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

The Big [Censored] Theory

pudding.cool

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

381–390 of 891 posts

Re: The Big [Censored] Theory

#381

Post by wizofaus »

bentley wrote: post #371
wizofaus wrote: post #363

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The interesting thing is that end result seems to be a proliferation of extreme views in the US vs other similar countries, which is arguably the opposite of what you might reasonably expect from the opportunity to allow freer discussion of ideas.

Is that the case, though? The US has problems of religious and political extremism, but is Muslim violence worse in magnitude than in France with its restrictions on religious expression, or anti‐semitism than in the European countries that ban Holocaust denial?

Good question. At best it would seem that such censorship doesn't seem to have all that significant impact on beliefs and behaviours.

Re: The Big [Censored] Theory

#382

Post by the_doctah »

fluoridation wrote: post #357
tuatoru wrote: post #275

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Non-heterosexual images (and masturbation) are anathema to China's leadership because China is facing a population decline, due to very low fertility.[1] [2] Internally produced TV in China has been censored for portraying "effeminate men".[3] The CCP has also, er, "encouraged", women to spend less time on social media and shopping. Internally the CCP says members must have three children.[4] 1. Here is military age…

I love the implicit assumption that everyone is only a sufficiently convincing argument away from going gay.

Do you think the rate of people identifying as gay has increased or decreased along with the general public's acceptance of it?

Re: The Big [Censored] Theory

#383

Post by thegrimmest »

wizofaus wrote: post #193
alldayeveryday wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would a culture require a puritanical religions to have an aversion to discussion of sex? And do you consider an aversion to discussion of sex to be default lacking or present in a population?

Because why else would such an aversion arise? I don't think there are any sensible "defaults" for human cultures. But I wouldn't expect aversion to talking any sex to arise spontaneously among a population that hadn't had it imposed by prior generations or from outside. We're naturally curious beings and have lots of sex (compared to other species).

> I don't think there are any sensible "defaults" for human cultures

There are loads of sensible "defaults" for human cultures. Aversion and disgust at the practices of unfamiliar out-groups is one - keeps us from getting their diseases. Practices assuring paternity are another - males that are indifferent to who's children they raise aren't very well selected for. Risk aversion in, and preference for protection of, child-bearing females by the group is a third - harm to these females disproportionately affects the ability of the group to reproduce and pass its genes. There are many, many others, and we have many of them in common with our animal relatives.

Re: The Big [Censored] Theory

#384

Post by still_grokking »

tgv wrote: post #285
still_grokking wrote: post #270

What's the moral here? There is also a lot of censoring in the "western" world. It's also mostly justified by the exact same "reasons" like the ones mentioned in that blog post. Especial the "but the children" "argument" is used the whole time. And if that gets boring than it's "terrorism". Than again "the children". Also there are a lot of things one can't publicity say for political reasons. In Germany for example…

You’re really not making a strong argument by invoking the German example. The things that they forbid are mainly glorification of a most shameful regime. Holocaust denial comes to mind. Good riddance, I say.

Given the down votes I guess I've got misunderstood.

I didn't made any argument up to now. I've asked for the moral of that blog post in the light of the fact that there is also quite some censorship elsewhere in the world.

Sure, Chinese censorship is bad (and the examples given are partly laughable in my opinion). But censorship is bad in general. This applies the same to for example the censorship we have in the EU. (And no, it's not "only some Nazi things").

Also it's a notable fact that the "justifications" given for our censorship are the exact same as the reasons given in, say, China (or likely elsewhere).

The concrete censored content may differ, but behind that is the exact same line of reasoning: That there is "inappropriate" content the people need to be shielded from.

That motivation is the part that is questionable at least. (Now I've made an argument).

Actually this reveals a lot in which way governments think about the population, no matter the country.

Still there seems to be a lot of black and white thinking in the line of "But we are the good ones, we have reasons, but just look what the bad ones do". I refuse to take part in this narrative. The world isn't as simple as that.

Re: The Big [Censored] Theory

#385

Post by jacekm »

ginger2016 wrote: post #335
clouddrover wrote: post #322

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What in particular is racist about it?

If you have watched the show and failed see why it is racist, then we need to give some anti-racist education. It is affirming the stereotype Indian males lack confidence with women. Raj can’t speak with women without the use of alcohol, the show constantly mocks his accent, worshipping of cows etc.

