we are talking about. This isn't an SU fan forum, actually elaborate on your topic or face it getting derailed by people confused about WTF you are talking about.

I got curious and checked. Cartoon Network UK is censoring out 'queer' material from the show. Basically, de-gaying it.

While a disturbing notion, and one I don't personally agree with, it's legal, and it should continue to be legal. By all means, get upset with it, tell Cartoon Network that your pissed, do all that jazz, but don't try to compare it to government run censorship. It may still be censoring, but its an entirely different beast.

 

[EternallyBored]

What Steven Universe thing?

I won't even address your second statement until you actually answer DoPo on what Steven Universe thing we are talking about. This isn't an SU fan forum, actually elaborate on your topic or face it getting derailed by people confused about WTF you are talking about.

I got curious and checked. Cartoon Network UK is censoring out 'queer' material from the show. Basically, de-gaying it.

While a disturbing notion, and one I don't personally agree with, it's legal, and it should continue to be legal. By all means, get upset with it, tell Cartoon Network that your pissed, do all that jazz, but don't try to compare it to government run censorship. It may still be censoring, but its an entirely different beast.

Thank you, if that is what the OP is talking about, then I agree, it is a troubling decision, but the people who talk about government censorship are generally talking about legality.

It is the companies right to make that decision, just as it is my right to say they are stupid for doing so, or refusing to associate with their products until they change it. To try and force one or the other to comply is illegal, and generally why government is considered the main instigator for censorship, because they have the ability to enforce their decrees through physical force, a private company does not, and if it tries, the government ideally steps in and forces them to stop.

I have never heard anyone followup that statement with what the OP says, people are indeed stupid enough to try and stop people they don't like from speaking, but that doesn't make it censorship in the sense of when we talk about governments do it, where it is a great moral wrong that we would consider worth fighting for with physical force.

There are of course grey areas and lines in the sand to be drawn, many countries outside the US have anti-hate speech discrimination laws, or lines for threatening or false speech under certain circumstances. The details are important here, which is why the OP's topic needs more information, the statements the OP seems to be railing against are true in certain contexts, and while they can be thrown around with some hyperbole, they cannot be summarily dismissed in a couple lines like the OP seems to think is possible.

 

[Johnny Novgorod]

You know the Steven Universe thing?

Not a clue. What are you talking about?
(beat)
CN excised content off a show? Happens all the time. Not a big deal.

 

[Silvanus]

Not a clue. What are you talking about?
(beat)
CN excised content off a show? Happens all the time. Not a big deal.

Doing it for the reason it happened does not happen all the time (mostly because instances of same-sex romance in cartoons are extremely rare), and the reason it happened is the whole point.

[...]this is just a decission taken by a private corporation in order to avoid alienating half of its fanbase.

D'you really feel the majority of straight people would feel alienated by seeing a single same-sex romantic scene, when the vast majority of romantic scenes are straight?

This is not a rhetorical question; it's perfectly possible they might. I'd just be a little sad if so.

 

[DrownedAmmet]

I hate how nowadays every argument seems to boil down to semantics. People should be more careful when they throw around loaded words like "censorship", because it always devolves into an argument over that word, instead of the issue at hand

Instead can't we all agree that it was shitty of them to take out a mild reference to a lesbian relationship, whether or not it technically is censorship

 

[Barbas]

I don't understand. Could you please help me understand what this thread is about.

 

[Johnny Novgorod]

Not a clue. What are you talking about?
(beat)
CN excised content off a show? Happens all the time. Not a big deal.

Doing it for the reason it happened does not happen all the time (mostly because instances of same-sex romance in cartoons are extremely rare), and the reason it happened is the whole point.

I was like 11 when certain Pokemon eps got censored (as in, not aired). I recall they were censored for transvestism, sexual imagery, the appearence of guns and some unlucky allusions to terrorism. I gave... I think no fucks, at all. Throw in a lesbian kiss back in the day? Still wouldn't have cared either. I wouldn't then, and I don't now.

 

[Pseudonym]

I hate how nowadays every argument seems to boil down to semantics. People should be more careful when they throw around loaded words like "censorship", because it always devolves into an argument over that word, instead of the issue at hand

Instead can't we all agree that it was shitty of them to take out a mild reference to a lesbian relationship, whether or not it technically is censorship

This says most of what needs to be said. Most people in this thread seem to be on the same page anyway. What CN did was not illegal, but a questionable if not outright scummy decision nonetheless. There seems no need to split hairs over whether it is or is not censorship.

I'll also join the people complaining that the OP does not properly introduce the subject matter. Even worse, by immediately calling into question the intentions of people who disagree with him/her and labeling their arguments dumb the OP comes of as not only confused but also hostile.

(Wow, the amount of arguments I'll be able to recycle for this thread from R&P and GiD is astonishingly long)

While certain threads are closed or die out, certain subjects are around the escapist for as long as I've been here and probably longer. What precisely the word 'censorship' means is one of those subjects.

 

[Zontar]

I don't understand. Could you please help me understand what this thread is about.

