Yes, the word "faggot" when used as a pejorative directed at another person is vile. I would agree with her on that point as well as the point that someone's sexuality isn't an insult (again I find myself in a situation where I might be criticizing someone with whom I have far more in common than not in common). But to arbitrarily say that using the word is "not okay" once again goes back to the idea of thought-policing and cultural PC fascism.

We've already seen what this individual has had to say about other things she didn't agree with. But to say that using that word isn't okay is the same as saying any word isn't okay. This goes back to the same argument I make against the "ThinkTank" video produced as a reaction against the web cam model Sunny Olivia which claimed "it is not okay" to satirize Nazis on a web cam show. What will be the next thing that the bourgeoisie claims is not okay all for the sake of protecting everyone's feelings? And what will be after that? Before too long we'll have an entire enterprise going on where people work in little cubicles snipping out and eliminating words from the urban dictionary, erasing them from memory and existence all together.

As well intentioned as the sentiments were behind this tweet, to take up this position is to openly advocate on behalf of those seeking to establish Orwell's Big Brother. To argue that it is anything else would be short-sighted. This is not fascism coming from the top down, as most of us fear. This is fascism coming from our own ranks. It seems with people such as this that we are setting ourselves up to be our own jailers.

The right to self-censor

Censorship, when imposed from the outside-in, is a vile and contemptible thing; especially censorship for the sake of political correctness. There is a repugnant disingenuous film coating anything that is manipulated by the currents of modern PC fascism. This, however, is not to say that all forms of censorship are as detestable. As you will notice, I've censored out the usernames and handles of the twitter users and web models I've been making references to. It was my personal choice to do so.

At the end of the day these users and cam models are just people voicing their opinions- which they have every right to do, just as I have a right to counter such opinion. Who they are is irrelevant. That is why I self-censored their identities out. Nobody compelled me to do so. Nobody said "You shouldn't use people's social media tweets against them to make a point." There are no laws saying I can't reveal social media identities in blog posts. I consciously chose to self-censor.

Self-censorship can be a great thing. Ideally you'd self-censor yourself from saying hateful things such as "faggot," "gook," "spic," "towel head," "nigger," etc. Ideally you'd be enlightened enough; socially educated enough; morally superior enough to not ever find yourself needing to use any of those terms. But to have someone, or something, come in from the outside and rope off these words and ideas is nothing short of PC fascism, and it is my opinion that fascism of any kind, no matter how small or from what good intentions it stems from is something that should be rooted out like a weed out of a garden lest it be given a chance to overtake not just the garden, but the whole damned yard.

A Serbian Film

In 2010 Srban Spasojevic wrote, produced, and directed a film unpretentiously titled (some would argue very pretentiously) A Serbian Film. It was a horror-thriller dealing with the very very... very dark underbelly of the pornographic film industry in Serbia, a land where as many inhumane monstrosities have been committed by humans against other humans in the past twenty-five years as any other.

I cannot recommend the film. It's a horrific abomination of a motion picture. Spasojevic's film depicts graphic scenes of violence, snuff, and necrophilia as well as containing a scene where the protagonist is forced to anally rape a drugged child covered by sheets. In fact, he soon learns that it is his own child he has been made to rape; and that isn't even the worst sequence in the film. That distinction belongs to the stomach churning scene which depicts a woman in labor who upon the immediate birth of her newborn watches in psychotic ecstasy as a man rapes her baby.

As horrifying as what was being depicted in the narrative of the film is, it does not negate the fact that Spasojevic was making a poignant (perhaps too poignant) statement about dehumanization. That's not to say that Spasojevic didn't face any backlash either. Not only did he suffer the scorn and outrage of some of his fellow Serbian countrymen, some of whom make some very interesting points about the nature of the film being called A Serbian Film, but Spasojevic was also investigated by the Serbian national government for "crimes against sexual morals related to the protection of minors." As far as I have been able to determine nothing ever came of the investigation. That, however, has not stopped a number of countries in the world from having banned the film. Brazil, Singapore, Malaysia, Germany, Spain, even Australia, have all banned it. I would be of the opinion that these countries are wrong to do so.

Echoing what I've already stated in the previous post, censoring art, even distasteful art, sets a horrible precedent. Aside from the fact that censoring art is an unwarranted violation of the freedom to express one's self, distasteful art, even revolting art, can also teach us a lot about ourselves by the mere act of watching or observing it.

Of course every precaution should be taken that such a film like A Serbian Film is not seen by minors. I would even go so far as to applaud the Netflix decision to remove the film from its lineup upon initially being made available on the ubiquitous streaming service. Just as I am in support of myfreecams.com's right to remove any model it may deem as harmful to its business I am as equally in support of Netflix to do the same with films that could cause harm to its business relationship with its customers. Unlike the idea that I think it is ultimately wrong for myfreecams.com to remove models merely for performing controversial shows I have no such qualms with Netflix. It was the right and moral thing to make it unavailable on their service. Let anyone interested in seeing the film get a hold of it by other means.

As revolting as Spasjovec's film is (being a revolting film was his point) it is still art. I know I'm not alone in my opinion on this because Spasojevic's A Serbian Film, monstrous as it may be, would go on to win a Special Mention for a Best First Feature Award during Montréal's annual Fantasia Film Festival the year of its release.

A Serbian Film is not for the squeamish, and in spite of all the unsettling thematic material depicted in the film, the one scene that stands out in most people's memories when they watch it is that of a rubber muppet (meant to stand in for a real newborn baby) being sexually assaulted as part of the film's narrative. Similar to A Serbian Film, Kota_Morgue's show, which was nowhere near as shocking as the aforementioned movie, was not meant to be for the squeamish. Also similar to A Serbian Film, the big complaint was that of Kota indiscriminately using a plastic doll to represent an aborted baby as part of her show/costume.

The aesthetic use of rubber dolls in pop and anti-pop art

In 1966 The Beatles released their ninth studio album Yesterday & Today. The cover art on their album release originally featured the Fab Four dressed in butcher smocks, covered in slabs of meat, and surrounded by mutilated plastic baby parts.