College Case Essay (Draft): Censorship

    Socrates believed that every person is responsible for what comes out of their mouth, and Stephen Fry believes that everyone’s reaction to those words is their own problem. So why does every school, work, and public environment subtly encourage censorship, be it on a legal, social, or personal level? I’ll trust the words of George R.R. Martin to form the foundation of my thesis, “When you tear out a man's tongue, you are not proving him a liar, you're only telling the world that you fear what he might say.” Censorship is not a display of decency, but of fear, evidence of a distorted perception of the opinions of others. To support and exercise acts of censorship is to discourage the development not only in personal education, but in the betterment of society as a whole.

I believe that censorship appeals to several negative traits found in human nature, and that there is a difference between censorship and appropriate exposure. One such trait being fear; more specifically, fear of opinions that counter our own. People don’t like to argue, or at least, don’t like losing an argument, as many find a sense of accomplishment in needlessly demeaning the views of others. Censorship, in its simplest form, is designed to silence opposition to a norm set by society or government for the sake of giving people a sense of ease, for who is happier than the people that believe they are always right in their morals, tastes, and preferences.

Another aspect of human imperfection that censorship caters to is that of ignorance. It’s almost painful to imagine how many people (generally young adults and adolescents) treat “ignorance is bliss” as an analect to live by. To enforce censorship in schools is to discourage the desire to expand one’s knowledge. What better way to limit one’s developing writing skills than to prohibit controversial topics in a Case Essay assignment? It subconsciously trains young mind that certain real-world issues  are “best left unapproached”. Is it any surprise that these very topics are the very issue many young adults are most uninformed about? We don’t (often) send soldiers unequipped for battle, so why would we send out the voting demographic unaware of what’s a relevant issue and what’s a “no-go”.  I’ll reel it back a bit here, for the sake of wanting to receive at least partial credit.

Outside of the sociopolitical spectrum, I find that censorship is largely at fault for many teens’ distorted views on dating, sex, and personal identity. Outside of the home, (particularly school environments), simple lewd terminology and content is understandably prohibited (as I’ll discuss in the following paragraph). I find that When this obscurity is not accompanied with punishment or explanation, it subconsciously trains children that sexual thoughts are “wrong” and dirty in nature. Alternatively, I support the idea that schools shouldn’t punish questions and discussions about sex, but rather, encourage children to bring these natural and healthy curiosities to their parents, if possible. I believe that school counselors should also be equipped and prepared to answer these tougher questions in a healthy manner. I’m aware of the ethical red-flags that arise with this proposition, but we can’t neglect that some parents may not be entirely reliable when it comes to learning about sexual development.

Of course, moderation and decency should be implemented in the standards for the type of content available to certain demographics for certain and environments and periods of their lives. This is what I personally refer to as “appropriate exposure”. In the same way wouldn’t want to send our youth unprepared for “real life” issues, we also don’t want to burden undeveloped minds with ideas that are relatively abstract and irrelevant to them. This can turn simple curiosities into unhealthy explorative endeavours.

As children’s access to internet resources significantly increases, so does a child’s ability to take their education into their own hands. This sort of liberty can often have the same results as complete obscurity. It’s foolish to consider children as equals to adults, even on a social level, for the sake of feeling like a fair and “nice” adult. No doubt every human being has similar basic emotional needs, but this does not serve as an excuse to allow children to participate in adult decisions and discussions. Communication skills are a developing trait in people’s lives, and should be nurtured by parents, similar to hygiene and dietary patterns. As with those two, communication without structure leads to unhealthy habits.