The UK version of Steven Universe is being localized in a way which removes the lesbian overtones of two of the characters.

Not that anyone has to worry, after all it isn't censorship, it's just localization to help the product sell in a different culture.

 

[Zontar]

This is bullshit and even the people who are saying it know it's a paper thin shield at best.

I'd like to point out those of us saying it don't actually mean it, and that it's in response to the fact that are making a big deal out of it (particularly Polygon) are being massive hypocrites who think it's ok so long as it isn't happening to media they enjoy, but the moment it happens to what they enjoy what they where a moment before defending is suddenly the worst thing ever.

 

[Andy Shandy]

The Steven Universe thing is editing. It's stupid as fuck - with Cartoon Network UK/EU piling on with an even stupider statement. But editing, nonetheless.

 

[Barbas]

I don't understand. Could you please help me understand what this thread is about.

The UK version of Steven Universe is being localized in a way which removes the lesbian overtones of two of the characters.

Not that anyone has to worry, after all it isn't censorship, it's just localization to help the product sell in a different culture.

...?

I thought there were lesbians in Britain. I mean, I don't go up to people asking them whether they're lesbians, but I think it's more likely that lesbians live here than not.

 

[DefunctTheory]

...?

I thought there were lesbians in Britain. I mean, I don't go up to people asking them whether they're lesbians, but I think it's more likely that lesbians live here than not.

It does seem bizarre. Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't homosexuality far more tolerated in the UK then in the US? Stephen Fry seems to be fairly happy in the UK.

Why would they remove lesbian content that was shown in the US, when the UK would probably be more receptive?

 

[Barbas]

It does seem bizarre. Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't homosexuality far more tolerated in the UK then in the US? Stephen Fry seems to be fairly happy in the UK.

Why would they remove lesbian content that was shown in the US, when the UK would probably be more receptive?

There is absolutely no explanation I can think of for that decision. I can only assume that there was a derp in the line, or maybe the censors board decided it was too adult for a kids' show - more a plain old suggestive/sexual content thing.

 

[Redd the Sock]

...?

I thought there were lesbians in Britain. I mean, I don't go up to people asking them whether they're lesbians, but I think it's more likely that lesbians live here than not.

It does seem bizarre. Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't homosexuality far more tolerated in the UK then in the US? Stephen Fry seems to be fairly happy in the UK.

Why would they remove lesbian content that was shown in the US, when the UK would probably be more receptive?

2 words: kid's show. Tolerance takes a nosedive when young kids are involved.

OT: It's been 20 years since I was dealing with the same shit in Sailor Moon, DBZ, and Card Captor Sakura and my position hasn't changed: It's stupid, shows how much we're afraid of other culture's ideas of right and wrong and how they may conflict with our own, and it a waste of time in a digital age where the original will all be on youtube or torrent sites.

 

[KyuubiNoKitsune-Hime]

...?

I thought there were lesbians in Britain. I mean, I don't go up to people asking them whether they're lesbians, but I think it's more likely that lesbians live here than not.

It does seem bizarre. Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't homosexuality far more tolerated in the UK then in the US? Stephen Fry seems to be fairly happy in the UK.

Why would they remove lesbian content that was shown in the US, when the UK would probably be more receptive?

Well it's a show that's aimed at children, and CN is a Turner owned network... Still, I think the US is currently making more progress in GSM[footnote]Gender and Sexuality Minorities[/footnote] tolerance currently, though we have farther to catch up, after legalizing same-sex marriage we've made a strong push in tolerance and acceptance. What I find humorous is that Brits love to criticize Americans for being hung-up about sex, then this happens... I mean you can point out Stephen Fry, but I can point out loads of American stars who are gay and lesbian who are quite content, though we don't have our own version of Vicious yet... Unless I'm mistaken.

Anyways, OT: This isn't "censorship" it's an edit being made by CN UK/EU for their localization, based upon what they think their audience will accept. The lesbian undertones with two of the gems was sort of controversial in the US, strangely the episode hasn't been removed from rotation in repeats, at least as far as I'm aware. Similar such controversial episodes of other shows have been banned from Cartoon Network in the past, so that's a rather big step foreword. I know in some places in Europe at large and even in the UK, people might have an issue with that sort of thing being in what is ostensibly a "children's cartoon". So CN UK/EU making such an edit isn't really surprising, I disagree with it, I think it's stupid, but that's what the network heads across the pond decided. It's not really "censorship" so much as it is them saying: "Yeah that content is too loaded for us to allow to be aired here."

I notice that people toss around the the word censorship when there is an edit they don't like, and yes it is a form of censorship. But this isn't a government shutting down free speech, this is a business making what they think is the best business decision. That's it, it's nothing more of that. While technically it can be called censorship, it's a private company making their rules and standards for what they're willing to broadcast. Do I think it's stupid? Yes. Do I think it's pushing a homophobic hetero-normative world view? Yes. Do I think the justification is flimsy at best? Yes. Still does that mean that CN UK/EU doesn't have the right to do it? No, it's their decision to make. I feel they made the wrong decision, I feel it's them being homophobic, but it still doesn't mean it's not their right to do it.