Twitter (2020) VS the Hays code (1930)
Maybe the Hayes code wasn’t that bad
Imagine knowing this little about history. The Hays code we’re so apparently keen to bring back included the following:
“Miscegenation” (interracial relationships) were not allowed.
Sex hygiene and venereal diseases were not appropriate subjects.
Homosexuality was not to be depicted.
Ridicule of the clergy was not allowed.
Religion could never be depicted in a mocking manner.
Words like “God,” “Lord,” “Jesus,” “Christ,” “hell,” and “damn” could not be used unless it was in connection with religious ceremonies.
But yeah let’s fucking bring back the Hays code because sex is evil. You fucking lemmings. The point is that the Hays code was a horrible, immoral piece of bullshit that was only there to enforce white supremacy and Christianity on screen, and the reason people compare you to them is because of this absolutely brain-numbing tomfoolery.
Good lord, we’ve really reached “maybe the Hayes code was good” levels of purity culture. Yikes.
Because of the Hayes Code, women were no longer portrayed as independent beings. Instead they were reduced to mere appendages to men.
Some references: Wikipedia, The Hays Code Made Hollywood Hell On Earth For Women, Uncensored: Gender Roles and the Dismantling of the Picture Production Code, A Series of Splices, The Origins of Classic Hollywood’s Male Gaze
It’s driving me nuts because I can’t find the quote, but one of the rationales for the Code I read in a film history book was (paraphrased) “If it’s not fit for a child to watch, then it’s not fit for anyone.” And gosh, doesn’t THAT sound familiar…
Homosexuality actually could be depicted under the Hayes Code! By irredeemable villains!! Or people who died because of it!!!
If you’ve ever wondered why media has so much sh*tty stereotypes about homosexuality and villainy, or the bury your gays trope exists, well look no further than the Hayes Code and its wide reaching impact on generations of media makers! Our current rating system? Was actually an improvement on the Hayes Code.
Feel free to miss me with that bullsh*t, thanks.
I just can’t with the “don’t make fun of us for defending the Hays Code! How are we supposed to know what that even is?”
You. Look. It. Up. You look it up. YOU LOOK IT UP. You do what you should be doing every single time you see something you don’t understand. You fuckin look it up. You have libraries of information in your pocket. Look it up. You do not have an excuse for not opening another tab, typing in the thing, and hitting enter. Look it up.
And if you’re LGBTQIA, Bipoc, non-xtian, or a woman in the US, and you spend any time looking up your history, you will see the Hays Code. It’s not just a silly old rule that we can laugh at now. It’s the framework we’re trying to dismantle. You need to know this. You should’ve been taught by your parents and teachers, but if you weren’t, you have to pick up the slack and do the research yourself. That sucks and I’m sorry, but it’s an unavoidable part of life.
See, this is that critical thinking stuff that purity culture is so obsessed with. You cannot interpret a thing (like “sex scenes are only for horny lol” being juxtaposed with the Hays Code) if you don’t know
the meaning of the language (the definitions of “sex,” “story,” “passion,” etc), the topics referenced (the Hays Code, what sex scenes are),
the speakers (Lily Orchard is notoriously aggressive, bigoted, and authoritarian… the Hays Code was written by a priest, a trade paper editor, and some studio heads),
or the context (the first statement is part of a ridiculous list of “writing tips” that also includes such gems as [paraphrased] wlw only kissing at the end is abuse, high-stakes conflict is bad, and the good guy must kill the villain, and was written in 2020… while the Hays Code was written in 1930 as a way to self-censor bc they thought the govt might step in if anyone saw their media as “lowering the moral standards” of ppl with “succeptible minds,” aka women, children, the disabled, and poor ppl who needed to be spoon-fed images of the “correct standards of life”).
You really do need that info. You do. You need to go get it. Then you look at it. And you combine it with all of the other applicable info you have. (For example, if you have had sex, or consumed any media containing sex.) Then you think through the thing, while taking everything you know into account. You identify what it was supposed to mean, and decide what it means to you. Congratulations! You have done the critical thinking.
At least if you still agree that sex’s only purpose in literature is to give you a boner, and that it’s a good idea to put down sweeping policies to prevent that from happening, you’ll have some kind of thought process behind it. And you can start trying to reconcile that view with its historical and present effects on minorities and society as a whole.
And if you don’t know what those effects are, FUCKIN LOOK IT UP
GOSH, I WONDER WHY PEOPLE WANT TO BURN AND BAN BOOKS ALL OF A SUDDEN. WHAT IGNORANCE AND EVIL COULD POSSIBLY FUEL THIS ENTIRELY UNEXPECTED DEVELOPMENT.
