There is more leeway in regards to the context of the situation. For example, the Production Code says that there should be no apparent cruelty to children or animals, but yet they still showed a tiger being shot by a firearm. The absolutist would say that killing and taking another beings life is wrong period. It should never be done. On the other hand, the relativist would see the circumstances of the situation to understand if there was a real reason to kill a tiger due to protection of one’s …show more content…
Drinking, profanity, suggestive mannerisms, adultery, and killing animals have all become very common plots for successful filmmaking. We have become desensitized to seeing it on screen and it has become more typical to see it off-screen as well. It isn’t to say that it is correct, but as times change, people start to become more understanding of the circumstances that certain acts were based upon. The relative perspective sees deviance as something that can be socially constructed to keep certain behaviors in check, thus calling them deviant (but really aren’t entirely so). The acts mentioned above were seen as absolute deviance by the makers of the production code, but the film makers saw those same acts as relative