"the suppression or prohibition of any parts of books, films, news, etc. that are considered obscene, politically unacceptable, or a threat to security."
Yep, the first one was of censorship in general. The second was to prove self censorship was not a putz term but a widely accepted socially recognized term
@Putz
*"If you are an adult, your mom cannot FORCE you to do anything, yet im confident you still censor yourself in her presence"*
The HELL SHE CAN'T, only a fucking retard takes in his own mother... Even cops know better.
So if self censorship is a form of censorship by societal standards which you acknowledged. And self censorship does not require force. Then force is not a prerequisite for censor
So in the context of your post, if the person removed homophobic content because their boss told them to then yes it is based in force. If they removed it because they evolved and became more sensitive to homophobia organically then it wouldn't be based in force
Not societal pressure at all. Its important that people see me for who i am not who i was. Not because of societal force, but so that i can engage with a person and they come into the engagement with as accurate of an understanding of me as possible
But that is not necesaarily based in fear. It could be based in convinence. It gets people to know you quicker if you don't have to waste time on inaccurate perceptions. A person with a professional haircut has an easier time in interviews. They may choose to cut there hair so they can spend less time proving why their haircut does not reflect an inability to do the job. They are not forced to cut their hair, they have chosen to based on self interest to ensure the perception of their appearance reflects their skill.
