233 réponses à ce sujet

[Forumtroll]

Well wasn't this a cluster****?

[Creature 1]

Banana Muffin wrote...

Creature 1 wrote...

[..]
In the US we have freedom of speech and people can talk about whatever topics they like without fearing legal prosecution, so Germany's laws seem very strange.  I guess in context this infringement of rights is understandable, since we have laws against inciting a crime, and anti-Semitism did lead to a crime of national proportions not too long ago in Germany. 

I thought you had laws about using the N-word, That would seem a very similar infringment on freedom of speech to me.

I really do resent when americans say they have  freedom of speech like they are the only ones on the planet having it when every country in the EU has it too, It's a requirement for becoming a member.

No, there are no national or state laws that I am aware of forbidding certain words.  There are a lot of hip-hop and rap singers that would be in jail if that particular word were illegal.  We do have laws against speech that is considered "fighting words", which is language directed against another person in their presence that is severe enough to incite violence or cause severe emotional distress.  But that depends greatly on context, and I don't think just one word is enough to do it--the judicial tendency has been to restrict the definition of fighting words so as not to infringe upon freedom of speech as much as possible.  We also have laws against speech that harms a person's reputation and is untrue.  Otherwise, say what you like, but don't be surprised if others don't listen or get angry with you. 

EU members may have freedom of speech in general, but place more restrictions upon it than in the US, such as restrictions preventing blasphemous speech or "hate speech".  Of course, one man's hate speech is another man's religious expression, and then if you criticize the religion that caused the hate speech, couldn't that be considered blasphemous? 

I do note you're a little sensitive.  Not every statement an American makes is intended as a criticism of your half-continent. 

[Monstruo696]

Freedom of Speech only applies to media. As in, if they find information about a conspiracy and they feel the need to publicize it, they can. Not as in, you're allowed to say whatever you wish.

[mrofni]

Not true, you are allowed to say whatever you wish, considering it doesn't fall under certain categories. You cannot threaten people, that is against the law. If at the workplace, you cannot say things that would be considered harassment or would cause a hostile work environment. Also, depending on where you say certain things, be prepared for a fight or to be not allowed to remain or possibly come back to a certain area. If they start a fight, they will be breaking the law themselves, but it is still a predictable outcome. Also, you're not supposed to say certain things while on tv during certain hours.



As far as the thread issue, it entirely depends on the outlet. In TV and Movies, sex is far more common and allowed then violence. In games, its the opposite. If you have a high violence show on tv, you tend to get more people complaining about it then a high sexually oriented show. For games, its the other way around. You don't see much complaining for high violence games, but you see it for sexual games.



However, people just speak out more against games in general. It is partially because of the nature of a games vs TV/Movies. When people watch movies, people view it as a visual story. Not you, but a story of people. Games however, some people view it as yourself actively doing this. It isn't a surprising conclusion since you actively control a character. However, because of it, it gives the impression that people would design these high violence and sexual games to people who want to feel these fantasies and may influence them to want them even more. They are afraid that it would get into their child's hands, either through them mistakenly or much more common through a friend, and get sucked into acting like the game because they are controlling the character, not just watching the characters in a movie. This is just from a view from afar, if you actually look up close, it is the exact same as watching multiple movies with sex/violence. I say multiple because the sense of control needs to be added to have the same effect. If you are choosing to watch multiple violent or sexual movies, its the same control as playing a game and doing those things.



I believe parents should talk to their children more about these things. Studies have shown that with a more involved parent, these violent/sexual games, tv, and movies have less of an adverse effect. A parent can't always control their children from getting these influences, without truly hampering their social skills at least. However, I can understand parents who don't. It is very difficult to view their children as anything but their baby. Its a primal feeling to try to protect their children from everything. It is also a primal feeling to teach their children, which is a very good thing, but it doesn't stop the other feeling from being there. Often those 2 feelings are also contradictory. Parents need to learn when to stop coddling their children, and to let them learn. You can't let them be dependent or the second you aren't there they will not be able to handle it. The other extreme is terrible too. To never protect their child can lead them to get hurt easily, and develop paranoid attitudes that will never allow themselves to help or be helped by others.

