FJ Nation 50: Nudes, Censorship, and Making People WatchshirigamiRank: #3377 FunisvotingBlocksBlocks prevnext Prev Next The power’s back, and I’m getting ready to go home. I got a headcold in the middle of summer though, so don’t expect my spellchecking to be as nimble as usual. I am on numerous things. Anyways, I have invited you all here for one thing and one thing only: to discuss five different things. I have the RESULTS from the last two Issues, as well as Issues No. 613, No. 1008, and No. 964. So without further ado, I present to you: Issues. join list: FunnyStates (51 subs)Mention History RESULTS: Issue No. 786: Tainted Tattoos “Sales of disinfectant wipes have skyrocketed.” “Retirement” Banner Unlocked (Extend your citizens’ average lifespan beyond 80 years.)Issue No. 1062: The Hunt for the Violet November “The military refers to helpless combatants offering surrender as ‘sitting ducks’.” ISSUES:Issue No. 613: A Nude Day, a Nude Awakening… The Issue: Internet news sites and online communities are abuzz over supposed leaked nude images and videos of you that surfaced online this morning. Amateur photo-manipulation experts have concluded that these are fakes, but the files have already spread across the internet like wildfire. As the victim of this internet trolling campaign, it may be time for you to address the problem of fakes of this sort. Debate Points: 1. “Here we have thieves and perverts, stealing your likeness and creating obscenity,” declares Coraline Griffin, a country singer of dubious talent who claims there have been more downloads of fake nudes of her than downloads of her music. “Every time I go online I see these filthy pictures. It’s humiliating, degrading, and feels like a violation of my privacy and a kind of sexual assault. I guess now you know how it feels too! I know this is hard to police, but you should at least establish the principle that photo-manipulation is illegal, with fines applicable to those who break this law or who distribute these images.” 2. “Kirby Streisand agrees, but Kirby Streisand thinks that we should go further,” agrees the notorious Kirby Streisand, a staunch censorship advocate who once tried to remove all references to his name on the internet. “If it were up to Kirby Streisand, any unauthorized image, name usage, or even a likeness of a person without their permission should automatically be taken down whether it’s on the internet, the news, or any random video.” 3. “Either everything is okay, or nothing is,” refutes satirist and online columnist Michael Murphy, whilst using a clever piece of software to make a mildly angry photo of you on a bad hair day look like you are a positively psychotic murderer on the verge of going on a killing spree. “Are you going to censor the Moaning Lisa because she was painted without her knowledge? Are you going to ban a schoolboy from drawing a moustache on a newspaper photo of your face? You have no right to censor art, and photo-manipulation is art. Quite frankly, celebrities and politicians should give up their expectations of privacy. If you don’t want people drawing you nude, you shouldn’t have chosen a career that makes you famous.” 4. “Face it, you can’t stop people putting things on the internet,” suggests your tech-savvy nephew, who moonlights as notorious internet troll politichunt42. “But you can affect an image’s notability, by changing its context. Say we fake a few hundred nudes of a dozen other world leaders, and maybe some politicians and public figures you don’t like: we could make it so that your faked nudes are old news, and have everyone laughing at your rivals and opponents instead. Wouldn’t it be fun to watch them flail around like a goose with its head chopped off? Is it immoral? Sure, if somebody hadn’t obviously already done this to you. Can you say ‘hackers-sponsored-by-Blackacre’?” 