Now That’s Obscene

I recently read the details of a proposed bill, filed by Sen. Manny Villar. It’s just baffling and ominous. Here’s a link to John Silva’s blog entry about the proposed Anti-Obscenity Bill.

Mr. Silva intelligently wrote about the topic: “This bill insults Jose Rizal and all other libertarians that fought for our individual rights. It violates the Philippine constitution and will be used to impose a repressive fundamentalist state. It is anti-art and demeans the whole notion of sexuality. It is not the answer to the exploitation of women and children in pornography. The bill should be cancelled.”

I agree. My friend Gerry Alanguilan also spoke his mind articulately about the bill last month:

“As an artist, this is a bill that gravely concerns me because it has the potential to seriously curtail not only my freedoms as an artist, but my ability to make my own choices as a mature, intelligent and moral human being.”

Again, I agree. Among the disturbing parts are its definitions of “pornography” and “obscene.”

“’Obscene’ refers to anything that is indecent or offensive or contrary to good customs or religious beliefs, principles or doctrines, or tends to corrupt or deprave the human mind, or is calculated to excite impure thoughts or arouse prurient interest, or violates the proprieties of language and human behavior regardless of motive of the producer, printer, publisher, writer, importer, seller or distributor.”

Among those considered obscene are “showing, depicting or describing human sexual organs or the female breasts,” and “showing, depicting or describing completely nude human bodies.”

I’m all for the protection of children and women. Don’t get me wrong. I just think there should be other practical and realistic ways. They shouldn’t plunge us back to the dark ages. By the definitions of “obscenity” and “porn,” it doesn’t look too promising or intelligent at all.

So here are my questions, based on different parts of that proposal:

What kinds of films will be butchered or sanitized of profanity and sexual content as a result? What will be left for adults to watch?

How will that translate to guarding the internet? Why won’t grown-ups be allowed to view some adult-oriented sites or literature, or express ourselves freely in forums?

Why is nudity “obscene”? Will footages of naked indigenous people or their rites be considered pornographic? Will naked religious statues be removed from public display, along with celebrated paintings or statues depicting people in the buff? Who decides what’s tasteful or not in that situation?

As for consensual acts between adults and expressions of sexuality, how far will privacy be breached in the name of the law? Parts of the bill are vague about it.

What are the specific “religious beliefs” and which religions are being referred to? What will happen to agnostics, atheists, gay men and women who don’t subscribe to established religions or belief systems?

This bill inspires imagery akin to Spanish-era censorship. The ideas in it, and the thought that it’ll end up improperly executed and implemented if it’s approved, are simply dreadful. It’ll result in witchhunts where mostly innocents will suffer. And that’s just truly and undeniably obscene.