Live data from Hacker News

Naomi Wu video demonetized on YouTube

twitter.com

191–200 of 579 posts

Re: Naomi Wu video demonetized on YouTube

#191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>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…

Quoted post unavailable.

See: https://twitter.com/RealSexyCyborg/status/139660466709473690...

There's more, but again, until/if I can explain it more fully, it's on me.

Re: Naomi Wu video demonetized on YouTube

#192

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…

So did Madonna. And for good reason. Quite often one needs to take a more direct approach because these misogynistic policies are so ingrained that people actually believe them to be natural . One needs to be in-your-face to get past that. We like to scoff at Muslims and their backwards policies about women, and yet somehow Western societies are blind to their own - so much so that we need to be told from time to tim…

>"Quite often one needs to take a more direct approach because these misogynistic policies are so ingrained that people actually believe them to be natural. "

I strongly agree with this. No one would dream to complain if the Louvre posts a male academic-led MOOC lecture about the Venus of Milo [0]. The pathology of this puritanism isn't harmless disagreement over which art is or isn't in "good taste"; it's the undercurrent of diminution of and disdain towards women, as Wu is very right to call out. The wild disparity between how censors classify male sculptors and woman sculptors is precisely how bigotry works -- tacit, implicit, unexamined. Men get the benefit of implicit respectability where women are suspect. Any constructive discussion about this will of course push sexists far outside their comfort zone.

[0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pKsdb8dq7fo ("La Vénus de Milo par Ludovic Laugier - Musée du Louvre")

Re: Naomi Wu video demonetized on YouTube

#193
For any Westerners here who seem to have a hard time understanding why this is wrong:

Look at an even more women-oppressing culture such as that of Afghanistan under the Taliban. Women are required to cover their faces in public. Why? For "modesty." What it boils down to is that if women show their faces it could have a negative effect on men (sexual attraction).

A lot of people where are shaming her for being essentially immodest in her quest for female empowerment. A face is not immodest. A boob is not immodest. It is not sexualized because it is just a body part. It takes a man to do the sexualization, so the sexualization isn't the boob, but a man's who is doing the sexualization. A baby does not sexualize the boob (it's food). They get conditioned to it by society and culture as they grow older (a culture that sexualizes it).

Sub out face in Afghanistan with boob in America and you'll see it's the same picture. While we should pat ourselves on the back for being so progressive as to allow women to show their faces in public, we haven't quite gotten to the point where it's ok to show boobs in public. And yes, some women prefer to wear burkas, just as some women prefer to hide their boobs in public.

The point is that those restrictions on women shouldn't be dictated by the actions or effects they have on men. Instead, men should either change their viewpoints or control their own sexualization so that women don't have to accommodate. These immodest views come from those who sexualize women, and because that's out of the control of women so they should not be forced to accommodate something out of their control.

Re: Naomi Wu video demonetized on YouTube

#195

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.

Quoted post unavailable.

That is a very broad brush you are painting with.

Re: Naomi Wu video demonetized on YouTube

#197
post #170

It's funny how all this talk about democracy and freedom goes to shit as soon as some redneck's dink tingles and he and his buddies start mailing Alphabet about a girl's cleavage... ah the mythical land of the free.

If you equate somebody being refused to post content on a website to some sort of deviation from democracy and freedom I would encourage you to live in Russia or China for a few years. It'll re-calibrate your understanding of freedom and democracy.

Re: Naomi Wu video demonetized on YouTube

#198

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…

But who cares? We don’t have puritans or religious nutjobs doing it any more… now it’s Google, Facebook, and Amazon. A naked woman is only as big is a deal as you make her, just label content accurately and as long as nobody is getting hurt, let it be.

> puritans or religious nutjobs

They absolutely are still active and doing write-in campaigns about this; that's where FOSTA/SESTA came from. The ability of evangelicals to sway elections by having a large number of people in a pulpit filter bubble is greater than that of tech in the US.

Re: Naomi Wu video demonetized on YouTube

#199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"She pretends to be some women's rights activist" I'm a mainland Chinese citizen with a high profile on Western Social Media, I can assure you I work very hard to make sure no one confuses me as a women's rights activist. Particularly not these days. "Yes the algorithm is capricious," Not the algorithm- all human moderation. "she's really just a purveyor of some weird type of titillation" Why not just have an Only Fa…

I'm happy to see you here, and kind of shocked how the discussion seems to flow past your comments, going back and forth within the HN crowd instead of engaging with literally the creator who's livelihood is being discussed here. For any random project that gets posted on HN, "hey, author here..." posts will typically end up at the top of the page, let's hope we also manage for this one here. I had honestly not ever…

That's very kind of you. No Patreon and Western sponsors are understandably reluctant to work with a Chinese national- even those that are ok with my appearance. Chinese businesses can't figure out how I am still online, most don't want to risk the association but a few do and sponsor just enough to keep the lights on. It's tight some months though.

Re: Naomi Wu video demonetized on YouTube

#200
post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A lot of people think that looking at flickering colorful lights on a planar surface can be sexually arousing. There are so many fetishes... ;) However I do think that western culture is a bit on the prude side and has a strange double standard regarding nude or partially nude bodies depending on gender or its features. Sexualizing one type, while normalizing another.

The point here, is what the advertisers want to spend their money on. Use whatever euphemism or descriptive word you want. The point here, is that advertisers do not want to be associated with whatever it is you want you call it.

Yes, and for this, the content need to be triaged. Here the content is rated as containing depiction/drawings of nudity, and this is just a fact, advertisers are then free to buy or not.
Post reply on HN