Monday, 2 June 2014

Fighting Censorship

The above poster for the new Sin City movie, featuring French actress Eva Green, has been censored by the MPAA. Apparently, this vile institution - known for fighting piracy in all sorts of malicious ways - deems it to feature
"nudity — curve of under breast and dark nipple/areola circle visible through sheer gown."
Aside of wanting to express my candidacy for the job of whoever it is that verbalises the above description, I think it as my duty as an anti censorship inactivist to ensure the poster is seen by as many eyes as possible.

Of course, my contempt for censorship is only an excuse to post this astounding image of Eva Green. Which raised the question: do I post the photo because of its censorship thing, or do I avoid posting it because of its sexist thing?
You might dismiss this argument, but I certainly don't. The problem stares me in the eye: there are tons of prominent photos featuring females in very compromising sexual positions, but only a fraction of similarly clad men. I will put it this way: I doubt Sin City has an equivalent poster to the one above featuring a man. My problem is, I do not want to be just another promoter of this type of sexist discrimination.
Often enough I contemplate photos for my posts, only to dismiss those that exploit the female [and thus settle for less sexist photos that also do a much lesser job at delivering the message I'm after]. It's actually a fairly common affair. Take the previous post as an example. Due to the context in which it was to be aired, I wanted a photo of Aussie women practicing sports; I even thought of using this photo. But then common sense prevailed and I decided not to stoop that low, correcting with a photo featuring a naked guy. For a change.
But was I on the verge of stooping low? Were those women in the photo I was thinking of publishing feeling exploited? I'd say they do, simply because the men playing the same game do so dressed significantly differently. Still, the question remains: when does one cross the border between the exploitation of women and the promotion of feminism? I will not pretend to have the answers.

The other issue springing to my mind with regards to Eva Green's image, particularly given the MPAA context, is the matter of copyright.
It is simple matter: Generally speaking, I do not have the right to reproduce the image. On the other hand, I doubt the movie studio would mind the publicity I am providing. And on the other other hand, the USA's copyright legislation does allow for fair use; but then again, Australia's doesn't, and what provisions there are for using copyrighted materials around here are rather thin.
I went ahead and published the image anyway. It's been all over the Internet anyway, so it's not like my publication matters much. The fact still remains, though: by publishing the image, partly in order to protest against the limitations imposed by copyright, I am legally exposing myself.

I don't know who holds the copyrights for the above image, but it certainly isn't me.

No comments: