Zack and Miri Make a CENSORED

Some days I need to check and make sure that the Carlyle Group didn’t completely take over the United States and give it to the Saudis. Today is one of those days.

XBiz reports:

The mere presence of the word “porno” in the title of upcoming mainstream comedy from Kevin Smith has created a storm of controversy.

Even with creative efforts to market the film, some newspaper, TV and outdoor ads for the ads for “Zack and Miri Make a Porno” because they allude to pornography. (source)

Numerous newspapers, TV stations, and cable channels refuse to run ads for the movie. Even in supposedly open-minded Los Angeles, alleged consumer complaints led to Fox Sports dropping ads for the movie during Dodgers games.

The MPAA, which must approve all advertisements for movies as being suitable for all audiences initially rejected billboard and print ads for the movie as being too suggestive. Director Kevin Smith then submitted ads that merely showed stick figures. Even his efforts to be as innocuous and innocent as possible proved to be too much for some censorship advocates.

CNN Reports:

Diane Levin, an education professor specializing in child development at Boston’s Wheelock College, said the posters at city bus stops send a message to children that working in the porn industry is an acceptable occupation.

“It’s drawing attention to a movie which is mainstreaming and normalizing pornography, saying if you need money, this is what you do,” said Levin, co-author of “So Sexy So Soon: The New Sexualized Childhood and What Parents Can Do to Protect Their Kids.”

The stick-figure images are especially appealing to youngsters, since “stick figures are something for children,” she said. (source)

CNN does not report that Professor Levin frequently teams up with notorious censorship advocate Gail Dines. This does not, without more, suggest that Levin’s opinion is invalid. Nevertheless, her comments suggest a hyper-active imagination.

The film’s website is here.

4 Responses to Zack and Miri Make a CENSORED

  1. Tatiana says:

    Grrr. Ok, let us for the moment think about some other “acceptable” characters that teach “sexual ethics” to children, i.e., Bristol Palin & Jamie Lynn Spears with their pregnancies, both being hyped up as justifiably moral in the mistake department; various Disney blondes who are made to look and act older than the kind of teenagers presented in my day; various musical groups popular among teens/pre-teens/kids such as the Pussycat Dolls not to mention the sleazy, butt shaking moves on MTV. Those are always fun explaining to my kid. “No sweetie, you really don’t want to shake your behind like that because it makes you look like you want sex from a boy”, which in itself creates a need for a completely different conversation. I’ll take the stick figures and the word porno anytime.

    Further, what gives Professor Levin the misunderstanding that the porn industry is NOT an acceptable occupation? For whom? Based on what grounds? That it hurts women, devalues them, creates violence towards them? I’m technically in the porn industry though I don’t consider myself to produce porn, rather erotica but for many, there is no difference. There is a huge misconception about what a porn industry individual is like; it’s not all crazy where photographers, actors, models and directors are jumping the swinging scene at wild sex parties. That’s the fantasy created by those who don’t actually participate in the *reality*. It’s actually on average, more moral than what it appears. Perhaps that is only my experience but even so, it’s a sliver that rarely gets mention or credit. Porn is as necessary in culture as prostitution and in many way, serves a common “good”, if you will.

    I’ve seen magazine ads in teen magazines more pornographic in nature than the stick figures Levin fears. Christ, my daughter’s German teen magazine had a frontal nude pic of Harry Potter. Imagine my surprise. What did I do? I blew it off (pardon my pun) and said, “Yeah, that’s what it looks like. It ain’t pretty in real life either”. The more one tries to hide the reality of sexuality in our world, attempts to paint it as dirty and bad – immoral – the more problematic it becomes for kids in their future. America has such an unheathly view of sexuality yet, I see more sex on MTV reality shows and videos than anywhere else.

    There are also levels of porn so the very term “porno” is misleading and unfortunately automatically associated to value judgments based on a kind of porn one views as porn. If I define porn as “sexual” then the majority of MTV videos are pornographic and most prime time shows, which ooze sexual content and violence.

    Furthermore, this is just censorship. Come to Europe where you’ll have to explain to your kid the various “Erotic Expo” or “Fetish Expo” posters that hang on lamp posts, girl’s breasts out in the open and the naked guys at public swimming pools. That’s a heck of a lot harder to explain than a boy/girl stick figure with the word “porno” attached. I haven’t seen all that many Europeans screwed up by the sex exposure here. Put a sock in it professor. I can think of a million more impressionable aspects of American culture to censor if we are to censor anything sexual to kids. This example is weak in terms of its harmful effects on kids.

  2. […] join the convo, or read it at least.  If not that, see the movie just to irk those Convserative experts who love […]

  3. Brent E. Dyer says:

    Sheesh! I really have to wonder how these folks would have reacted in 1970 to the movie posters for Bob & Carol & Ted & Alice with its obvious depiction of a spouse swapping/group sex scenario. I guess those of us who were children in the 70s have just been ruined for life.

    I really have to wonder where we’ve gone wrong as a society when it’s OK to assume that every Muslim is a terrorist and for a Vice Presidential candidate to openly imply that every person who isn’t an evangelical Christian hates America, but we freak out over the use of the word “porno.”

%d bloggers like this: