NZpol: A Dick-Burning Dumpster Fire

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > NZpol: A Dick-Burning Dumpster Fire

Are you a This poll is closed.
homeowner	39	22.41%
renter	69	39.66%
stupid peace of poo poo	66	37.93%
Total:	174 votes

[Edit Poll (moderators only)]

exmarx: Feb 18, 2012; The experience over the years
of nothing getting better
only worse.

The FLBR shouldn't exist

# ? Sep 8, 2015 01:16

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 25, 2024 07:06

exmachina: Mar 12, 2006; Look Closer

Exclamation Marx posted:

The FLBR shouldn't exist

# ? Sep 8, 2015 01:34

klen dool: May 7, 2007; Okay well me being wrong in some limited situations doesn't change my overall point.

Exclamation Marx posted:

The FLBR shouldn't exist

I cannot agree more, and let's neuter the OFLC while we are at it. I am happy for the rating system to stay, with r18 being the defacto rating. No more of this "refused classification" bullshit.

# ? Sep 8, 2015 02:09

klen dool: May 7, 2007; Okay well me being wrong in some limited situations doesn't change my overall point.

gently caress I hope no one shows family first a copy of American psycho. They would poo poo their collective trousers if they read that, considering their reaction to into the river. .

# ? Sep 8, 2015 02:11

swampland: Oct 16, 2007; Dear Mr Cave, if you do not release the bats we will be forced to take legal action

I have a copy of Naked Lunch I bought when I was in high school sitting on my shelf right now

# ? Sep 8, 2015 02:12

Varkk: Apr 17, 2004

klen dool posted:

gently caress I hope no one shows family first a copy of American psycho. They would poo poo their collective trousers if they read that, considering their reaction to into the river. .

Imagine if they actually read the Old Testament.

# ? Sep 8, 2015 02:13

exmarx: Feb 18, 2012; The experience over the years
of nothing getting better
only worse.

Another person shot by police

# ? Sep 8, 2015 03:03

Ivor Biggun: Apr 30, 2003; A big "Fuck You!" from the Keyhole nebula; Lipstick Apathy

swampland posted:

What in the gently caress? What god drat year is this again?

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/sep/07/new-zealand-bans-into-the-river-teenage-novel-outcry-christian-group?CMP=soc_567

Family First has never heard of the Streisand effect

[e] Apparently it's all a misunderstanding and they never intended to ban anything

http://www.stuff.co.nz/entertainment/books/71849582/family-first-says-it-didnt-intend-for-racy-teen-novel-into-the-river-to-be-banned

quote:

Family First leader Bob McCoskrie told Radio New Zealand's Morning Report that the group was satisfied with an R14 restriction initially placed on Into the River, but would be happier if it was R18.

Deputy chief censor Nick McCully ruled last month that the book should be unrestricted, but the president of the Film and Literature Board of Review, Don Mathieson, QC, stepped in and put an interim ban on the book, the first time that has happened in 22 years.

...

McCoskrie had counted the number of times offensive words appeared in the book, telling Radio New Zealand "it's a book that's got the c-word nine times, the f-word 17 times and s-h-i-t 16 times."

But he said he never intended for the book to be banned, and said the censor's office "went against due process" in doing so.

Bob should try online gaming with today's yoofs.

Ivor Biggun fucked around with this message at 03:51 on Sep 8, 2015

# ? Sep 8, 2015 03:12

truther: Oct 22, 2008; ASK ME ABOUT THE BEARS

Exclamation Marx posted:

Another person shot by police

What's that, 2 this year?

# ? Sep 8, 2015 03:13

exmarx: Feb 18, 2012; The experience over the years
of nothing getting better
only worse.

truther posted:

What's that, 2 this year?

Three apparently. At least this time the guy actually had a gun.

# ? Sep 8, 2015 03:29

truther: Oct 22, 2008; ASK ME ABOUT THE BEARS

I think our police generally do a good job but after the shooting in Albert Part Auckland witnesses said the man had lowered his gun before being shot.... or was it a knife? Either way I'm keeping an eye out for the results of their report.

Anyway:

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11509675

quote:

""She was trying to talk him down. She said she had a good liaison with him. He was going to put the rifle down. She was only a metre away when he was shot dead."

