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

Sex censorship killed the internet we love

engadget.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 520 posts

Re: Sex censorship killed the internet we love

#201

Post by odiroot »

blattimwind wrote: post #174
odiroot wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> So as a citizen of an EU country that's not prudish about sex, why do I have to suffer from the censorship of US companies? Conversely, I found out after travelling a lot in Europe, making foreigner friends and moving to another state it's not about being prudish about sex but about nudity . From my (admittedly limited) experience Americans are much less prudish about sex than Europeans (especially Western EU count…

> Again, from my experience, Germany (my new country of residence) is extremely open about nudity while at the same time being similarly repressed about sexuality. It's notable that younger people have a way more repressed sexuality than folks which are in the 35..40 to 60ish age bracket currently.

Ok that's actually very interesting. I noticed a similar pattern but didn't want to put too much to it.

Re: Sex censorship killed the internet we love

#202

Post by tnolet »

thaumasiotes wrote: post #182
tnolet wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ah yes, the good old “Dildo King” ads always put a smile on my face and remind me that Germans (and Berliners even more) are not yet 100% sucked up into the US / SV stance on morality and censorship. I noticed in Berlin startups that this is sorta changing. Seems the exported “culture of being offended” is slowly taking hold of, surprisingly, mostly younger people.

Surprisingly? I'd expect any cultural shift to take place among young people. Older people already have their culture.

I guess you’re right, just weird to see young people turn to a form of conservatism.

Re: Sex censorship killed the internet we love

#204

Post by coldtea »

avian wrote: post #184
bambax wrote: post #172

In general, superstitious behavior tends to win over non-superstitious behavior, even if it is a small minority . For example, say there are two communities in a given town; one of the community has decided that black doors were evil, and won't go through them. The other community doesn't care. Shops that have black doors lose the business of the superstitious community; even if that community is small, it simply mak…

I don't buy this argument. It works for things like "unlucky" numbers others mention, where there is basically no economic side effect (outside superstitious group no one cares about their seat number) Shops that didn't sell black doors would be losing business from non-superstitious people looking to buy black doors, which might be a bigger factor if superstitious group is relatively small. I think adult content is…

>Shops that didn't sell black doors would be losing business from non-superstitious people looking to buy black doors, which might be a bigger factor if superstitious group is relatively small.

It's not about selling, is about having black doors of your store. If 10% of the people absolutely refused to go through a black door (because of some BS religious reason for example), stores would either paint their black doors some other color, or lose 10% of potential customers. Guess what most will chose. The 90% of the people who are indifferent to door color wont make any difference.

Here's a better version of the argument: https://medium.com/incerto/the-most-intolerant-wins-the-dict...

Re: Sex censorship killed the internet we love

#205

Post by beobab »

marcus_holmes wrote: post #127

I find the US prudishness thing so fascinating. I'm travelling at the moment, and meeting lots of Americans (and Europeans for contrast). There's definitely a huge difference in tolerance for swearing and blasphemy. Also several well-educated and seemingly intelligent Americans who hold strong racist opinions. But that's another subject. I guess it all comes down to the religion. Americans do seem to be more religiou…

Enjoying sex isn’t a sin. Sex is supposed to be held in the highest regard. It’s a wonderful and joyous thing. The point is, I believe, to avoid cheapening it, making it less than the truly awesome thing it is.

It’s supposed to be a priceless gift shared with your true love. Packaging it and selling it makes it less valuable.

I believe that if you approach the subject with that mindset, a lot of the decisions that society has made suddenly make a bit more sense.

Re: Sex censorship killed the internet we love

#206

Post by koonsolo »

oefrha wrote: post #192
koonsolo wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Another thing I saw in US is that they can't make the distinction between hardcore porn, soft porn, erotica, nudity and showing some cleavage. I used to work at a European game company that made erotic games for PocketPC. Our biggest market was US, and most negativity also came from US. Video striptease is labeled as "porn". What they preach is very different from how they act. You cannot say fuck or shit on tv or in…

> You cannot say fuck or shit on tv What TV shows are you talking about? Kids shows? American television in general is full of profanity. Some shows have way higher profanity content than what’s observed in real life, they always makes me wonder if certain demographics really fucking talk like that all the time.

