I Like it Like That

Apr 5, 2010

I Like it Like That

There are lots of things I’m willing to let government agencies decide for me: speed limits, tax rates, what countries are worth spying on, how many bank notes to print, the price of stamps, the pay scale for forest rangers, whether to sell peas in ounces or grams. That kind of thing.

It’s not that I don’t care about forest rangers or bank notes, but more that I don’t feel a need to be vigilant concerning all areas of governmental control. Once every few years we elect people to do those things. I’m good with that.

I have been known to write to various public officials. I wrote to Alex Salmond about the release of Ali Al-Magrahi (he wrote back… Salmond, not Al-Magrahi) and several members of the European Parliament about an internet piracy act that was downright loony (They all wrote back as well). I wrote to my senators about their vote in the recent health care debate in the US (No response from the Mountain). Being a dual-national means I have to do double-duty in the outrage department… another good reason to conserve energy.

But when I saw this article about a film advert that was deemed “not offensive” on the grounds that “the newspaper ad for Lars Von Trier’s film was unlikely to cause sexual excitement“…. I did a double-take.

The ruling continued: “If children did see the ad, it was not considered particularly explicit. The dream-like context, introduced by the hands protruding from the tree, had the effect of making the image of the naked couple seem removed from reality.”

Two points about this: 1. I’ve found that “being removed from reality” is a constant state for many people, so that hardly seems to have anything to do with whether or not the advert was appropriate for television.

Point 2, however, and more importantly, is that I don’t want the government (or any group appointed by, employed by, or directed by a public body) deciding what is or isn’t likely to cause sexual excitement. My feeling here is not based on the fact that the government should stay out of our bedrooms. In this country they do, for the most part, so it’s not on my list of fears regarding government overreach.

No, my objection is based on this one fact: There is no idea too weird, too banal, too removed from reality that someone out there isn’t turned on by it.

Humans are odd creatures.

Once while looking for an image to use for a blog post, I made the mistake of doing a google image search for the phrase “sexy clowns”. There is a woman who claims to have had sex with the Berlin Wall. Some people are into dressing up like furry animals. We don’t raise so much as an eyebrow about people who are into vampires or playing pretend. That’s practically mainstream. (I’m torn about putting up links to illustrate my point, but most of you probably know where to get odd smut as readily as I do, so I’m not too concerned that this is a surprise to you that you’re going to go out and investigate my outlandish claims.)

So here’s a note to the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA): I appreciate what you guys do. Really. And I also appreciate the hours of borderline smut you have to watch in order to decide what isn’t fit to be shown before certain watershed times if at all. I don’t want your jobs, so I’m glad there’s someone else do to it. But I do wonder, dear sirs and madams, if perhaps the time spent doing your job has made you forget exactly how fucked up people are?  With respect, it isn’t for you to say whether something will cause sexual excitement. Most people between the ages of 15 and 25 need little more than a rumbling ride over a railroad track. Not to mention that in my experience, the older people get, the more peculiar (or should I say adventurous?) they get when it comes to matters of stimulation.

So set your rules as you must, dear members of the ASA. Decide what bits can and cannot be shown on television. Consult a list of words that should not be uttered. But don’t tell me what doesn’t turn me on. Sexy clowns might not be my thing, and I might be operating on version 4.0, but I’m not dead yet, and I reserve the right to be as freaky as the next girl.

Related Posts

Share This

3 Comments

  1. Bravo!

    [ Follow me on Twitter: ]

  2. That photo is a like something from a nightmare to me, but I can just not look at it. I can’t say for other people what might bother them, etc. The same people who scream about morality and who want laws to enforce their version of it are at the same moment against government doing anything at all. Censorship usually ends up being a negative thing.

  3. Girl Fren'

    Gather ’round, sweeties. I’ve been known to publicly suggest that God might wear red, patent-leather pumps and a skirt split up to here (lecturing to Freshmen). I’ll see your bet and raise you: I am operating on damn-near Version 7.0 and such jackassery as this tells me they need to switch out these goobers more frequently. They’re obviously jaded from their daily smut-hunting.

    I’m with Mollie: Bravo!

    PS: Not surprised your US Senators & Reps didn’t respond.Moments like this make me want to re-think 1776.

    [ Follow me on Twitter: ]