The Chinese government maintains one of the most extensive censorship operations in history — an effort to hold the world at its physical and virtual borders. It is not only an effort to prevent citizens from reading of civil liberties or government abuses. It is also a ban on such subjects as homosexuality. That effort has taken a ridiculous term with the censoring of gay language and plots from the hit movie “Bohemian Rhapsody.” The cuts have left audiences reportedly confused by the disjointed dialogue and story.
The film explores Freddie Mercury’s homosexuality, so cutting such references leaves unconnected pieces.
I read once of a Taiwanese movie theater owner who wanted to show two films but did not have time for two full length productions. So he cut the songs from the movie Sound of Music. It terms out that the movie is quite short when all of the music is cut.
China however has never been bothered by the need of pretense. Movies are as incomprehensible as the Chinese legal system: bits and pieces of a story untold.
16 thoughts on “Chinese Censors Leave Audiences Confused After Cutting All Gay References From Bohemian Rhapsody”
I haven’t seen the movie yet, but heard it was quite good. Sorry to hear that, on top of all the air pollution, criminalization of Christianity, and the repressive government, the Chinese have a disjointed edited Bohemian Rhapsody on top of it. Boo. Hiss.
oh it is also interesting, by the way, that the PRC totally suppresses homosexuality. What is the reason for that? Cultural chauvinism? I doubt it. How about more likely it is viewed as inherently antisocial and potentially subversive. That’s how a lot of regimes have seen it in the past too. That is a dynamic that human rights ideology can’t manage. But Trump is smart to avoid the topic altogether.
True benevolence, perhaps, should not be to antagonize Chinese with issues that only affect a small minority like homosexuals, but, focus on the things that will help the greatest number in society, like improvements in basic rule of law and legal institutions.
Human rights on niche issues like gay rights will be perceived as a propaganda ploy and just fizzle out with zero positive effect. And yet I notice that a lot of Asian social activists in the USA are also LGBTQ whatever so it’s all rather perplexing at times.
The PRC legal system is a farce. On paper it exists but in reality it is just systematic bribery
It layers shakedowns at every level. People who have been accused, usually do best negotiating bribes with police before they end up in court, because the merciless hanging judges there will ask for even more and then there is not even room for any negotiation, just TIOLI and then ship you off to jail if the answer is no.
To blame this on Marxism is wrong. At least Marx had the good of the workers in mind. The supposed “Communists” of China are actually a wealthy caste atop all the others. They are as much a plutocracy as any other has ever existed there.
The facsimile of law is in place in writing on the books. Ideals of justice have existed in China since the time when Confucian scholarship coexisted alongside “legalism” long before Christ. Of course Mao made war on the “Four olds” including old traditional ideas of justice so here we are. A once great people now governed by an organized pack of bandits misusing ethnic nationalism to justify their extortions.
it is so endemic that not another hundred thousand officials locked up could put a dent in it. Xi Jinpeng, showing some wisdom, has tried to crack down, but he’s spitting in the wind. One wonders if all these people who went to jail for corruption, simply failed to pay their own bribes and kickbacks on time!
censorship is the least of their problems. basic rule of law is right now the biggest.
There is little academic attention to this in the west. The mass media and Hollywood are suffused with Chinese investment money so they don’t want to offend. But if you have friends or family who live in China the problem is very well known.
Even the leadership recognizes the problem which is why Xi has locked so many up for corruption. It’s like trying to bail a pool out with a tablespoon, however. The problem is so huge. But consider that the Chinese have kept their hands off HK and Taiwan, why? Not even the leadership wants to territorial outliers by taking them over to forcefull with the failed and corrupt PRC system of government costumed racketeering.
The problem of Chinese people addressing their own government’s worst tendencies, goes beyond the usual difficulties attendant to authoritarian regimes.
It also reflects a certain paranoia that is characteristic of very ethnocentric peoples. Westerners who criticize Chicom government, arouse a suspicion inside Chinese breasts, that they may be attacking the group as a whole. They feel defensive, about the group as a whole, and turn inward, ignoring criticisms and standing clear from associating too closely with the laowei.
The conditioning that foreign devils are only intent on exploiting the “sick man of asia” has been reinforced vigorously since the british were there dumping opium on the population which is the source of a lot of the negative stereotype of Westerners in the first place.
The PRC are very clever and cunning about all of this. They play on this in China and they play on it here.
Many westerners steeped in individualism and liberal ideals, are very ignorant about ethnic group thinking as a whole, how it works socially and psychologically, and have a moralistic attitude towards it. Hence, Chinese who have strong ethnocentric culture, may think we are stupid on top of untrustworthy.
Some Asian leftists in America on the take of the Democrat party, busy playing the race baiting game here too, which services both the Dem party interests and the PRC interests. But there are openings. it’s important if Republicans ever want to get a slice of this important demographic here, to have more sophisticated thinking. How do you respect ethnic group identity, while still forming an effective political coalition?
