Woman ‘dehumanised’ by viral TikTok filmed without her consent • Hacker News Board

Re: Woman ‘dehumanised’ by viral TikTok filmed without her consent

#251

Post by MandieD » Thu, Jul 14, 2022, 2:42 PM UTC

megous wrote: post #30

I wouldn't hold any flowers or anything really for any stranger in public. I've been to touristy places before and learned this lesson just by observation. High likelyhood some pressure style selling tactics would follow. Really, putting things on the groud or some other higher surface to free your hands should be a basic human skill by now.

"Don't accept roses from strangers in Italy" was travel wisdom at least back as far as the mid-Oughts - the gambit there was a seeming well-wisher (often a child) handing a woman a rose, and then an accomplice badgering her male companion to pay for it and then resentfully yanking it back when he refused.

Re: Woman ‘dehumanised’ by viral TikTok filmed without her consent

#252

Post by dchftcs » Thu, Jul 14, 2022, 2:43 PM UTC

powerhour wrote: post #128

dchftcs wrote: post #108

While I don't like what happened to her, we should call it for what it is and not more. The filmer was a jerk and she had to right to not be disturbed or filmed. "Dehumanised" is a bit too far.

Turning someone into a prop for your entertainment and profit without permission seems like a dictionary definition of dehumanizing.

"Turning someone into a prop" is a metaphorical statement. To conclude the act matches a dictionary definition of something is taking rhetoric way too seriously. Any act can be metaphorically described in a way that sounds like that but if you want to attach moral judgment you really ought to focus on original facts and not the projection onto a metaphor.

The woman is clearly still treated as a human being, even if not given enough respect. If the filmer did something like forcefully moving her body and limbs for posing to achieve dramatic effect, or deliberately humiliated her with insulting commentary, you may have a point that it's "dehumanizing", but he didn't go that far.

Re: Woman ‘dehumanised’ by viral TikTok filmed without her consent

#253

Post by o_1 » Thu, Jul 14, 2022, 2:43 PM UTC

phpisthebest wrote: post #78

nonrandomstring wrote: post #40

The reason this act breaks a moral boundary is that it subverts a principle of "ends" [1]. A genuine random act of kindness cannot occur if it's being filmed. Filming the act turns it into a virtue display. It also turns the subject into an object of utility, a means and not and end in themself. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingdom_of_Ends

Social Media has largely exposed the levels of narcissism embedded in a large number of human's psychological makeup , Selfies, clout chasing and virtue signalling are ever increasing forms of narcissism that really has destroyed the internet IMO

I agree, I think the internet took all the trash content over. Reality Shows/MTV to Tick Tok. We really better filters trash content. Kind of the reason most people are here on HN.

Re: Woman ‘dehumanised’ by viral TikTok filmed without her consent

#254

Post by HellDunkel » Thu, Jul 14, 2022, 2:43 PM UTC

This is TikTok. Complete waste of time and and absolute douchebaggery.

Re: Woman ‘dehumanised’ by viral TikTok filmed without her consent

#255

Post by e-clinton » Thu, Jul 14, 2022, 2:43 PM UTC

nonrandomstring wrote: post #40

The reason this act breaks a moral boundary is that it subverts a principle of "ends" [1]. A genuine random act of kindness cannot occur if it's being filmed. Filming the act turns it into a virtue display. It also turns the subject into an object of utility, a means and not and end in themself. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingdom_of_Ends

I disagree. If entertainment value can be extracted out of people doing good things, then we 100% should do that. The issue here is that the creator didn’t do a good thing. He should’ve offered the flowers outright and asked permission to post the video.

Re: Woman ‘dehumanised’ by viral TikTok filmed without her consent

#256

Post by upupandup » Thu, Jul 14, 2022, 2:43 PM UTC

revolvingocelot wrote: post #249

upupandup wrote: post #231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quoted post unavailable.

Arguments of the form "So $MISREPRESENTATION_OF_STATED_OPINION" are disappointing to see here. I don't think you really think that the grandparent is suggesting that to be "more empathetic to people who beg for money" is to invite them to Thanksgiving or give them your bed. Consider visiting Reddit, where discourse of the form "So $MISREPRESENTATION_OF_STATED_OPINION" is more accepted.

No post body was provided.

Re: Woman ‘dehumanised’ by viral TikTok filmed without her consent

#257

Post by Invictus0 » Thu, Jul 14, 2022, 2:44 PM UTC

strix_varius wrote: post #246

Invictus0 wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's your stance then? That it should be illegal to speak to people in public?

What an absurd take. Are you really so confused?

Quite confused. Please explain.

Re: Woman ‘dehumanised’ by viral TikTok filmed without her consent

#258

Post by vinyl7 » Thu, Jul 14, 2022, 2:45 PM UTC

afavour wrote: post #211

vinyl7 wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem with public displays of virtue is that it comes off as seeking return value for the action. Virtuous acts should be done in quiet/secret and for the simple reason for it being virtuous. Seeking some other sort of value out of it (like social recognition, social credit, youtube views which end up with ad revenue) makes the act look dishonest. The act wasn't done because they were a nice person, the act was…

> it comes off as seeking return value for the action Surely that’s in the eye of the beholder? It is possible to interpret it that way, certainly. But applying the observers value judgement (i.e. how it comes off) onto the original actor seems unfair to me. Sometimes I feel like (and I don’t mean anything personal by this) we’re all cynical bastards these days so when we see someone do something genuinely altruistic…

> But the people in the soup kitchen see me serving the food. Anyone walking by might see me in the window.

The nuance here is that there's a difference being observed doing a kind act versus purposefully making it a public spectacle. I don't view people I observe doing something altruistic as self-seeking unless they try to "cash in" on it.

I would see someone helping a person in need and think "how kind of them!" But then later, if I see an Instagram post from that person saying "There was this person in need of help and I went over there and did something about it", then it can be seen as self-seeking.

Re: Woman ‘dehumanised’ by viral TikTok filmed without her consent

#259

Post by e-clinton » Thu, Jul 14, 2022, 2:45 PM UTC

jonnycomputer wrote: post #57

I sort of feel compelled to quote the Bible here, though I'm not religious. "So when you give to the needy, do not sound a trumpet before you, as the hypocrites do ... to be honored by men. Truly I tell you, they already have their full reward. But when you give to the needy, do not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing, so that your giving may be in secret. And your Father, who sees what is done in s…

The issue is that it is the trumpet-sounding which enables the giving to the needy. Can’t have one without the other in this scenario.

Re: Woman ‘dehumanised’ by viral TikTok filmed without her consent

#260

Post by xwdv » Thu, Jul 14, 2022, 2:46 PM UTC

I do not want an act of kindness, the kindest thing a person could do is just to leave me the fuck alone, especially since most “acts of kindness” are done for some other motive these days such as viral Tiktoks.