Is it also affirming a stereotype that Indians are incredibly rich? Because that's how Raj is portrayed and the show mocks his wealth on more than one occasion.

Re: The Big [Censored] Theory

#386

Post by astrange »

clouddrover wrote: post #359
ginger2016 wrote: post #353

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where Kunal Nayar grew is insignificant. Most of the soldiers who fought for British India were Indians themselves but that doesn’t mean the occupation of India was right. In the case of Indian soldiers it was in their personal monetary interest to fight for the British. You are trying to make a similar argument, the role advances Kunal Nayar’s career and I am sure he is in it because it helps him, doesn’t mean the s…

> Where Kunal Nayar grew is insignificant. Not when it comes to his accent. It's wholly unsurprising that someone who grew up in India speaks English with an Indian accent. That isn't "mocking" his accent. That's just what his accent is. > I am not sure whether you are Indian or not, but if you fail to see Weak. If you can't demonstrate where this supposed racism is in the show then I'd suggest you need to start cons…

Having a TV actor speak in their natural accent might be mocking them, if it's normal to have them fake a different one.

eg David Tennant uses his Scottish accent for jokes in a show where he normally sounds English

Re: The Big [Censored] Theory

#387

Post by muglug »

fluoridation wrote: post #357
tuatoru wrote: post #275

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Non-heterosexual images (and masturbation) are anathema to China's leadership because China is facing a population decline, due to very low fertility.[1] [2] Internally produced TV in China has been censored for portraying "effeminate men".[3] The CCP has also, er, "encouraged", women to spend less time on social media and shopping. Internally the CCP says members must have three children.[4] 1. Here is military age…

I love the implicit assumption that everyone is only a sufficiently convincing argument away from going gay.

They want gay people to stay in the closet and have unhappy marriages that produce lots of kids.

Re: The Big [Censored] Theory

#388

Post by deepdriver »

awinder wrote: post #355
deepdriver wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Diversity Day" has been removed in its entirety per first link. The distinction between private and government censorship is increasingly irrelevant to consumers, as in heavily consolidated markets the end effect is the same.

It was removed during some Comedy Central marathon lmao, it’s still a part of the series, no episode was renumbered, and it’s on Peacock which might as well be the canonical streaming source

I saw it mentioned elsewhere as removed from Netflix, glad it’s up on the NBC streaming service.

Re: The Big [Censored] Theory

#389

Post by astrange »

iratewizard wrote: post #373
concordDance wrote: post #242

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This seems untrue. Do more than a fraction of a percent of Chinese people watch the uncensored versions of things?

Agreed. It's easy to handwave it off. Americans churn out propaganda and inject it into every form of media it can. Similar to preservatives, some media is more nitrate than meat. China cuts it out because it says it's unhealthy to consume. China can do that overtly in it's culture war because it has never guaranteed not to.

Isn't China's movie editing more like adding a slideshow at the end that says "and then every character was arrested by the police, reeducated, and is now in a heterosexual nuclear family with 2.5 children"?

https://twitter.com/ZeyiYang/status/1561565205942919170

Re: The Big [Censored] Theory

#390

Post by archi42 »

gernb wrote: post #292
still_grokking wrote: post #270

What's the moral here? There is also a lot of censoring in the "western" world. It's also mostly justified by the exact same "reasons" like the ones mentioned in that blog post. Especial the "but the children" "argument" is used the whole time. And if that gets boring than it's "terrorism". Than again "the children". Also there are a lot of things one can't publicity say for political reasons. In Germany for example…

I don't know if it's still true but a friend of mine married a German woman and we were a little surprised she had never seen "The Sound of Music" and she said, of course, it's banned.

I couldn't find info on a ban. It was heavily/absurdly redacted due to the Nazi topics (1966 was two decades after the war), but some of those changes were promptly reverted. Can't say if that was due to the censor bureau, or if the censorship was a decision in the company.

Anyway, since it's VHS release you can buy the uncut version legally, and sellers are allowed to advert for it. It is rated as suitable from the age of 6 (FSK 6) since 2005. It simply wasn't that successful in Germany to begin with.

Sources (all German): https://www.schnittberichte.com/special.php?ID=176&Seite=6 https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meine_Lieder_%E2%80%93_meine_T...

Post reply on HN