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

Naomi Wu video demonetized on YouTube

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 579 posts

Re: Naomi Wu video demonetized on YouTube

#81

Post by stale2002 »

kstenerud wrote: post #42
jb1991 wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Madonna explicitly wanted to be seen that way and did not attempt to suggest otherwise.

Yes, she did. And she wanted the right to do it. She wanted the right to do with her body as she pleases, and the right to be seen as she pleases. And in doing so she fought censors, TV networks, the FBI, you name it. She fought her whole life against this kind of bullshit. And now Naomi has taken up the fight too, and is probably discovering just how unnecessarily heavy a burden it is.

Ok, thats fine if she wants to do that type of content (if you don't like the words "sexual content" then make up a new word, because that's not the point).

But sometimes advertisers do not want to advertise on that type of content, and since it is their money, thats alright.

Like sure, go ahead. Make that type of content. But don't be surprised when advertisers don't want to buy ads on it.

Re: Naomi Wu video demonetized on YouTube

#82

Post by helsinkiandrew »

SexyCyborg wrote: post #70
helsinkiandrew wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

She is a conundrum: is she titillating or expressing herself, or maximising her reach? It is a sad fact that if you took two women on youtube with equal talents and content - the one that "dressed up a little" would be more successful. I don't think that's the case with men (although Colin Furze and Integza do wear ties, maybe that's a factor in their success) It hard to see how YouTube can defend their actions - her…

>She is a conundrum: is she titillating or expressing herself, or maximising her reach? Initially, before I was Outed I could not explain any of it. Which was...frustrating at the time to say the least. Now, as shitty as getting Outted was I can at least reference part of the explanation: https://twitter.com/RealSexyCyborg/status/139660466709473690... But as to the rest, I'm still on the fence. I'd like to explain, b…

> I'd like to explain, but these things are very personal

And you don't need to. Unfortunately people are people - titillation and everything else is in the eye of the beholder - and they will interpret what they see in a way that fits in with their perspective.

Re: Naomi Wu video demonetized on YouTube

#84

Post by post_from_work »

SexyCyborg wrote: post #44
twofornone wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Why not just have an Only Fans, weekly photo video sets, and a decent copywriter and make 10x as much money? Why go through all this work? I mean, I cant help but agree that you're being a little dishonest here. Without passing judgement on whether what you're doing is right or wrong, a quick glance through the Twitter link in the OP and its quite obvious that you are well endowed and using it to your advantage by w…

>its quite obvious that you are well endowed and using it to your advantage Yes, I play the cards I've been dealt. >by wearing revealing clothing. No, the clothing and gender expression predates YouTube and is for other reasons, is usually more conservative when I'm filming for YouTube, and is for myself. I've never worn anything for my audience. >Can we acknowledge that some probably significant proportion of your c…

No post body was provided.

Re: Naomi Wu video demonetized on YouTube

#85

Post by meheleventyone »

stale2002 wrote: post #81
kstenerud wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, she did. And she wanted the right to do it. She wanted the right to do with her body as she pleases, and the right to be seen as she pleases. And in doing so she fought censors, TV networks, the FBI, you name it. She fought her whole life against this kind of bullshit. And now Naomi has taken up the fight too, and is probably discovering just how unnecessarily heavy a burden it is.

Ok, thats fine if she wants to do that type of content (if you don't like the words "sexual content" then make up a new word, because that's not the point). But sometimes advertisers do not want to advertise on that type of content, and since it is their money, thats alright. Like sure, go ahead. Make that type of content. But don't be surprised when advertisers don't want to buy ads on it.

Except advertisers can’t make a choice to advertise on her channel through YouTube so this comparison misses the point.

Re: Naomi Wu video demonetized on YouTube

#86

Post by meheleventyone »

oceanghost wrote: post #5

Sigh... while talented, she is constantly pushing the boundaries of taste and the YouTube TOS to gain subscribers. She pretends to be some women's rights activist when she's really just a purveyor of some weird type of titillation. Yes the algorithm is capricious, yes its arbitrary, and yes YouTube is evil. But she's clearly making a bust of herself naked. I'm sure if I put my balls on YouTube they'd be more than dem…

If you think nude statues are tasteless wait until you learn about fine art!

Re: Naomi Wu video demonetized on YouTube

#87

Post by post_from_work »

emptyparadise wrote: post #72

You'd think a non-white non-American female engineer not afraid of self-expression and her own sexuality would be a darling given the big talk of diversity and inclusion, but in the end she gets rejected because her boobs are too big for America to handle. It's comical.

No post body was provided.

Re: Naomi Wu video demonetized on YouTube

#88

Post by SexyCyborg »

stale2002 wrote: post #81
kstenerud wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, she did. And she wanted the right to do it. She wanted the right to do with her body as she pleases, and the right to be seen as she pleases. And in doing so she fought censors, TV networks, the FBI, you name it. She fought her whole life against this kind of bullshit. And now Naomi has taken up the fight too, and is probably discovering just how unnecessarily heavy a burden it is.

Ok, thats fine if she wants to do that type of content (if you don't like the words "sexual content" then make up a new word, because that's not the point). But sometimes advertisers do not want to advertise on that type of content, and since it is their money, thats alright. Like sure, go ahead. Make that type of content. But don't be surprised when advertisers don't want to buy ads on it.

>Ok, thats fine if she wants to do sexual content.

You are sexually attracted to dressmakers dummies made out of 4mm cardboard?

Re: Naomi Wu video demonetized on YouTube

#89

Post by theshrike79 »

twofornone wrote: post #52
ghosty141 wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>its quite obvious that you are well endowed and using it to your advantage by wearing revealing clothing What is "revealing clothing" to you. We are not in the 1900s where it's a crime to show a little ankle. Her clothing is nothing out of the ordinary in many videos. If you have big boobs people will notice no matter what you wear, youtube shouldn't act different based on your body... If another youtube would exist…

It's so weird that this is the default response. Again, I'm not making a moral judgement. But the first three tweets in the linked thread: 1. Bare midriff and tiny shorts 2. Deliberately fully exposed cleavage 3. A tiny spaghetti strap Wear whatever you want, but don't be surprised when you get sexual attention, and don't pretend that as a public figure who makes money off of eyeballs that you're not deliberately tak…

There was a video, by her, explaining this years ago. The standard for "sexy" is completely different in China vs USA.

Extremely skimpy clothing isn't culturally "sexy" or frowned upon in Chinese culture as it is in USA.

Re: Naomi Wu video demonetized on YouTube

#90

Post by theshrike79 »

totony wrote: post #16
arpa wrote: post #12

What I don't get is how in year 2022, having landed on the moon and tricked silicon into computing for us, we as a western civilization still haven't come to terms with our own bodies, other peoples' bodies, the fact that we have a sex drive, the fact that we can and do have sex for pleasure and punish ourselves for all of these things. It's insane.

Isn't it understandable that people want separate spaces for sexual and non sexual content? I wouldn't jump the gun on allowing sexualization everywhere since it can have pretty bad effects on some people. Now whether this is sexual or not is another matter.

Have you seen the way way people dress on American media? Dunno where you would find this non-sexual content.
Post reply on HN