The gunman was animated at times. The rifle was mostly by his side but when he raised it slightly, he was shot twice by police, Mr Kokcu said.

"He wasn't holding the gun aggressively. It was just in his hand to the side."

# ? Sep 8, 2015 04:40

Ghostlight: Sep 25, 2009; maybe for one second you can pause; try to step into another person's perspective, and understand that a watermelon is cursing me

Ivor Biggun posted:

[e] Apparently it's all a misunderstanding and they never intended to ban anything

http://www.stuff.co.nz/entertainment/books/71849582/family-first-says-it-didnt-intend-for-racy-teen-novel-into-the-river-to-be-banned

I like that today when everyone's blowing up about it he's saying they never intended the interim order, but yesterday he was really excited about it:
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/entertainment/news/article.cfm?c_id=1501119&objectid=11508895

quote:

Family First director Bob McCoskrie, who requested the review, said the interim order - the first affecting a book under the Films, Videos and Publications Classification Act 1993 - showed people could still use the censorship system.

"Hopefully we have set a precedent and people start bringing other books to the fore that they are concerned about."

# ? Sep 8, 2015 06:01

exmarx: Feb 18, 2012; The experience over the years
of nothing getting better
only worse.

Ivor Biggun posted:

Family First has never heard of the Streisand effect

http://smile.amazon.com/gp/bestsellers/books/10368548011/ref=pd_zg_hrsr_b_1_5_last
http://smile.amazon.com/gp/bestsellers/books/10368569011/ref=pd_zg_hrsr_b_2_5_last

# ? Sep 8, 2015 06:04

Slavvy: Dec 11, 2012

Can someone explain to me what, exactly, is so bad in the book that it incites talk of banning? Explain it to me like you're explaining it to someone who has no idea why anyone would want to ban any book at all. Is it because it uses the word oval office and there are people loving?

Do the people complaining know about something called game of thrones?

I wasn't aware that NZ censored books at all, what a laughably stupid waste of time and money.

# ? Sep 8, 2015 07:41

Ivor Biggun: Apr 30, 2003; A big "Fuck You!" from the Keyhole nebula; Lipstick Apathy

Slavvy posted:

Can someone explain to me what, exactly, is so bad in the book that it incites talk of banning? Explain it to me like you're explaining it to someone who has no idea why anyone would want to ban any book at all. Is it because it uses the word oval office and there are people loving?

Do the people complaining know about something called game of thrones?

I wasn't aware that NZ censored books at all, what a laughably stupid waste of time and money.

As far as I can tell it's because Family First objected to a young adult novel that had swearing in it.

swampland posted:

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/sep/07/new-zealand-bans-into-the-river-teenage-novel-outcry-christian-group?CMP=soc_567

The Guardian posted:

Ted Dawe�s Into the River has been banned from sale or supply by the Film and Literature Board of Review (FLBR) after a complaint from conservative lobby group Family First.

It is currently being pulled from libraries, schools and bookshops around the country.

Family First objected to sexually explicit content, drug use and the use of a slang term for female genitalia.

The interim restriction took effect on 3 September and will be reviewed to decide on a permanent classification within the next month.

A human heart posted:

Note that it's an interim ban while the FLBR reviews its status based on the complaint, it's a standard process that they go through. The book hasn't been banned indefinitely or what have you, and it's unlikely in the extreme that it will be banned outright, it's more likely to be given a restricted classification(which can't go above R18). Most of the books banned outright here are stuff telling you how to commit crimes or kill people.

# ? Sep 8, 2015 07:49

Ghostlight: Sep 25, 2009; maybe for one second you can pause; try to step into another person's perspective, and understand that a watermelon is cursing me

Family First are reactionary conservative fuckwits who use the weight of their incredibly misleading name to push standard white Christian not-racist-but talking points like the breakdown of society, political correctness gone mad, abortions!, "non-traditional" families!

It's a young adult novel about an underprivileged Māori kid outside his family unit confronting his non-white cultural identity while encountering exaggerated but not exactly uncommon issues of teen sexuality, sexual abuse, violence and drug use. It's the kind of thing that if schools got their hands on it would completely threaten the precarious plan of totally privileged ignorance Family First pushes as the 'correct' way to raise kids.