5. Dismiss the Issue Communications Penal Code? Close shop forever. Any likenesses to actual people are entirely cooincidental. NOW it’s art! Send nudes. ALL the nudes. Dismiss. Vote! (View results) Issue No. 1008: Wash Your Mouth Out! The Issue: The League of Concerned Moms has successfully petitioned to ban the dictionary from the Little Goose Elementary School, to be replaced with a “Clean-tionary” of “pleasant” words. The reason? It contained “lewd and offensive” words referring to private parts of the body. On the day you collect your niece from school, you are confronted by picketers holding signs with boldly-lettered suggestions of where the concerned moms might like to stick their “Clean-tionary” and chanting inventive invective-filled rhymes about censorship. Debate Points: 1. “We need to protect children from seeing bad words!” demands Harriet Ho, the white-clad leader of the League of Concerned Moms. “Our delicate flowers must be shielded from all bad influences. Just yesterday, my five-year-old came home, saying his classmate called him a ‘[expletive deleted] [expletive deleted] whose mother was [expletive deleted] [expletive deleted] [expletive deleted]’. And where do you think those words were found? That’s right! The dictionary! Where any innocent child can chance upon them. Remove all harmful words from schools’ dictionaries and let our beautiful pearls thrive.” 2. “All you big people are cramping my style,” groans third-grader Xu Payne, giggling over the term ‘poop deck’. “Dictionaries are great; I can learn whatever words I want! Words are GREAT. They give kids the power to say what we really think. Yesterday, I called my teacher a ‘big bum-bailiff’. You can’t take that away. You need to keep the fun words in the dictionary, and add more, so we can... um, express ourselves.” He grabs the dictionary protectively and hisses, “Precious words!” 3. “We need to look at the root of this problem,” soothes psychologist Cornelius Ward, who has an office across the street with ‘Appointments Available’ in the window. “All this is the result of bad influence. These poor, misguided children don’t know better. They see a cuss word, and yell it to the world. It’s simply a combination of poor impulse control and a need to impress their peer group. Well, no longer! Schools should have psychologists on staff, and as soon as these troubled angels go astray, we can help them find their own way back to the right road.” 4. “I agree that this is serious,” notes Isabelle Curtis, your Minister of Let’s-All-Just-Calm-Down. “But it’s not just the kids who are dirtying the air with foul language. The adults are also at fault. We should fund an official Junky dictionary of approved words, free from all expletives, coarse words, vulgar expressions and terms for the unpleasant parts of human anatomy, and punish anyone who uses any bad word – in books, media, and written and spoken speech. Only then can the People’s Republic of FunnyJunk be a truly pleasant place to live. Now, shall we have a cup of tea?” 5. Dismiss the Issue Bad Words? “Failure” isn’t in my dictionary. Is that what kids are calling it? Slow down the fast learners. Common courtesy. Dismiss. Vote! (View results) Issue No. 964: An Expensive Watch The Issue: Sporting events have always drawn big crowds of passionate fans, but those same crowds can bring a temporary surge in crime. While extra policing can be assigned, questions have been raised over who should pay for this. Debate Points: 1. “These are big-profit events for the corporations that run them, but they generate considerable externalities which must be paid for by taxpayers,” explains Police Assistant Accountancy Director Liam MacIntyre, seeming excited to be at the centre of attention for once. “Let the profiteers pick up the extra cost, as guesstimated... I mean, carefully calculated by my department.” 2. “Excuse me? Since when have private companies been liable to fund public services?” retorts CEO Rosita Simpson, showing you an empty wallet to emphasise her point, though her gesture is diminished in impact by it being a ridiculously expensive crocodile-skin, diamond-studded designer piece. “If you cut into profits, you discourage free market enterprise, and if you do that, there’ll be less sporting entertainment. And you know what happens when a populace doesn’t get its sports? That’s right - they start thinking about politics, and criticising their social betters. Do you really want that to happen?” 3. “Oi oi, there’s no need for all this bovver,” grins die-hard fan Four Fingers Ahmad, hiding a bloodied length of scaffolding pole behind his back. “So we like to let off a bit of steam before and after the match, and have a bit of a scrap. It’s all good fun, and nobody who don’t wants to be there has to be there if they don’t wants to be, right? So why not give the rozzers the day off, and let us sort ourselves out?” 4. Dismiss the Issue The Chiefs vs. the Fans? Crowdfunded. Corporate task forces. Self-policed. Dismiss. Vote! (View results) prevnext +12 -Favorite +Favorite Unblock User's Content Block User's Content Sub/Block Channels Funisvoting:UploadUnblockBlockSubUnsubsubs: 297