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

461–470 of 891 posts

Re: The Big [Censored] Theory

#461

Post by kelnos »

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.

> It is affirming the stereotype Indian males lack confidence with women.

I wasn't even aware that was a stereotype, after knowing (very closely, with some!) and interacting with hundreds of Indian males in my life.

Lacking confidence with women is a pretty standard "nerd"/"geek" stereotype, though, which, given the title and subject matter the show deals with, is what I would assume they were going for. Were you ever upset that Leonard was often awkward with women? Sure, he didn't have the "unable to talk to women without alcohol" bit, but Leonard wasn't exactly a ladies' man. So it's ok to portray a white man as being awkward around women, but if it's an Indian man, it's racist?

Re: accent mocking: accents are fun and the confusion that they can cause can be funny!

I do recall references to cow worship, which was a bit insipid and not that funny, but... c'mon, racist? Gimme a break.

Re: The Big [Censored] Theory

#462

Post by erichocean »

personjerry wrote: post #392

> These acts of censorship not only limit the impact of foreign-based productions, they also help the Chinese government maintain control. But why does the Chinese government need that kind of control?

From the article: the Chinese government believes the primary purpose of culture is to raise healthy children, not to entertain or amuse adults.

The Chinese also believe it is the government's responsibility to maintain their culture over time, which is why the government exerts cultural control.

Re: The Big [Censored] Theory

#463

Post by dirtsoc »

darawk wrote: post #56
S201 wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because the people of China didn't choose this: their oppressive and authoritarian government did it for them.

This is right. If people vote for censorship in a democracy, that's a perfectly fine form of governmental heterogeneity. What's happening in China is not that.

If the current generation votes for censorship, should the next generations have to live under those rules also?

Re: The Big [Censored] Theory

#464

Post by fallingfrog »

welshwelsh wrote: post #155
darawk wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is right. If people vote for censorship in a democracy, that's a perfectly fine form of governmental heterogeneity. What's happening in China is not that.

I completely disagree. An individual's rights should have nothing to do with the people who happen to surround them and what they happen to think. If different countries allow different things, that would mean that what a person is allowed to do would depend on where they happen to live, which is usually close to where they happened to be born. That doesn't make any sense to me- the lottery of birth should have no im…

It’s certainly an interesting philosophical problem, finding the balance between the individual and the society. My take on it is this: decisions should be made by the people who those decisions affect. In the case of censorship I agree with you completely- my watching a slasher flick does not give you nightmares. If I were playing devils advocate I might say that it corrodes the national character or something like that- but that to me is a very weak argument.

Re: The Big [Censored] Theory

#465

Post by kelnos »

ginger2016 wrote: post #369
MichaelCollins wrote: post #352

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> lack confidence with women Aren't all the male characters in the show this way? Is the show doing "Character who is Indian male lacks confidence with women" ? Or is it doing "Character lacks confidence with women because he's an Indian male" ? There's a world of difference.

Asian men historically have been desexualized. The show is relying on that stereotype. https://youtu.be/2k82hIqd1Os

Raj is an Indian male who is desexualized.

Sheldon is a white male who is desexualized.

Leonard is a white male who is desexualized.

Harold is a white male who is oversexualized in creepy ways.

And I'm not even sure "desexualized" is the right word. With both Raj and Leonard, at least, I remember there were many plot points about their difficulty with women. "Desexualized" to me would mean that they weren't even seen as people who are interested in sex or relationships -- that is, their status as having sexuality at all was minimized and never touched upon -- which was clearly not the case for either of them.

In any case, "relying on a stereotype" does not make something racist. When I watched the show (admittedly not for long; I probably got tired of it after a season or two), yes, there were certainly jokes that only worked because Raj was Indian, or Harold was Jewish, or Sheldon was neuro-atypical, but for the most part it was the stereotype "nerdy people are awkward in all sorts of social situations, especially when nerdy heterosexual men interact with women". Being Indian, or Jewish, or probably-autistic were secondary characteristics that gave them more color as people.

Re: The Big [Censored] Theory

#466

Post by mbreese »

MichaelCollins wrote: post #308
coryfklein wrote: post #277

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My Mormon neighbors tend to use VidAngel, which got in huge trouble with an absolutely hilarious payment model. 1. VidAngel purchases a bunch of Blu-ray discs and stores them in a warehouse 2. Tag all the content of a film and create filters so the user can, for example, filter out all sex and violence but leave in vulgarity 3. User "purchases" a Blu-ray for $20 (!!) and VidAngel says, "since we now know you're the o…

Leaving aside the matter of Mormons and their weird puritan sensibilities, what this company essentially did was reinvent movie rental, but because they did it on the internet instead of a brick and mortar shop we're all expected to think it obvious and self evidence that what they did was horrible. In other contexts on sites like this, "do [common thing] but on a computer" patents get mocked and derided because "but…

This reminds me of how Aereo worked. They effectively built small little antennas that they could put in a data center. You’d then rent the antenna and stream data to your home instead of using your own antenna. This was found (Supreme Court) to be unauthorized as it was a “public performance”. This DVD streaming service would likely have fallen under the same category.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aereo

Re: The Big [Censored] Theory

#467

Post by shusaku »

neither_color wrote: post #416
Animats wrote: post #394

What's more striking is what comes out of China's domestic entertainment industry. There are far too many historical costume dramas. Those aren't as heavily censored as modern ones. More modern content looks like it was censored in accordance with the US Television Code of the 1950s. ("The code prohibited the use of profanity, the negative portrayal of family life, irreverence for God and religion, illicit sex, drunk…

What's interesting is in the US that kind of censorship is attributed to the most mainstream religion but China is officially atheist and does the same. Whenever people tell me that it's only one religion standing in the way of equal rights for disadvantaged groups I remind them that there's an atheist superpower that's even less permissive except for on reproductive issues(although, in their case they do regulate it…

A lot of people in the west (especially the US) are raised with the Sunday school idea that religion is something you choose after an objective weighing of ideas. The reality is that both China and the US have engrained cultural values which lead to these regulations. Those cultural values sometimes manifest as religious practice, but there is no hard distinction.

Re: The Big [Censored] Theory

#468

Post by fallingfrog »

fluoridation wrote: post #406
the_doctah wrote: post #382

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Do you mean publicly or privately? Publicly, sure it has increased. Most people won't admit to something that they'll be shamed for. Privately, how could we know? Has there always been more or less the same amount of gay sex going on behind closed doors regardless of the situation in the public sphere? My default assumption would have to be yes, unless I saw compelling evidence to the contrary.

I read a statistic once that said the high water mark of homosexual relationships in the United States was during the Second World War (because all the men were overseas together and all the women were back home together). But you don’t see that portrayed in media.

Re: The Big [Censored] Theory

#469

Post by kypro »

This happens in the West too. For example one of my favourite shows, "Peep Show" has a scene removed because one of the main characters wears black face to break social taboos. Obviously, it's done in a mocking way, but even mocking someone for black face has been deemed inappropriate by modern Western standards. The show isn't even that old either.

I'm almost certain there would be things seen as normal or inoffensive in China that would be seen as offensive and censored here. For example, a show that expressed criticism of homosexuality probably wouldn't be tolerated in the West. I'm guessing there could also be scenes that we would consider examples of animal cruelty given our differing views on animal welfare.

Re: The Big [Censored] Theory

#470

Post by Firmwarrior »

brigandish wrote: post #460
lettergram wrote: post #428

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

I think the downvotes you're attracting give some indication for the HN crowd.

I didn't downvote him, but I could see how even a staunch COVID denialist would think his comment is taking the thread off the rails
Post reply on HN