So far this year, we've been dealing with the parameters of non-government censorship. Of course, we've gone through the same tired conversations about the limits of free speech and where (if any) the lines should be drawn differently between private enterprise and government. We've also seen glaring hypocrisy that always comes with censorship: freedom for me, not for thee.
It's true that private enterprises can't currently throw you in jail for speech. What they can do is no-platform and keep speech from the ears of the public if we don't demand better practices.
A blaring example of this is the MPAA. The MPAA isn't a government entity. It can't prevent you from making your movie. It can't even prevent your movie from being shown in theaters. What it can do is make your movie financial suicide by absurd, arbitrary, and contradictory standards.
The Matrix was groundbreaking in a few ways, not the least of which that it took the R rating as a summer, action blockbuster. Before The Matrix, PG-13 was the target rating for financial reasons.
That was a bit of progress; but, the NC-17 rating is still an absurd and egregious way that the MPAA screws movies.
Movies like Requiem for a Dream, The Cooler, and Boys Don't Cry were all originally slapped with NC-17 ratings which either required edits or some seriously aggressive strategies and protests to have the ratings reduced to an R. You see, most theaters won't show NC-17 rated movies.
None of these movies recieved the NC-17 rating due to violence or language. You can do whatever you want there and still get an R.
No, the NC-17 always ends up getting slapped on movies because of sex.
I've seen scenes with eye gouging, demonic torture involving people's intestines being slowly removed, people hacked apart with chainsaws; none of those movies needed to fight the NC-17 rating. They all got R ratings.
Boys Don't Cry didn't get hit with an NC-17 rating due to its depiction of a brutal murder scene of a trans person; it got its NC-17 rating because of a scene wherein that trans-person wiped his mouth after performing oral sex on his girlfriend. Requiem for a Dream didn't get its NC-17 rating because of a character getting his infected arm sawed off; it got the rating do to a female character prostituting for drugs. The Cooler showed graphic, Mafia related violence and it got its NC-17 rating due to a glimpse of Maria Bello's pubic hair.
It's also specifically draconian about women's sexuality specifically. James McAvoy appeared completely naked in The Last King of Scotland, Cillian Murphy in 28 Days Later, and Jude Law in The Talented Mr. Ripley; all of those movies got R ratings without a problem. (Note, none of these examples were sexual; but, let's just say that I've met my share of women who viewed James McAvoy dropping dong as a selling point.)
This isn't the government. This is a private entity which is and has been engineering what can be seen in what has been nearly a cathedral of American entertainment, art, and expression.
No, the MPAA can't keep a theater from showing a movie. I'm not saying that. What it can do is make any movie that pushes its limits financially not viable to even make in the first place. It has profound power over our art and our culture and liberals act surprised that we still have hangups about seeing a woman's nipples while we're desensitized to people being bashed over the head with blunt objects.
Stop pretending that this isn't an issue just because it's not the government throwing people into cages. This is deeply important to any person of mild intellect.