15 ms·

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 activ

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 demonetized. I have no problem with her personally, I also don't find her interesting at all... but it is what it is. YouTube probably needs to classify videos more finely grained so that we can distinguish between types of videos and match tolerances for blue content to advertisers.

SexyCyborg 5y ago
"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 Fans, weekly photo video sets, and a decent copywriter and make 10x as much money? Why go through all this work? "she's clearly making a bust of herself naked." It's a dressmakers dummy, for sewing. It's a tool, it's not even decorative. It's of me because the clothes are for me. You can't make it with clothes on it or it won't work, I decimated the mesh instead. Men have been 3D printing far higher resolution models of nude female torsos without complaint from YouTube for a decade.
- fjhfhgf 5y ago
  Upvoted you and oceanghost just so you dont have to reply the same idiocy over and over if they are buried in downvotes
- spacexsucks 5y ago
  I am a huge fan. Keep being you. And you are brave.
- fifteenforty 5y ago
  If YouTube put as much effort into addressing the pandemic of health misinformation as they do into making your life difficult, the world would be a better place. Thank you for spreading such good information on masks.
- twofornone 5y ago
  >Why not just have an Only Fans, weekly photo video sets, and a decent copywriter and make 10x as much money? Why go through all this work? I mean, I cant help but agree that you're being a little dishonest here. Without passing judgement on whether what you're doing is right or wrong, a quick glance through the Twitter link in the OP and its quite obvious that you are well endowed and using it to your advantage by wearing revealing clothing. Can we acknowledge that some probably significant proportion of your channel views are at least initially due to your physique and the way you happily show it off?
  - ghosty141 5y ago
    >its quite obvious that you are well endowed and using it to your advantage by wearing revealing clothing What is "revealing clothing" to you. We are not in the 1900s where it's a crime to show a little ankle. Her clothing is nothing out of the ordinary in many videos. If you have big boobs people will notice no matter what you wear, youtube shouldn't act different based on your body... If another youtube would exist who has very small "assets" I can assure you nothing would've happened.
    - twofornone 5y ago
      It's so weird that this is the default response. Again, I'm not making a moral judgement. But the first three tweets in the linked thread: 1. Bare midriff and tiny shorts 2. Deliberately fully exposed cleavage 3. A tiny spaghetti strap Wear whatever you want, but don't be surprised when you get sexual attention, and don't pretend that as a public figure who makes money off of eyeballs that you're not deliberately taking advantage of your assets. It's like we're not allowed to acknowledge that people dress for attention without being accused of puritanism or shaming. And while we're on the subject, it is disingenuous to ignore the fact that the female figure induces a instinctual physiological and psychological responses in men. Social norms around modest dress may exist for a reason beyond oppression or patriarchy or what have you. It's tens of millions of years of evolution - not quite fair to pretend that revealing clothing does not force an onus onto men to suppress visceral urges.
      - 5y ago
- somerando7 5y ago
  1 question: how do you know their videos aren't demonetized? Also, in my understanding, youtube only demonetizes PER VIDEO, not your whole account unless you do something serious, is that right?
  - SexyCyborg 5y ago
    >how do you know their videos aren't demonetized? “No, there won't be an answer as to why men making nude female torsos will not be subject to the same enforcement and never have been.” I pressed YouTube on are or would those videos with identical content be treated identically, over several emails- they refuse to answer. That model is an extremely common test print in the community and I’ve never heard of anyone being demonetized for it. I’m hardly going to test it by reporting them and I’m also worried that people may now go and report or otherwise brigade those videos- many of whom are incredibly supportive friends in the community so I don’t want to over emphasize this and have them somehow blamed for doing nothing wrong. >Also, in my understanding, youtube only demonetizes PER VIDEO, not your whole account unless you do something serious, is that right? That is correct, although in my case it has been becoming more common every month and more ridiculous each time. None of the adult content rulings have fallen within their own definition.
    - hd4 5y ago
      Hold on, this is important. You're claiming gender-based discrimination but you don't actually know for sure if you're being treated differently from the male content creators.
      - pseudalopex 5y ago
        She said many of them are friends. The strongest plausible interpretation is she asked them.
- robinduckett 5y ago
  > mainland Chinese citizen Which is a hugely touchy subject around here on its own, for some reason
  - throwaway4good 5y ago
    - throwaway4good 5y ago
      And I am only slightly joking. YouTube is chuck-full of soft porn, so that is obviously not the problem here. Moderation and demonetarization of this sort is done by an (anonymous) human not by an algorithm. So why is mrs. Sexy controversial? Look at her twitter-profile and see where she is getting the most flak ...
      - throwaway4good 5y ago
        You can see an example of what I am referring to here: https://twitter.com/RealSexyCyborg/status/1483974791132762112 https://twitter.com/RealSexyCyborg/status/148397479113276211... Believe me, saying something like that is far more controversial, and will generate far more hate, than showing off some artificial boobies in a tech video.
