Why are female breasts pixelated?

The US series "Naked Survival" is currently running on German television. It's quite interesting, but what I don't understand at all, is that in addition to the sexual organs, the female breasts are also made unrecognizable (pixelated). My wife and I think that's inhuman and misogynistic. Something like this would be unthinkable in Germany or Austria. Why is this done in the US?

In the US, we have this government agency know as the Federal Communications Commission. They set the rules for on-air broadcasting as to what is deemed vulgar or unacceptable. This includes speech.

The US series "Naked Survival" is currently running on German television. It's quite interesting, but what I don't understand at all, is that in addition to the sexual organs, the female breasts are also made unrecognizable (pixelated). My wife and I think that's inhuman and misogynistic. Something like this would be unthinkable in Germany or Austria. Why is this done in the US?

Because of a historical and cultural tradition of prudish Puritanism … heavens forbid that anyone should actually enjoy the sight of a human body. It might incite to desire and lust.

what is deemed vulgar or unacceptable

Female breasts are vulgar and unacceptable? Poor American women :-(

Female breasts are vulgar and unacceptable? Poor American women :-(

It is not unheard of for mothers breastfeeding in public to be arrested. Every now and then there are small news items about such occurrences (say at an airport, train station etc.) …

This will help explain some of it, as for Japanese porn I don't recall why they do there's

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meese_Report

Try googling “Edwin Meese porn”

I don't know about pixelated..but in the past year or so I've noticed a lot of “blurry blobs” on regular TV programs (news/documentaries,etc.) covering up/censoring even the tinniest view of male/female buttocks/women's boobs.The most ridiculous/silly one was a Grandmother holding her +/- 8 month old grandson in her arms after giving him a bath…a tiny blurry blob of censoring was applied to the child's partially visible left buttock. When all the protesting was going on awhile back…live on TV..signs with the “F” word and/or verbally hearing that word were clearly seen and not censored out or the audio cut off. Visual censoring of the human body is becoming hyper-sensitive on TV. If you watch a lot of TV you'll notice all the blurry blobs of censoring going on lately..

I don't know about pixelated..but in the past year or so I've noticed a lot of “blurry blobs” on regular TV programs (news/documentaries,etc.) covering up/censoring even the tinniest view of male/female buttocks/women's boobs. The most ridiculous/silly one was a Grandmother holding her +/- 8 month old grandson in her arms after giving him a bath…a tiny blurry blob of censoring was applied to the child's partially visible left buttock. …. Visual censoring of the human body is becoming hyper-sensitive on TV.

I'd start reading up about the laws and rules of the not all that fictional Republic of Gilead. Some places are getting there, slowly but surely.

This will help explain some of it, as for Japanese porn I don't recall why they do there's

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meese_Report

Try googling “Edwin Meese porn”

Thanks - I wasn't aware of that report.

The report was criticized by many inside and outside the pornography industry, calling it biased, not credible, and inaccurate.The report along with revised prosecution tactics under Attorney General Meese was effective in reducing pornography markets in some jurisdictions prior to the Internet.”. Some thought the report itself was pornographic!!

Women's breast are shown on TV all the time - seems like most movies that want to sell put a little “skin in the game”. I have never noticed “pixelated boobs” on regular TV - except on the news where they may not have a model release (my guess).

The current standards of editing non-premium TV channels and regular radio broadcasting are largely the result of Janet Jackson's wardrobe malfunction during the Super Bowl halftime show, when one of her breasts popped out of her top.

This caused enough of a stir that song lyrics became edited on radio station broadcasts. ‘Who the fuck are you’? by The Who, and ‘do goody good bullshit’ by Pink Floyd now have the words ‘fuck’ and ‘shit’ edited out.

These words fall within the list of 7 dirty words, expressed by the late, great comedian George Carlin. Shit, piss, fuck, cunt, cocksucker, motherfucker and tits.

To further understanding of this and the complexity of this is the Community Decency Act, CDA of which is not truly objective but highly subjective. One of my friends, Barbara Nitke, filed suit and lost. Reading through the decision by the court, they are basically chicken s**t's, asking for proof that is very difficult to obtain as no research has ever been done on communities and so called standards. Even doing the research alone would be very difficult because of the subjective nature of the subject itself. Below you can read the case and I am also including another link to help clarify a legal term used. As you read this you will get an idea how we all are potential targets and the risks involved. As @agracier pointed out, fictional Republic of Gilead, may not be so fictional at all. Margaret Atwood may have created the fictional Republic of Gilead, but she said she just looked around the world and that is where she got her material to write the Handmaids Tale.

https://www.steptoe.com/images/content/1/2/v1/1252/2071.pdf

https://www.lectlaw.com/def2/p106.htm

https://psychologydictionary.org/prurient-interest/

You can also google “Barbara Nitke lawsuit”

It is not unheard of for mothers breastfeeding in public to be arrested.

