Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Calls for Twitch to police 'sexual streaming'

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 89 posts

Re: Calls for Twitch to police 'sexual streaming'

#51

Post by noobermin »

apk-d wrote: post #41
frgtpsswrdlame wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>However, they're even not competing for the same audience. I don't think that's exactly accurate. Presumably the major audience for both types of streamers is young boys/men.

You have broadened the category widely enough to include both audiences. Given that guys typically watch gaming streams and undressed females for different reasons, I think there's finer distinctions in terms of which the audiences don't overlap.

Here's a thought experiment, imagine you are a young male looking for random streams because you're bored. You see a) one stream with speed runs done by a female streamer who is not scantily clad but actually has a lot of skill and is trying to garner views by being a good gamer. Then, there is a b) 23 year old female streamer who isn't really playing games but is merely doing stretches in yoga tights. What will you probably click first?

When talking about aggregate, the small delta counts. This swings those uncommitted to looking for sexual content as well as attracting those purely looking for sexual content. To be fair, there are more hardcore sexual content out there that is just as free, so why would the population just looking for soft porn go to Twitch to do it?

It sounds more to me like they are competing more than just having different audiences.

EDIT: and more importantly, these sexual streamer are taking advantage of it, while avoiding other sites devoted to sexual content where competition would be harder for them.

Re: Calls for Twitch to police 'sexual streaming'

#52

Post by hateduser2 »

mschuster91 wrote: post #30
freeflight wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Anyone that thinks that Twitch isn't turning in to a soft-core cam girls site can just load the IRL section of Twitch and see for themselves. And it's not even like anybody is trying to hide it, the Patreon's of many of these Streamers involve rewards like "Private lewd pictures" and their "gaming" often boils down to a video of a game being played in a small corner of the screen or simply playing rhythm/dance game…

I dont see what's exploitive on young males there. Older generations have had Playboys from the gas station and dad's VHS collection (or if they knew someone, their own), my generation had emule, Us porn sites and prepaid CCs, the new generation has patreon and camgirls.

They try to emotionally manipulate their viewers into donating to them. Or they try to form a real bond. There’s some clear mix of genuine value for the lonely donators and id assume emotional abuse on the part of the streamers.

Re: Calls for Twitch to police 'sexual streaming'

#53

Post by lwkl »

tree_of_item wrote: post #46
ryandrake wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wasn't there a thread on here a while back about a lady who was doing tech/nerdy 3D printing and maker videos, taking tons of criticism simply because she happened to be good looking while doing them? This seems like an oddly similar mind-set: You can't do game videos because you're sexy. What??

No, not because she "happened to be good looking", because she does many videos half naked. You cannot even link to her Twitter or Youtube without a [NSFW] tag. Why do you feel the need to use such a disingenuous framing? The Twitch streamers in question are also creating what amounts to softcore pornography. They aren't making game videos, they are just using Twitch as an alternative to other adult camsites. That's…

Yesterday someone linked me such a stream and it was just a pretty girl with a deep cut shirt.

Didn't look like porn to me and she wasn't really entertaining. It's more like the people want to satisfy their fantasies and buy the attention of a pretty girl. Clearly in a non sexual way otherwise they would turn to cam girl sites.

Is this bad? I don't know but I don't have a problem with it. I feel like it's sad that people feel like they have to buy the attention of another person. But this happens with male streamers too.

I watched a guy in the IRL section since I wanted to see what the guys stream and he was letting people insult him for money. It was really strange to watch.

I don't understand alot on twitch. But I don't see the pornography on it either.

Re: Calls for Twitch to police 'sexual streaming'

#54

Post by hackinthebochs »

tomc1985 wrote: post #37
knowaveragejoe wrote: post #2

Twitch already has a flagging system for "mature" content, and they ban anything with actual nudity pretty aggressively. It sounds like this is actually a call to police the use of sex appeal by streamers, which seems like a difficult thing to judge in general and I'm not sure how they could actually achieve such a thing.

Watching the world drift further and further towards moral prudery is so disheartening, especially when so much social progress was made on this front during the 60s and 70s. Society is so cyclical :/

Agreed. I feel like I don't recognize liberalism in the kinds of things that people advocate for these days.

Re: Calls for Twitch to police 'sexual streaming'

#55

Post by tree_of_item »

lwkl wrote: post #53
tree_of_item wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, not because she "happened to be good looking", because she does many videos half naked. You cannot even link to her Twitter or Youtube without a [NSFW] tag. Why do you feel the need to use such a disingenuous framing? The Twitch streamers in question are also creating what amounts to softcore pornography. They aren't making game videos, they are just using Twitch as an alternative to other adult camsites. That's…

Yesterday someone linked me such a stream and it was just a pretty girl with a deep cut shirt. Didn't look like porn to me and she wasn't really entertaining. It's more like the people want to satisfy their fantasies and buy the attention of a pretty girl. Clearly in a non sexual way otherwise they would turn to cam girl sites. Is this bad? I don't know but I don't have a problem with it. I feel like it's sad that pe…

Okay, so you didn't see one of the streams I'm talking about. Try one of the streams that promises to do "squats" or some other sexually suggestive activity whenever someone donates.

Re: Calls for Twitch to police 'sexual streaming'

#56

Post by lwkl »

hateduser2 wrote: post #52
mschuster91 wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I dont see what's exploitive on young males there. Older generations have had Playboys from the gas station and dad's VHS collection (or if they knew someone, their own), my generation had emule, Us porn sites and prepaid CCs, the new generation has patreon and camgirls.

They try to emotionally manipulate their viewers into donating to them. Or they try to form a real bond. There’s some clear mix of genuine value for the lonely donators and id assume emotional abuse on the part of the streamers.

I had to laugh if showing some cleavage, saying thank you or talking to you is emotional manipulation or even abuse. Maybe there is really some truth to the lonely nerd.

It's probably just people stuck in their teens or teenagers. It's exactly like the teenage girls loving some star they never met and thinking they'll get married and all.

The more I read and think about it the more I'm asking myself how there can such an outrage about it.

Re: Calls for Twitch to police 'sexual streaming'

#59

Post by r00fus »

jchw wrote: post #32
knowaveragejoe wrote: post #2

Twitch already has a flagging system for "mature" content, and they ban anything with actual nudity pretty aggressively. It sounds like this is actually a call to police the use of sex appeal by streamers, which seems like a difficult thing to judge in general and I'm not sure how they could actually achieve such a thing.

>and they ban anything with actual nudity pretty aggressively. Framing it as if they only ban aggressively for actual nudity is unfair. They ban aggressively on all kinds of fronts, including very subjective criteria, they just do it very inconsistently. For all I care, they can do whatever they want. But I do feel like they are hard to take seriously until they decide to apply their rules equally. They do not. They…

> But I do feel like they are hard to take seriously until they decide to apply their rules equally. They do not.

Any examples that can help me understand?

Perhaps the advertising angle goes hand in hand with the above inequality. Ads are essentially buying real-estate in your brain. One way is to have exclusives (i.e., buying out the room), another is Yelp-style (pay-to-play).

Post reply on HN