|
Excessive
Screening Of Violence Defeats Purpose
June 18, 2004
Do you remember
when the media made a decision to stop airing the videos of the
jumbo jetliners crashing into the Twin Towers allegedly because
repeated viewings could desensitize us to the horror that occurred
on September 11, 2001? Maybe it's time to rethink that.
The sentiment
to reduce our -- especially our children's -- overexposure to
violence is sensible and worthwhile. As a matter of our mental
and moral health we don't want to dwell unduly on violence and
the horrors of life.
But isn't
there a distinction between portrayals of violence in fiction
and those of actual violence? Couldn't the excessive suppression
of real acts of violence, murder, and mayhem have precisely the
opposite effect than is intended?
Sure, as
a civilized culture we want to shield ourselves and our young
from coarsening influences with the hope that we don't become
numb to these horrors and thereby less shocked and outraged at
their occurrence. But if we go too far the other way, if we try
to sanitize real life atrocities committed in our midst, we run
the risk of neutralizing the outrage factor just as surely as
we do from overexposure.
A perfect
example of this can be seen in the ongoing abortion debates. The
pro-abortion lobby expresses implacable indignation at displays
of photographs depicting aborted babies. "These are grotesque,"
they scream.
Do you see
the irony in their objections? Those who purport to have such
hypersensitivity to the depiction of the macabre seem to have
no problem with the underlying acts giving rise to these photographs.
If the photographs
showing recently killed babies are unbearable, how much more so
the act of killing those babies? Why the selective outrage for
the pictures and not the acts themselves?
Pro-life
activists have the right, indeed an obligation to show these pictures
even if -- especially if -- they are offensive. They are meant
to be offensive because what they depict is offensive.
When we shield
ourselves from the graphic evidence of these acts in the name
of protecting ourselves, we are betraying the babies already killed
and those who will be in the future. Or are our sensibilities
more important than the lives of the unborn themselves?
Only if we
wake up to the reality of these atrocities will we have a chance
of doing something about them. As long as we play these "out
of sight out of mind" games with ourselves, we will not likely
deal with what is really at stake here: the extermination of human
life.
Indeed, as
technological and scientific advances force us to deal with the
reality: to acknowledge that those creatures in the womb are human
beings, more and more people inevitably are turning against abortion.
Nothing seems
to shock us into reality better than images. And that's why we
should reconsider the conventional wisdom against showing the
public videos of September 11, the Daniel Pearl beheading, the
Nick Berg beheading, and the recent footage of Saddam Hussein's
acts of prison torture made available to an unconscionably disinterested
media.
The American
Enterprise Institute couldn't seem to get the mainstream press
interested in viewing a four minute tape showing Iraqi prisoners
being fed alive to Saddam's Doberman pinschers and others' fingers,
tongues and heads being cut off. Yet they feast incessantly on
the "horrors" our side committed at Abu Ghraib.
Despite our
sinful nature, most people are too decent to consider that other
human beings are evil enough to engage in the kinds of abominable
behavior that is commonplace for terrorists in Saddam Hussein's
Iraq and other international terrorists groups, like Al Qaeda.
Until we
are reminded of these unspeakably brutal acts we tend not to deal
with them. They are too horrible, too unthinkable to occupy our
minds for very long. We simply won't permit it.
But if we
continue to steal ourselves away from the reality of these horrors
we will have difficulty retaining the resolve to persevere in
the war against radical Islamic terrorists. We must expose ourselves,
at least from time to time, to the fruits of their evil nature,
no matter how distasteful.
If we insist
on continually beating ourselves up for the relatively isolated
bad acts committed by our side, we must restore some proportionality
by occasionally focusing on the infinitely more heinous actions
of our enemies. Such chilling reminders should provide all the
incentive we need to stay the course.
|