Oh my goodness, what a perverted, me shocking idea to arrest a breastfeeding mother. I'm happy that my country see this as very natural and not as a criminal act.

The current standards of editing non-premium TV channels and regular radio broadcasting are largely the result of Janet Jackson's wardrobe malfunction during the Super Bowl halftime show, when one of her breasts popped out of her top.

Janet Jackson did nothing wrong. We saw that as a little funny thing but nothing to discuss more as a minute. Swedish women fight since a few years against the prohibition of naked female breasts, and they do it with more and more success. Hope USA will become a bit more liberal too.

Female breasts are vulgar and unacceptable? Poor American women :-(

I don't feel sorry for them at all. They seem to be the ones who created this by hiding girls parts from view of boys almost from birth. It was fine for my neighbor girl playmates to see me coming from the bath naked on my way to my room to get dressed but not so if the situation was reversed. Any naked girl had to be hidden from me in my own house or other places. When I was a kid playing naked in the lawn sprinkler with my female playmates they had nothing of any great interest to be seen. We all had asses and they had a miniature one in the front – Big Deal. I had the interesting parts hanging out. They used to love to watch me pee with that tool that seemed to be made special for that purpose and they always wanted to see me write my name in the snow. Hell. we couldn't even figure out where their pee came out, just somewhere inside that miniature ass in the front. Then when boobs began to show those had to be covered up no matter how uncomfortable it may be.

Janet Jackson just showed the world how scared Americans really are of breasts and she didn't even break any of the usual repressive laws. Her nipple was covered by a shield, that's all that's required by most laws. Strangely the area that was the most Puritanical has nearly no laws against public display of breasts. ME, NH, & VT have no state laws against it neither do most of the towns. Also in NYC bare breasts are legal. There are towns in VT where full public nudity is legal and the high school girls can't wait for the weather to warm up enough to head for the local park to show the boys what grew during the winter.

https://www.findlaw.com/state/vermont-law/vermont-indecent-exposure-laws.html

https://www.sevendaysvt.com/vermont/wtf-why-is-public-nudity-legal-in-vermont-but-public-disrobing-isnt/Content?oid=2804753

Here in NH they can't get the legislature to pass any laws about public nudity, it's left up to the towns.

The FCC is the dictatorial agency for radio and TV. I remember years ago when a DJ played the wrong version of Greenback Dollar and nearly lost his job. I think it was the album that had “damn” in it but the 45 had “mmmm” replacing it.

Hustler magazine won it's case because the court couldn't define public decency.

“Curtina, you are talking about the Trump nation, filled with small independent highly restricted “churches “

I'm pretty sure we have a state law making breast feeding legal in NH to prevent towns and other entities from stopping a woman from doing that. I've known many people over the years who were not ashamed to do it. I had one friend when I was 22 whose wife would just pick up the baby and sit back down at the kitchen table where we were having a beer, pull off her sweater and hook him up. It's not unusual now to see someone with a child on her breast at the local diner.

In the State of Texas--the Law allows a Mother to breastfeed her baby anywhere in the State. Whether this can be done publicly..I'm not sure..the Law says she can do it--without any interference from Bosses or puritanical complainers. Seeing a woman's breast on standard TV programming is another thing..it would be blurred out or cut/deleted out. It's been like that for decades in the U.S. It's perceived as being sexual and/or inappropriate. So now we are in the 21st century and so much more “socially enlightened” and all that..and censoring of breasts or any nudity of the pubic region of the human body (or even nude marble statuary) on TV is a supreme No-No --with some rare exceptions on PBS.. Censorship is increasing and it's approaching ridiculous levels..

On most commercial channels here in Australia it is unusual to show naked breasts without a disclaiming warning before the show.

On SBS our multicultural network it's open go and nudity or sex is ok

“Curtina, you are talking about the Trump nation, filled with small independent highly restricted “churches “

I absolutely cannot understand that. I am also involved in a church, but seeing female breasts as something sinful offends the one who created us humans. Puritan church leaders who see a breastfeeding woman as something evil are nothing but hypocrites.

Well..another on--TV blurry blob censoring of a artistic tabletop wooden or stone statue of a indigenous African woman with prominent or expressive breasts. Camera closeups were blurry blobbed out but views of the statue maybe 5' away were not blobbed out. So what's next ? “Fig leaves” or coverings placed on nude or partially nude statues/paintings in museums so that no adult or child might be shocked or traumatized by seeing it ? There seems to be a frenzy of blurry blobbing out of “sensitive” human body parts going on with television lately. School libraries are banning or cleansing out books with “sensitive” language/words/drawings. Most of this censoring borders on being “Victorian”/silly in the 21st century but it is definitely going on..

