"Crush Videos" -- Banned in the US...

The "Internet!" The mention of one word, "internet", can inspire such varied and passionate reactions in people. These reactions stream along a curve from the positive to the negative. The internet is a wonderful resource. Yet, it is also a place where there is much to be found that highlights the darkness and depravity that makes some of us tick. Crush videos are one of those things that hide out in the deepest and darkest recesses of our existence.

The US Senate voted unanimously to ban the creation, sale and distribution of crush videos. For some of you, this might be the first time you have ever heard of the term crush videos. You are also wondering "what the hell is he talking about?" A crush video, to all of you reading this who have lived very sheltered and protected lives, are sexual fetish films in which small animals are maimed and killed. It is probably worth noting that the law does not cover "cruelty" to small animals that fall victim to hunters or who might suffer in the care of veterinarians.

If you are anything like me, then you are having a hard time getting your head around the idea that there is anything sexual in the maiming and killing of small animals. Then again, I have always wondered what it is that makes a seemingly super-ordinary person a serial killer? For me, the what makes them "tick" aspect of it all.

I really do not have any problem with parliament getting involved in this way. I have absolutely no problem with crush videos being banned. I do not see the banning of these sorts of videos as an impingement on the freedom of speech of those who make them or those who want to watch them. I would reckon that in this day and age of modern technology there would have to be a way to satisfy this sexual fetish 'virtually'.

Yet, come to think of it, it would not take a whole lot to ban virtual sexual fetishes either. The law as it was passed seems to provide a free pass to virtual content as the wording goes something like this: "actual conduct in which one or more living animal is intentionally crushed, burned, drowned, suffocated, or impaled in a manner that would violate a criminal prohibition on cruelty to animals".

Digressing a little, has a crime been committed against a person, a child, in a virtual child porn, operation? I have been watching too much "Law & Order: SVU" of late.

Back on track, and back to the internet. The internet is a vast resource if you know how to look for certain things or if you are looking for specific content. To be honest, I have not ever looked for crush videos. To be equally honest, I have not studied sexual fetishes that closely to know that there was even a sexual fetish that involved cruelty to animals.

Nevertheless, the truth of the matter, these videos have traditionally been distributed for free utilising file-sharing peer-to-peer networks. The internet and ever-improving connection speeds have ensured that the ability to disseminate and distribute content has become much easier.

As context to why the US Senate had to pass a law on this sort of material arises from a US Supreme Court decision from this past April that declared an earlier 1999 law that criminalised videos that showed abuse and cruelty to animals to be unconstitutional. The 'unconstitutional-ness" of the 1999 law stems from the fact that SCOTUS held that the original law was too broad and therefore a violation of people's First Amendment rights to free speech.

Free speech vs. the right to life of some small defenseless creatures...hmmm, consider the animals for a moment and let's stop the crush!

Vulgarity on Indonesian TV

Being the world's largest Muslim nation means that one is often left wondering at some of the stuff that gets on TV, particularly late at night. Even though the late evening hours and the wee hours of the morning are hardly times that the kiddies will be watching the idiot box, there are idiots out there like me who instead of getting their beauty sleep prefer to waste time watching silly TV shows. Some of these shows are overtly sexually provocative and then some are more covert. Nevertheless, it would appear that the content would still breach the broadcasting standards that are applicable in this fine land.

The Indonesian Broadcasting Commission (Komisi Penyiaran Indonesia / KPI) has taken offence to a couple of shows currently showing in much earlier timeslots. There are four shows to be exact that have come under scrutiny and have been warned for inappropriate content. The shows are: Extravaganza, One Piece, Ngelenong Nyok, and Suami-Suami Takut Istri.

Working backwards because I do not regularly watch Suami-Suami Takut Istri, come to think of it I watched it once and thought it to be stupid and haven't watched it again. I have voted with my remote and as such do not need any help from the KPI on this one. Suami-Suami Takut Istri translates "Husbands Afraid of Their Wives". The title is self-explanatory and provides an insight into the show. However, the KPI has taken issue with domestic violence in this case wives who abuse their husbands. Domestic violence is wrong but it is an interesting turn around to have the violence perpetrated by wives against their husbands. The other problem for this show is that the KPI thinks that children are portrayed in unsavoury settings. Not sure what that means though. Perhaps it is kids in a setting where there is domestic violence.

For Ngelenong Nyok the issue is that one of the characters is a little person (dwarf or midget -- politically incorrect, right?) and the other characters make fun of him. Then there is another character with buck teeth who also comes in for the brunt of some less than politically correct jokes. This is another show that I do not watch. I just do not find it all that interesting or funny.

One Piece is an anime series which is under the gun for showing violence and blood, sensual looking women, and close-ups of women's body parts. Nothing quite like a cartoon woman wearing spandex to get the juices flowing! I had not realized there were quite so many Indonesians with an anime fetish!

Extravaganza is not my favourite show but I do watch it every Saturday evening. I normally crash out in front of the TV with the better half and have a good little chuckle over the 2 hours the show runs from 19.00 through 21.00. The humour on Extravaganza is generally sexually suggestive, but I have not found it to be vulgar. I guess though I am pretty liberal in my views and attitudes to vulgarity. I tend to watch it because I enjoy the idiocy of the characters played by Tora Sudiro and Aming (pictured). Nevertheless, the particular complaint is one that one of the female characters in one of the skits was portrayed as being sexually harassed.

Now, sexual harassment is wrong. Yet, this was a comedy skit and as such does it have a responsibility to portray this matter in a more serious way. Sexual harassment is no joke. However, I guess it is open to interpretation as to whether the skit was in fact one where the character is sexually harassed or is the definition applied by the KPI too narrow for the purpose. I do not recall the episode in question, although it was aired on May 10, so I might have a look on You Tube later as many of the skits are available there. In any event I would have to see it again to pass any comments that I would feel comfortable defending.

Anyways, under the Law, if the broadcasters ignore the warnings and continue to flagrantly violate the KPI's authority in this area, then the KPI can impose fines of up to IDR 10 billion and persistent breachers would be potentially liable for terms of imprisonment up to five years.

I guess we wait and see.