    - pjc50 5y ago
      Fairly sure she's already reported being visited by the police over the contents of her Twitter and youtube. In addition to being "outed". While you're suggesting that she do things that will result in her being silenced, for your own laughs.
      - throwaway4good 5y ago
        I realize the for-all-over-an-empty-set joke may be lost on some ...
  - Freak_NL 5y ago
    From what I understand it is as often a problem with translation as it a clear political standpoint. What makes the phrase 'mainland China' problematic in English, is that it can mean a number of things. Someone from China using it may do so because: * They were taught to do so and simply understand it to mean 'someone from the People's Republic of China'. No political subtext intended. * They use it to mean that they are from the literal mainland of the People's Republic of China, but not Hong Kong or Macau. * They use it because they genuinely see Taiwan as 'that other part of China' that needs to be unified with the People's Republic of China, despite having been a sovereign democracy for over 70 years. When you say "I am from China" (or "I am from the PRC"), there is no chance of this having any deeper political meaning. When you say "I am from mainland China", there is a good chance that you do see Taiwan as a 'rogue province' and may support its 'inevitable' reunification by any means, including force. That latter sense is the one that is highly political and irks many people. Note: there is no need to get into the justness or wrongness of Chinese reunification here; it would be off-topic and not likely to be fruitful. I do think it is important that people understand that the phrase 'mainland China' is not bereft of connotations and may cause readers to form an opinion of the person using it that may not be in line with that person's actual intent.
- ialyos 5y ago
  I don't have a nuanced thought to add. I think it sucks these videos were demonetized and I agree there's something weird going on when 3d bust test prints abound. Sorry you have to fit so hard to get people on the same page
- black_puppydog 5y ago
  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 thought about your financials, simply assuming that with such a prolific youtube chain you would be fine. Your first twitter thread about this a few days ago made me reconsider, and given that youtube are being so arrogant about this I just signed up for a small $5 subscription on your tipeee. @everyone: if your stance is "just ditch youtube" then this is your chance to make it possible: https://en.tipeee.com/naomiwu/ https://en.tipeee.com/naomiwu/ Edit: wow, just read through the rest of the thread. Actually a lot of back and forth going on. I stand corrected. :)
  - SexyCyborg 5y ago
    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.
    - 3np 5y ago
      Would you be up for receiving cryptocurrency, either as sponsoring (like your tipeee site) or just as donations? EDIT: See now that you already accept the main ones <3 Pro tip for when you have the time: Generate a new BTC address (native segwit bech32; starts with "bc1" instead of "1"). It will lower fees significantly, which can be a difference between a smaller donation being meaningful or not when fees are higher)
      - kragen 5y ago
        All her recent YouTube videos have cryptocurrency donation addresses for BTC, BCH, LTC, ETH, and XMR (Monero).
- timwaagh 5y ago
  You're not wrong. You are being discriminated against. I mean you have so many things that 'family friendly' reactionaries would object to: Chinese, LGBTQ, cup size, making naked torso. I guess they all count. If it was only one you'd probably be fine. It's not a surprise. For what it's worth I do not support such discrimination and in a better world this wouldn't happen.
kstenerud 5y ago
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 time that the emperor has no clothes. Naomi is doing a good thing, and a service to women's rights.
- jb1991 5y ago
  Madonna explicitly wanted to be seen that way and did not attempt to suggest otherwise.
  - kstenerud 5y ago
    Yes, she did. And she wanted the right to do it. She wanted the right to do with her body as she pleases, and the right to be seen as she pleases. And in doing so she fought censors, TV networks, the FBI, you name it. She fought her whole life against this kind of bullshit. And now Naomi has taken up the fight too, and is probably discovering just how unnecessarily heavy a burden it is.
    - jb1991 5y ago
      My point is different. Is it the same fight? Is explicitly pushing boundaries because you want to be seen as sexualized and have the right to do so the same as trying to push those boundaries while claiming not to aim for sexualization? Honest question as they don’t seem the same. But maybe they are?
      - kstenerud 5y ago
        It's the same thing. It's fighting against the stupid view that two lumps under your flesh are somehow evil and must be hidden away or punished somehow (but only if you're a woman), or that touching your crotch on television is an arrestable offence, or any other thing in that long list of stupidity. It's about having rights over your own body, such that you can say "You don't like what you see? Well too bad, because it's my body and my right and you can't do a damn thing about it, nor do I have any obligation to explain myself." It's primarily women who fight this battle because the rules are tilted far more against them. Most men can't even see the problem. Here's an interesting thought experiment: A man gets breast implants and then goes around topless like he did before. Can you imagine the chaos that ensues? The legal questions? The social commentary about "decency"? The traumatized children? Can you see the hypocracy?
drewcoo 5y ago
If those are the boundaries of taste, taste is not big enough for me.
robinduckett 5y ago
helsinkiandrew 5y ago
She is a conundrum: is she titillating or expressing herself, or maximising her reach? It is a sad fact that if you took two women on youtube with equal talents and content - the one that "dressed up a little" would be more successful. I don't think that's the case with men (although Colin Furze and Integza do wear ties, maybe that's a factor in their success) It hard to see how YouTube can defend their actions - her videos are far less titillating than many (most) music videos available (do a youtube video for "female rap video").
