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

Woman ‘dehumanised’ by viral TikTok filmed without her consent

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 634 posts

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

#271

Post by tuxie_ »

xorcist wrote: post #157
drakonka wrote: post #16

The video itself was quite off-putting when I first saw it. He didn't even just kindly offer her flowers. He _tricked_ her into taking them by making it sound like he just wanted her to hold them for him. She was actually being kind to him by doing him a favor, and then he basically ran away and stuck her with them. That's not kind at all, it's pushy and exploitative. As someone who doesn't usually like to accept gif…

Good thing it was just free flowers. Imagine if it had been a free puppy. "Here, just hold this" running off

Or a baby.

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

#272

Post by s1artibartfast »

afavour wrote: post #143
phpisthebest wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am not aware of a context where virtue signaling would be a good practice or behavior.

Perhaps we're working to different definitions of the term. To me, virtue signaling is signaling (i.e. making publicly known) a virtuous act. To me that seems like an unambiguously good thing: it is likely to inspire others to similar virtuous acts, creating a feedback loop of people encouraging others to engage in good behaviour. "I voted! You should get out and vote too" feels like an example of positive virtual si…

Virtue signaling in the common parlance specifically refers to exposition for personal benefit. Ie, they don't act virtuously when the cameras are off

I think demonstration of virtue would be a better term without this connotation. EG being a role model.

The large amount of virtue signaling has poisoned the Well for people that simply want to promote good deeds and behavior.

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

#273

Post by slx26 »

analyst74 wrote: post #205

> A friend contacted Maree that evening, sharing the uploaded video. At the time, Maree “didn’t think much of it”. > But after seeing the TikTok video featured in media reports describing her as an “elderly woman” with a “heartbreaking tale,” she said she “felt dehumanised”. Not trying to support the tiktoker, who is obviously a douchebag. But it's interesting that the negative emotions didn't trigger until it become…

Receiving the flowers is one thing. Then having a video shared about it is another thing. And even beyond that, the second can also affect the perception on the first: maybe you thought it was something random at first, but then you realize it wasn't.

It's not like something changed magically for no reason because humans are weird.

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

#274

Post by dools »

throwaway0a5e wrote: post #89
phpisthebest wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

It's really a shame people turned virtue signaling into a dirty world that can't be used in civil discussion. It is a great descriptor for all sorts of human behavior in all sorts of contexts. Edit: y'all are kind of proving my first point.

Virtue signalling is a term made up by a hard right libertarian propagandist writing for the spectator as a means of silencing progressive voices online. It’s a bullshit term for which we already had a perfectly good word: hypocrisy

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

#275

Post by jimmyjazz14 »

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

The act itself is also shallow, flowers are meant more of a symbolic gift; I give my wife flowers maybe to express love but if I just gave some random person flowers on the street without any further explanation then I have simply given that person a dead plant. If the guy gave the lady something of actual value or that served a need, or even just made statement as to the meaning of the flowers it could have changed the dynamic. Further it is customary to ask someone (especially someone you do not know well) to accept a gift and to explain why the gift was given; there is a very good reason for this.

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

#276

Post by zenron »

While I agree that this type of online content is questionable for the reasons said in this thread, the 'dehumanized' moniker is clearly sensational. No-one in that video has been dehumanized. This is rhetoric and nothing more. A person received an unsolicited gift and was filmed. If it was in a location where there is need of consent to be filmed by another party she can file a lawsuit. If it was in a location that doesn't require consent then them is the breaks and viewers of the video can make the conclusions of motives and ENDS for themselves.

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

#277

Post by twodave »

wyldfire wrote: post #153
protonbob wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think that the bible says that giving to the poor will absolve you of your sins. So maybe not the same coin.

If the reward cited above in Matthew 6 isn't absolution then it is still effectively similar if it's a pleasant afterlife.

It isn’t. A primary tenet of Christianity is to identify with Christ, mainly through suffering. Much the way a workout can be rewarding in and of itself (e.g. the runner’s high), the suffering of sacrifice can be its own reward if given in the correct mindset. What makes this possible for the Christian believer is the faith/knowledge that one’s sins have already _been_ absolved, so Heaven has already effectively been attained. So (now having a mindset of gratitude) the Christian believer is free to be charitable without the need for personal gain, for what more could the believer gain? Or what could he/she lose that would stain the gift already received?

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

#278

Post by prionassembly »

At one point my nihilistic consumeristic 20s got me in the hobby of "Lomography", which was basically using up ("shoot from the hip!) expensive film without care and seeing what kinds of random stuff turns up, if any at all.

Turns out shooting from the hip produces a lot of creepy angles on callypigian figures you were honest-to-god not trying to do. (Would a creepster use film?)

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

#279

Post by phpnode »

upupandup wrote: post #256
revolvingocelot wrote: post #249

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Quoted post unavailable.

that's not what empathy means, you don't have to house someone to feel empathy for them. In this case, I'd say don't judge them so harshly because they're a product of a failing social system. They're the consequence of society's collective decisions and priorities.
Post reply on HN