[Zenon]

Banana Muffin wrote...

[..]

I have played Fahrenheit I know the scenes.
I'm sorry I just misinterpreted the sentence "tastefully done without being pornographic like in Fahrenheit", I thought you meant "tastefully done, without being pornographic like in Fahrenheit" as in Fahrenheit is pornographic.
But i suppose you meant "tastefully done without being pornographic, like in Fahrenheit" as in Fahrenheit being tastefully done.
Without any comma the sentence is ambiguos and can be interpreted both ways.

Anyway I'm sorry I misunderstood and I completely agree with you on all points then.

You're right. I should have put a comma in the appropriate place. Thought it was clear and not ambiguous. Thanks for the hint. I shall check my posts next time for possibilities of misinterpretation.

[Kuravid]

Creature 1 wrote...

That is laughable.  People of non-European origin make up maybe 3-4% of the population of Europe, and racial diversity is extremely low in many European nations.  In the US 25% of people are from racial minorities, split approximately equally between black people and Hispanic people, plus some Asians and American Indians.  The cultural differences between the majority and the black and Hispanic minorities are much greater than the difference between two minor ethnic groups in Europe that have coexisted for centuries.  Maybe it would help to realize that blacks in American experienced inequality approaching the level of that experienced by the Jews in Germany in World War 2 and dragged out over a few centuries.  Does any other group in Europe have that kind of recent history? 

Again, with religion, in most of Europe Catholicism dominates, and Europeans are religiously insipid compared to Americans, with a greater percentage of people who just see church as a social group, or don't practice a religion at all.  It's not hard to not have religious conflicts when most people nominally possess the same religion and don't really think it's that important anyway. 

Additionally, you can't say, "We're diverse, because the people in the next country over speak a different language."  You have to look within the country, down to the level of cities.  The presence of Quebec up north does not cause crime in New York City.  The demographics of New York City are the cause of the crime in New York City. 

France is the country with the greatest racial diversity in Europe, and, unsurprisingly, also the country with the most problems with civil unrest.  France has a growing minority population, and their situation is more analogous to the situation in America because there are significant cultural differences between the majority and minority, as well as differences in affluence, education, and employment opportunities. 

Will France experience an increase in teen pregnancies and STD transmission along with the increase in demographic diversity, and thus move towards a more prudish approach towards sexuality?  Since the minority group immigrating into France is mostly Islamic, my *guess* is probably not unless the immigrants leave Islam over time, and then unless the problems of poverty and lack of job opportunities are solved France will probably see an increase in teen pregnancies in this minority. 

The rest of Europe had better pay attention to the situation in France, because increased immigration into all of Europe could lead to more social problems in other countries if poverty and education are not addressed. 

To you, I give hearts. I was about to write a response to this, but you said it so well that I no longer feel obliged to. 

[Kuravid]

Tominokar wrote...

What utter rubbish! The US has one de-facto language, English, which is spoken by 80% of the population. The next largest group is Spanish at 12%, and all the others are under 2%.  Let's compare this to Europe: 19% German, 13% French, 12% English, 11% Italian, 9% Spanish, 9% Polish, 6% Romania, 5% Dutch. And that's not even including Russia. All these languages create a clear cultural divide in people, as they are not mutually intelligable.

In the US, every state speaks the same language, that being English. If, for example, in Utah they spoke Portuguese and in New York they spoke Spanish and in Texas they spoke Mandarin, than more people in America would speak Portuguese, Spanish and Mandarin. The reason why Americans often don't speak more than 1-2 languages is because it is unnecessary. 

[Stanley Woo]

Yes, let's keep politics and religion out of the discussions, please.



End of line.

[Emloch]

A silly as it is, North American culture has deemed sexuality more of a taboo then violence. Even with the movie industry, a full frontal nudity shot (pubic hair) will get a film a higher rating than gratuitous violence will. I'll never understand that. Nudity and sexuality is a normal, biological and necessary part of life. That can't be said for the harm to others.