It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


What's this, No Freedom of FACIAL Expression?

page: 1

log in


posted on Dec, 5 2016 @ 11:15 AM

Here's goes a new one from the top of my head: The Freedom of Facial Expression! Shouldn't this concept have a face? Some people don't seem to think so, while other seem to think its a vehicle for artistic expression.

Upon Googling the term I first found this:

Perfect Paul: On Freedom of Facial Expression
In this lecture/ performance digital persona Perfect Paul presents the external digitally controlled human facial display as a site for artistic expression and discusses its theoretical and political implications. In a live classic human versus computer show down it will demonstrate the superior qualities of digital versus neural facial control and shows that the neural brain is underutilizing the expressive potential of the human facial hardware.

Next I found:

Three years ago, I attended an international spa conference that reminded me what it meant to be an esthetician: to continually learn and apply new information about skin care, ingredients, technology, methods and techniques to improve skin and positively influence how people feel about themselves.

Later that year, Facial Expressions was created to ensure I had complete freedom and flexibility to pursue as much advanced education as I could find. I will never stop learning and applying new strategies into my skin care philosophy, bringing you the best of my discoveries.

The book, "Freedom of Expression: A Critical and Comparative Analysis", also came up:

We are always thinking, even -according to some interpretations- when unconscious, and express those thoughts not only orally and in writing, but also by gesture, facial expression and actions.

So according to author Vincenzo Zeno-Zencovich this lands facial expressions soundly in the domain of Freedom of Speech.

Problem is, we are in the Age of PC and it's ugly cousin Islamofacism. According to these thought police, nope no freedom of speech or expression.

We all surely know the Burka:

But did you know that in the United Kingdom it's getting to the borderline point of people being arrested, convicted of "assault" and incarcerated for giving someone the wrong dirty look?

What is Common Assault?

Under Section 39 of the Criminal Justice Act the offence will be committed when a person either assaults another person or commits a battery.

A battery is classified as the application of unlawful force. This could be anything from a push or slap.

An assault is when the one person makes the other fear that immediate force will be used against them. This could be anything from shaking a fist or running a finger across a throat. No force needs to be applied in order for it to be an assault.

Will there be a prison sentence?

Common assault carries a maximum penalty of six months in prison and/or a fine.

As if looks could kill!

And this just in from the pipeline 'borderwar':

Anti-pipeline protesters give dirty looks over remark that facial expressions are ‘assault’

Energy giant Kinder Morgan got some quizzical looks on social media Thursday after a lawyer for the company’s subsidiary Trans Mountain suggested anti-pipeline protesters’ facial expressions might constitute “assault.”

In hindsight, imagine the looks on everyone's faces when the Burning Buddha's face lit up like a torch:
It literally sent JFK for such a facepalm he decided to call off the intervention in Vietnam. He was genuinely saddened by the act, his decision wasn't merely about saving face. Shortly after, what happened to his own face, well I wont go there.

Moving on, some eye opening bits come up in academia as well:

And no doubt about it Hollywood lives and dies by the facial (especially the adults hint-hint-wink-wink):

Which makes it rather striking that they go so off the hook if you try to criticize subjects like the Burka:

To all of them all I've got to say is:

edit on 5-12-2016 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 5 2016 @ 11:22 AM
Rage Against The Machine - Freedom

posted on Dec, 5 2016 @ 12:03 PM
a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

. . . convicted of "assault" and incarcerated for giving someone the wrong dirty look?

I suspect you'd have to consent by allowing joinder to be created with the legal fiction you use for commercial transactions, signing the legal fiction, and uttering self incriminating statements.

posted on Dec, 5 2016 @ 12:11 PM
The freedom of foreign cultures and their customs, including worship and dress?

The Buddhist that immolated himself did it to protest war in Southeast Asia, or to invite pro war interventionst fervor because "something must be done", whichever. During that war people were immolated by war machines. How violated were their rights? ***warning, graphic material***

new topics

top topics

log in