The fault of all this is of religious puritanism and Judeo-Christian culture, which assumes that everything that produces pleasure and enjoyment is pernicious and sinful, an offense against some "strange invisible force" called "Divinity", someone impersonal who he rejoices in sending us, the humans, to the earth to suffer and deprive ourselves of everything that makes us happy. According to this "religious decalogue", everything that makes us enjoy must be prohibited and suppressed and those who fail to comply with the norm, shall be severely punished. This is especially applicable to everything related to sexuality, but it is also appliable to the consumption of certain substances, which is why alcoholic beverages and also tobacco have these tax charges in all countries of the world as a dissuasory and punitive purpose and their advertising is unthinkable today and already; not to mention other addictive substances, prohibited in most of the planet.

The irony is that when censoring parts of the body, a distinction is made between men and women, for example, women have pixelated or blurred her chests, but not us men. The abominable and ill-mind censors estimate that only the female breasts can arouse lust (in addition to other things 😄) but not a male chest, which is a stupid nonsense, since obviously a heterosexual woman will be attracted by the sight of the breast of a man, just like us gay men do. This is the nonsense of a religious education and so, when beliefs in many countries are raised to the rank of law and what the priests say is applied compulsorily and with the threat of heavy penalties and criminal convictions, people are judged, jailed, as happened here in Spain during the cruel fascist dictatorship of General Franco only by not to be a believer in Catholicism and not to obbey those aberrant mandats, or even worst, killed by the governments as happens in many other countries even today.

@Hugobravo That is really an interesting perspective. I can agree with a lot of it, but some parts are a little extreme. I don't agree with the position that we must “….deprive ourselves of everything that makes us happy” - that's a little too broad. Unfortunately, the powers to be have to a great extent selectively decided for us what we can and can't enjoy. And like all edicts, they are selectively enforced (that's why they invented Altar Boys !!!!).

School libraries are banning or cleansing out books with “sensitive” language/words/drawings. Most of this censoring borders on being “Victorian”/silly in the 21st century but it is definitely going on..

Prepare and resign yourselves that this kind of censoring and cleansing is only going to get worse, much worse, in many places in the world. History and society do not follow a linear progression towards betterment and freedom.

I shall never know why do some cultures spread their petty morals on others. Before WWII it was common for Japanese women to work topless in the field, but when they were occupied after the war, they had to cover up.

I would say over in the UK we only have limited censorship on the TV. We have a programme called “Naked attraction”, where 4 contestants beauty are judged by someone hoping to take one of them out. Initially they are covered by a screen that rises a bit at a time after their future date has expressed an opinion and eventually the screens are removed and the contestants are all naked (as will the person who is choosing). It is open to everyone, trans, straight, disabled bi etc.

On our second public broadcast service (BBC 2), ) after the famous watershed of 9:00 PM, swearing is allowed and I have never heard it censored, even our news programmes have swearing, but when programmes previously shown on BBC" are shown on “Dave” which is supposed to be accessible in the UK only, the sound man has a nervous break down over the amount of beeps he has to put in.

During the morning we have magazine programmes on our mainstream TV, and it is not unusual to have self breast and testicle exams shown, and you get to see everything.

When I had my girls I had to breast feed very discretely in public, and even that it was frowned upon. Now after a public outcry because businesses and restaurants were banning women from breastfeeding in public, we have come to our senses and during the summer I often see women breastfeeding in the town centre. Some are discrete and whilst the baby is feeding, they cover their baby/breast with a small blanket, some simply lift the bottom of their top up resting it on their exposed boob, and then carry on feeding. Their breast is clearing on display, but no one seems to take any notice.

For any censors out there, what is wrong with the human body??

Censorship is one of humankind's biggest hypocrisies. The overwhelming majority of humans enjoy sex in one form or another, and the biggest censors of this world are often the most sexually perverted beings. I hate censorship.

The irony is that when censoring parts of the body, a distinction is made between men and women, for example, women have pixelated or blurred her chests, but not us men. The abominable and ill-mind censors estimate that only the female breasts can arouse lust (in addition to other things 😄) but not a male chest, which is a stupid nonsense, since obviously a heterosexual woman will be attracted by the sight of the breast of a man, just like us gay men do.

It isn't the man's breast that get me hot and bothered, but the whole chest and possible chiseled abs. Pictures a couple male movie stars in my head that work very hard to look great for their movie roles. Yummy pieces of manliness.

It isn't the man's breast that get me hot and bothered, but the whole chest and possible chiseled abs. Pictures a couple male movie stars in my head that work very hard to look great for their movie roles. Yummy pieces of manliness.

I always get a kick out of Ellen's show. She asks the men who work on the show and some guests to do things that would land any guy in jail if he did that to a woman.

We have a programme called “Naked attraction”

@SouthernAnn : we have the same program in germany, also uncensored. I agree with you: What is wrong with a human body? Nothing is wrong !

Whenever Ellen has a hunk on the show she always gets him to take his shirt off to wild cheers from her all female audience but of course it's not OK to get a sexy female to do the same. If a male host even suggested that he would probably lose his job.