Discussion of violence
Honest question:
Why are works of #fiction (books, comic, animation, film) depicting #rape or #pedophilia more offensive to more people and cause more calls to boycott or censorship than fiction depicting extreme #violence or #murder, when killing someone is universally regarded as worse than raping someone (morally worse) and criminal systems everywhere punish murderers more harshly than rapists (legally worse)?
@tripu Murder is a destructive act, with death as the end goal. Sex is a creative act, with pleasure and birth as the eventual end goals. The shock value of rape is that of a creative, loving act (sex) that's been perverted to destructive control.
It's the cognitive dissonance that occurs when observing the transformation of the positive into a destructive force that provides the added shock value.
In many ways, it's the same dynamic as the difference between death by a firing squad and mutilation through torture. The latter is less destructive (the victim is still alive), but vastly more cruel, as the victim has to live with the injury forever. The same can be said of victims of rape and pedophilia.
I think I understand the difference in shock value. My point is that morality (and the law) shouldn't depend on how shocking something is, but on objective measures of moral worth, consequences, etc.
Open-heart surgery is very shocking to watch, but it's very good. Hundreds of children dying every day of diarrhoea in distant countries isn't shocking (we got used to it, and we mostly ignore it), but it's very bad. etc.
Similarly, if killing someone is worse than raping someone, we should be
at least as vocal opposing depictions of the former as we are about the latter, regardless of what is more shocking.