# ? Sep 8, 2015 08:03

Moongrave: Jun 19, 2004; Finally Living Rent Free

Ghostlight posted:

Family First are reactionary conservative fuckwits who use the weight of their incredibly misleading name to push standard white Christian not-racist-but talking points like the breakdown of society, political correctness gone mad, abortions!, "non-traditional" families!

Hmm what country are these groups super popular in and also have an unreasonable amount of political pull... Hmm

Right on the tip of my tongue....

# ? Sep 8, 2015 08:13

Slavvy: Dec 11, 2012

BARONS CYBER SKULL posted:

Hmm what country are these groups super popular in and also have an unreasonable amount of political pull... Hmm

Right on the tip of my tongue....

More like right on the end of your ponytail amirite

# ? Sep 8, 2015 08:17

swampland: Oct 16, 2007; Dear Mr Cave, if you do not release the bats we will be forced to take legal action

Ghostlight posted:

political correctness gone mad

This one seems somewhat inconsistent even as far as these things usually go

# ? Sep 8, 2015 08:39

Moongrave: Jun 19, 2004; Finally Living Rent Free

swampland posted:

This one seems somewhat inconsistent even as far as these things usually go

To these people "political correctness" means "doesn't openly tell people to get murdered if they don't worship their specific version of God"

# ? Sep 8, 2015 08:41

Meander: Apr 1, 2010

A human heart posted:

Note that it's an interim ban while the FLBR reviews its status based on the complaint, it's a standard process that they go through. The book hasn't been banned indefinitely or what have you, and it's unlikely in the extreme that it will be banned outright, it's more likely to be given a restricted classification(which can't go above R18). Most of the books banned outright here are stuff telling you how to commit crimes or kill people.

I don't know if I'd call it the standard process - yes it's provided for in legislation but it's never before been used in practice (not for a book anyway). Not many things go to FLBR, and when they do normally there's no interim order. It's odd that they'd use it for this book considering there is no likelihood of all of it being classified as objectionable (which is an outright ban on sale or possession).

The only issue is whether to give it an R rating and if so to what level. In my view there's no need to ban the distribution or sale of it in the meantime. I reckon it was done because FLBR were annoyed by the OFLC revisiting the classification, but that's just a guess.

# ? Sep 8, 2015 08:41

Varkk: Apr 17, 2004

Doesn't the book already have an R rating? I think I saw R14 being mentioned in an earlier article, but then the FF people got all wound up about it and appealed the classification hoping to get it banned.

Also let us play a quote game:

Who said [

quote:

"but I am not going to turn the other way when people are being persecuted and say, as a leader, that it is other peoples' problem.

"I don't think that is the New Zealand way."

A) Andrew Little about lifting the refugee quote.

B) John Key on doing as little as possible about the refugee quota

Or

C) John Key on the prospect of working with the US to blow up brown people.

# ? Sep 8, 2015 08:48

Ivor Biggun: Apr 30, 2003; A big "Fuck You!" from the Keyhole nebula; Lipstick Apathy

Ghostlight posted:

Family First are reactionary conservative fuckwits who use the weight of their incredibly misleading name to push standard white Christian not-racist-but talking points like the breakdown of society, political correctness gone mad, abortions!, "non-traditional" families!

My rule of thumb is that any political organisation with "Family" in it's name is a poorly disguised hate group.

# ? Sep 8, 2015 08:50

exmarx: Feb 18, 2012; The experience over the years
of nothing getting better
only worse.

Varkk posted:

Doesn't the book already have an R rating? I think I saw R14 being mentioned in an earlier article, but then the FF people got all wound up about it and appealed the classification hoping to get it banned.

It was R14, but that got appealed and it was made unclassified (same as the books in the image below). FF complained about that, leading to the FLBR banning it. The FLBR President being this guy

Don Mathieson posted:

The bulk of the Commission�s report sets out a rationale for the Anglican Church to conduct same-sex marriages and, if that is not feasible, to conduct same-gender blessings. The objections to that rationale occupy much less space. This critique will help redress that imbalance. The unity of the Church and its acceptability overseas as a church that supports overseas mission are in peril. It is time to speak forthrightly in support of the clear scriptural witness about the sinfulness of homosexual acts and the position adopted without dissension by Roman Catholic, Protestant and Orthodox Churches alike for nearly two thousand years.

