SCREEN-L Archives

July 1996, Week 5


Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Molly Olsen <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Film and TV Studies Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>
Tue, 30 Jul 1996 11:12:01 ES
text/plain (32 lines)
Xyvind Staalen <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>Define porn.
Ulf Dalquist wrote:
>Sorry, I'm not sure I can. But unless Norway has abandoned the censorship on
>pornography, I reckon the censors can. Again: Do you still have a ban on
>showing certain sexual elements"?
Xyvind, it looks like the question is:  How does Norway define porn, or define
what it doesn't want the public to see?  Or are there no restrictions at all?
I don't think laws are necessarily indicative of public interest, though.  In
the U.S., it seems as if the laws on sexual freedom & portrayals are lessening
but the public is increasing its self-censorship.  In U.S. television, for
instance, you're technically allowed to show a lot more sex & nudity in
primetime than most shows actually do (with the notable exception of NYPD BLUE)
because that's what they think the public wants for that medium.  It's also
perfectly legal for women to walk around topless in New York City (thanks to a
gender-equity ruling a couple of years ago) but you still don't see anyone
doing that, even at the beach.  And kids are *asking* for dress codes at
school.  It seems like a de-escalation of open sexuality and expressiveness
(exactly the opposite of what's happening with violence).
Molly Olsen
[log in to unmask]
(and Norwegian by descent)
To signoff SCREEN-L, e-mail [log in to unmask] and put SIGNOFF SCREEN-L
in the message.  Problems?  Contact [log in to unmask]