The problem is actually harder for Democrats than Republicans, because the Dems have the tiger by the tail with their most loyal demographic. Republicans will never win much with that group so don’t need to waste energy on them. But this other Asian demographic is growing in population and money fast so it can’t be ignored.
In the meantime we should pursue a fair trade policy, and strong defense, but avoid war. So far I like what Trump is doing with China, it’s an interesting mix and seems to be working better.
Confucian scholarship coexisted alongside “legalism” long before Christ.
Neither Confucianism nor Legalism antedated Jewish Law or Roman Law.
Did I say Roman or Jewish law? No. Dont put words in my mouth. I said CHRIST
See below? BCE means Before Christian Era.
“Legalism, school of Chinese philosophy that attained prominence during the turbulent Warring States era (475–221 BCE) and, through the influence of the philosophers Shang Yang, Li Si, and Hanfeizi, formed the ideological basis of China’s first imperial dynasty, the Qin (221–207 BCE).
The three main precepts of these Legalist philosophers are the strict application of widely publicized laws (fa), the application of such management techniques (shu) as accountability (xingming) and “showing nothing” (wuxian), and the manipulation of political purchase (shi).
The Legalists believed that political institutions should be modeled in response to the realities of human behaviour and that human beings are inherently selfish and short-sighted. Thus social harmony cannot be assured through the recognition by the people of the virtue of their ruler, but only through strong state control and absolute obedience to authority. The Legalists advocated government by a system of laws that rigidly prescribed punishments and rewards for specific behaviours. They stressed the direction of all human activity toward the goal of increasing the power of the ruler and the state. The brutal implementation of this policy by the authoritarian Qin dynasty led to that dynasty’s overthrow and the discrediting of Legalist philosophy in China.”
Weird, I fast forwarded those parts and was able to watch the movie without confusion. Actually more confusing was the non chronological order for certain songs in the movie.
The sub title “Fearless Lives Forever” is kind of stupid also, since in Mercury’s case, he died. Fearless of what?
They sing a song in Hong Kong to ridicule American homosexuals. They sing this in English in bars where tourists go.
If you’re Bent you are Bent..
You are Bent all the way!
From your first cigarette …
To your last dying day!
Americans sing a song back to them.
You’re a Chink you’re a Chink..
You’re a Chink all the way!
From your first Mao leader…
To your last dying day!
Despite it being morally acceptable in some quarters of the West, homosexuality is not welcome in many areas of the world. It’s seen as unnatural, immoral, destructive of family units and a cause of effeminacy in men. The Chinese have opted not to display the practice believing it to be a corrosive agent in society. To each his own. In the West, we have moved from banning to tolerating homosexuality and then on to celebrating it. When the world fails to share that enthusiasm we react calling them bigots or worse. That’s Virtue signaling at its worst and cultural myopia at its best. We call our position tolerant, but much of human society thinks it is licentiousness. Btw, China permits homosexual contact by law but does not encourage it or afford homosexuals special legal status. It’s worth noting that our moral position was similar to much of the world’s just fifty or so years ago. We call it evolution, they call it degeneracy. So maybe we should climb off the high horse of moral indignation and compete with the Chinese in ways other than cultural morality.
Good analysis, Mespo. But I think there is much less acceptance of homosexuality in the West than what there appears to be. Most people are scared of the Gaystapo. Plus, we have a main stream media that is full of queers that pushes this stupid agenda.
And deny gays the same rights as others? Why would we do that?
Because we have the right to discriminate. Also, i think you meant to write, “special rights”.
Homosexual agitators are not now nor have they ever been interested in ‘the same rights as others’. Virtually every item on their policy agenda has been in favor of preferential treatment or prescribed public celebration of homosexuality.
so is being morbidly obese. You know: gluttony, sloth, pride, ….
oh whats the use..pearls…swine
How is that hypocrisy working for you Mark?
Communist dictatorship holds dominion in China where there is no freedom of speech or freedom of anything else. In America, government is infinitesimal, severely limited and exists solely to facilitate the maximal freedom of individuals. The entire communistic welfare state is unconstitutional. Affirmative action, quotas, welfare, food stamps, rent control, social services, forced busing, utility subsidies, WIC, TANF, HAMP, HARP, Education, Labor, Obamacare, Obamaphones, Social Security, Social Security Disability, Medicare, Medicaid, “Fair Housing,” laws, “Non-Discrimination” laws, etc. are all unconstitutional.
Karl Marx wrote the Communist Manifesto 59 years after the adoption of the Constitution because none of the principles of the Communist Manifesto were in the Constitution. Had the principles of the Communist Manifesto been in the Constitution, Karl Marx would have had no reason to write the Communist Manifesto. The principles of the Communist Manifesto were not in the Constitution then and the principles of the Communist Manifesto are not in the Constitution now.
Whose Constitution? Russia’s, America’s, China’s?
Comments are closed.