Beeping away words is something you will never see/hear in European productions. "What the beep are you talking about you son of a beep". Jerry Springer comes to mind.

European movies also have no trouble showing fully nude males, something you will never see in Hollywood.

The sensoring in texts like f*ck is also seen a lot online.

Re: Sex censorship killed the internet we love

#207

Post by Lazare »

sgt101 wrote: post #55

The real "original sin" of the free internet is the curation of the experience of using neutral information systems to drive engagement and skew users decisions away from their own interest towards the commercial interest of the web sites. Routine deception and manipulation mean that there are no clear lines or defensible moats of freedom. There is no rule of law or communal standard of fairness on the internet. This…

> Consensual sex work is mentioned, my perception is

I would be more interested in data than one person's subjecting perception.

> I hear of no stories where people have found happy and fulfilled lives as prostitutes

One of the major points of the article is that the voices of sex workers have been driven off the internet. You can't justify censorship by saying that none of the now-censored voices are complaining.

> The "women speaking truth" can only every have authentic voices if they are speaking from positions of power and security; I do not believe that this is the case for prostitutes anywhere.

That is either completely false, OR by your logic nobody can ever speak about what it's like to work a retail job. Some jobs suck; sometimes the people working them don't have a lot of power and security. So either your arguing that we shouldn't listen to anyone who isn't a millionaire, or you're not aware of the voices that exist.

> The illegality of prostitution is not because people are prudes, it is because prostitutes are routinely destroyed by their work.

Funny how that seems to only happen in places prostitution is illegal.

Re: Sex censorship killed the internet we love

#208

Post by TheOtherHobbes »

perilunar wrote: post #120
sgt101 wrote: post #55

The real "original sin" of the free internet is the curation of the experience of using neutral information systems to drive engagement and skew users decisions away from their own interest towards the commercial interest of the web sites. Routine deception and manipulation mean that there are no clear lines or defensible moats of freedom. There is no rule of law or communal standard of fairness on the internet. This…

> my perception is that the vast majority of sex workers are not doing it because of free choice, but rather because of exploitation and pressure. Your perception would be wrong. The vast majority of sex workers are doing it for the money, same as any job. > The illegality of prostitution Prostitution is not illegal in many parts of the world, and even decriminalised is some parts. > I hear of no stories where people…

What proportion of people do their day jobs because of exploitation and pressure?

There's possibly a lower proportion on HN than elsewhere, but suggesting that most of the population works voluntarily, and not to avoid starvation and homelessness, is going to be a bit of a stretch.

Sex work just makes the dynamic more obvious. There will be some who do it because it's a talent and a calling, but the majority do it because they need to put food on the table.

And some of those will be posting how awesome it is on TW etc because it's free advertising.

Re: Sex censorship killed the internet we love

#209

Post by mruts »

watwut wrote: post #143
koonsolo wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Another thing I saw in US is that they can't make the distinction between hardcore porn, soft porn, erotica, nudity and showing some cleavage. I used to work at a European game company that made erotic games for PocketPC. Our biggest market was US, and most negativity also came from US. Video striptease is labeled as "porn". What they preach is very different from how they act. You cannot say fuck or shit on tv or in…

Video striptease sounds to me like porn and I am not American. What else would it be, seriously? Is it really normal to colleagues gathering in a striptease bar? Cause I did not encountered it, through I heard people complain about some teams and companies doing that. But that is it - complains+anger not acceptance as norm.

Is a striptease bar a strip club? If so, I don’t think it’s that uncommon. Me and my coworkers would sometimes go to strip-clubs after work. Including female colleagues.

Not as often as regular clubs or bars, but not a rare event.

Re: Sex censorship killed the internet we love

#210

Post by grbr »

bambax wrote: post #172

In general, superstitious behavior tends to win over non-superstitious behavior, even if it is a small minority . For example, say there are two communities in a given town; one of the community has decided that black doors were evil, and won't go through them. The other community doesn't care. Shops that have black doors lose the business of the superstitious community; even if that community is small, it simply mak…

that's another example of Popper's paradox of tolerance.
Post reply on HN