# ? Sep 8, 2015 09:08

echinopsis: Apr 13, 2004; by Fluffdaddy

You can't buy that kind of publicity

# ? Sep 8, 2015 09:10

echinopsis: Apr 13, 2004; by Fluffdaddy

Disappointed that a 3 minute attempt to find the epub on an illegal file sharing website has turned up no results.

# ? Sep 8, 2015 09:15

Moongrave: Jun 19, 2004; Finally Living Rent Free

Why do Christians always talk about the sanctity of marriage and the word of God then constantly do poo poo that directly goes against when they supposedly believe like that one bitch who wouldn't marry gay people in the U.S.?

# ? Sep 8, 2015 09:17

Butt Wizard: Nov 3, 2005; It was a pornography store. I was buying pornography.

FFS Story did a piece on the horseshit about the flag change being needed to pass the TPPA and 'due authority' mentally ill sovereign citizen Facebook share dribble:

http://www.3news.co.nz/tvshows/story/flag-change-massive-conspiracy-to-pass-the-tppa-2015090819#axzz3l1P6Bvnc

# ? Sep 8, 2015 09:29

bobbilljim: May 29, 2013; this christmas feels like the very first christmas to me

BARONS CYBER SKULL posted:

Why do Christians always talk about the sanctity of marriage and the word of God then constantly do poo poo that directly goes against when they supposedly believe like that one bitch who wouldn't marry gay people in the U.S.?

Maybe they aren't very smart :ssh:

# ? Sep 8, 2015 09:49

Slavvy: Dec 11, 2012

BARONS CYBER SKULL posted:

Why do Christians always talk about the sanctity of marriage and the word of God then constantly do poo poo that directly goes against when they supposedly believe like that one bitch who wouldn't marry gay people in the U.S.?

Because people who get really enraged about what other people do with their private lives tend to be ignorant, stupid and filled with emotional problems. These things are not conducive to reasonable and logical actions.

# ? Sep 8, 2015 09:59

WarpedNaba: Feb 8, 2012; Being social makes me swell!

bobbilljim posted:

Maybe they aren't very smart

Even the stupid and foolish can possess the moral character to refrain from hypocrisy.

# ? Sep 8, 2015 10:00

Ghostlight: Sep 25, 2009; maybe for one second you can pause; try to step into another person's perspective, and understand that a watermelon is cursing me

Chris Finlayson thinks the idea that having the Union Jack on the flag has legal implications over constitutional rights is only moderately crazy compared to the idea that the GCSB is spying on you.

# ? Sep 8, 2015 10:22

exmarx: Feb 18, 2012; The experience over the years
of nothing getting better
only worse.

Ghostlight posted:

Chris Finlayson thinks the idea that having the Union Jack on the flag has legal implications over constitutional rights is only moderately crazy compared to the idea that the GCSB is spying on you.

please, it's the SIS

# ? Sep 8, 2015 10:33

Moongrave: Jun 19, 2004; Finally Living Rent Free

Exclamation Marx posted:

Oh gently caress off

# ? Sep 8, 2015 10:37

voiceless anal fricative: May 6, 2007

The 13 y.o. protagonist of Into The River has sex in case someone was wondering what the fundies were up in arms about.

# ? Sep 8, 2015 10:51

Moongrave: Jun 19, 2004; Finally Living Rent Free

fong posted:

The 13 y.o. protagonist of Into The River has sex in case someone was wondering what the fundies were up in arms about.

No one tell them about the Bible!

quote:

�Your breasts were formed and your hair grew, you who were naked and bare. 8 � �Later I passed by, and when I looked at you and saw that you were old enough for love� [taken from Ezekiel 16]

Ban this sick filth

# ? Sep 8, 2015 11:12

Meander: Apr 1, 2010

echinopsis posted:

Disappointed that a 3 minute attempt to find the epub on an illegal file sharing website has turned up no results.

Pretty sure you can get it off Amazon still. It's legal to buy it and read it, you just can't sell it or give it to anyone else to read. Really pointless.

# ? Sep 8, 2015 11:32