Recently, I found myself with an unexpected hour of free time and the ultimate control—the TV remote. In my household, this is a rare privilege, akin to winning a battle in a high-stakes competition. The competition for the remote is fierce, and as a parent, I often find myself intimidated by my children.
With the remote unguarded and the coast clear, I ventured to take over. I settled in, snacks at the ready, and began flipping through channels. My choices were limited, but I landed on the UFC 188 prelims. Yes, I know it’s not everyone’s cup of tea, but it certainly beats watching yet another home improvement show.
As I watched, I was struck by an odd contradiction. Here I was, a suburban mother, engrossed in a sport that involves fighters brutally assaulting each other, yet the sound of bleeping censorship filled the room. Profane language was being censored—words like “damn” and “shit”—while blood splattered across the screen as fighters exchanged blows.
I understand that it was early afternoon, a time when children might be watching, and parents often wish to shield their offspring from harsh language. Some believe that profanity could lead to undesirable behavior. But let’s consider the reality: two fighters in a cage, blood streaming down their faces, engaging in what is undeniably violent behavior.
Meanwhile, we hear the bleeps for curse words, but the violence goes unmentioned. This isn’t a scripted show; this is real life. These are actual individuals, not actors, engaging in a raw display of physicality. It seems perplexing that society is more concerned with censoring language than with the graphic violence being broadcasted.
If we are genuinely worried about the influence of media on impressionable minds, we should reevaluate our priorities. If a child repeats a curse word, the most severe consequence may be a shocked reaction from a grandparent. However, if a child tries to replicate a move they saw in the octagon, the outcome could be far more serious, potentially leading to injuries and trips to the emergency room.
It raises the question: should we not prioritize censoring the bloodshed over the use of certain words? Words themselves are not harmful; it is the intention behind them that can be damaging. In a world where violent crimes and mass shootings are prevalent, one would think society would be more alarmed about children witnessing real-life brutality rather than simply hearing a few inappropriate words.
Perhaps encouraging children to participate in martial arts could be beneficial. Programs like karate or jiu-jitsu teach discipline, respect, and self-control, which might help cultivate a more peaceful environment.
In summary, our current approach to censorship seems misguided. We should focus on the impact of violence on viewers rather than the mere utterance of certain words.
For more insights on home insemination and parenting, check out this article on artificial insemination kits and the comprehensive resources available at WomensHealth.gov regarding pregnancy. Additionally, explore the Cryobaby kit for a deeper understanding of home insemination options.
Keyphrase: Censorship of Words vs. Violence
Tags: “home insemination kit”, “home insemination syringe”, “self insemination”