- SexyCyborg 5y ago
  >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/1396604667094736900 https://twitter.com/RealSexyCyborg/status/139660466709473690... But as to the rest, I'm still on the fence. I'd like to explain, but these things are very personal, and if I won't explain, I understand why people assume the most likely explanation even if it's unflattering to me. As I said, I'm very aware of my own role in all this.
  - helsinkiandrew 5y ago
    > I'd like to explain, but these things are very personal And you don't need to. Unfortunately people are people - titillation and everything else is in the eye of the beholder - and they will interpret what they see in a way that fits in with their perspective.
  - throwaway_4ever 5y ago
    - Foobar8568 5y ago
ur-whale 5y ago
> boundaries of taste Do you realize how totally subjective this sentence is?
meheleventyone 5y ago
If you think nude statues are tasteless wait until you learn about fine art!
- 4gotunameagain 5y ago
  - colechristensen 5y ago
    So you think a Roman temple or senator weren’t commissioning statues of beautiful naked women for effectively marketing purposes? Like people who think anything Mozart or Shakespeare is high art but fail to realize both are full of dirty jokes.
    - 4gotunameagain 5y ago
      Past achievements should be considered within their timescale. If I build a water clock now, it would be cool. But Ctesibius building a water clock in 250 BC, now that's fucking impressive. 3D printing a human bust is cool. Sculpting a human bust three thousand years ago? That's incredible. Will those videos or that dressmaker's dummy have any artistic value in the future ? Please.
      - colechristensen 5y ago
        A modern day engineer designing and building 3d printers then scanning themselves in to building a physical model of themselves is I think roughly equivalent to a 2000 year old sculptor learning the by then commodity trade of stonecarving. Both skilled artisans doing things which did require a lot of training but also not uncommon in their own age. Let’s not infantilize the past and pretend everything they did was mindblowing.
  - delecti 5y ago
    > I don't think it is controversial to state that it could be perceived as tasteless "Controversial" is doing a lot of work here. Much of what is considered acceptable is only in retrospect. Much fine art was considered "controversial" in its tim.
sebow 5y ago
What boundaries?As in, who knows (besides the higher ups at youtube, of course) what are the boundaries of the YT TOS?This is the problem with your argument(if you made it, i'm not sure).Nobody knows literally what the boundaries are because they are too vague and YT has clearly a double-standard in both applying it to certain people and letting people know what is allowed.Then again most people, and definitely creators (should) know that YT has stopped being the platform of edgy interesting videos which actually made it explode (especially after 2007). I will not pretend to care for her for 2 simple reasons: I don't know anything about her, and I don't pity people who dance with YT "anymore"(As in 2014 and later, when Youtube de facto became sh1t, and later in 2016-2017 when this was already established as a way going forward for youtube, resulting in what's known by the masses as "adpocalypse", further censorship post 2016, etc.)
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
chrischen 5y ago
Youtube has a checkbox for not for kids and she points out that she checks this for all her videos.
- gorgoiler 5y ago
  Thank you for this comment — this is such an important part of the story. The only reason I could think of for the demonetisation was because family brands didn’t want to be alongside this content. What kind of family advertiser opts to display their content on “not for kids” videos? Unless — forgive some hyperbole — Oreos want in on the Megan Thee Stallion hype with amongst 9 year olds.
  - jcelerier 5y ago
    As far as I know YouTube has video "for kids", meaning video especially and solely made for kids, kids shows, etc. The "not for kids" is literally everything else. There's no real "family friendly" category, all the "not for kids" videos are still supposed to not be NSFW.
- circlefavshape 5y ago
  That youtube checkbox is to highlight content specifically made for children, not content unsuitable for children
  - chrischen 5y ago
    While true the tweet where she mentions this also shows that sexual content is permitted, and advertisers can opt in for monetization.
- dncornholio 5y ago
  If she is pointing this as an excuse, it just shows how ignorant and/or manipulative she is. This checkbox is not how she says it works. It doesn't mark video's unsuitable for children..
  - 5y ago
bambax 5y ago
You may not be completely wrong, but this is her answer: > YouTube's criteria are patriarchal, and male gaze focused- if men like it, it's bad and women need to change I think she's right. The kind of puritanism enforced by Youtube (or Facebook) is based on, and obsessed by, male gaze, and therefore patriarchal and retrograde. I would agree that there's a limit, and that limit is porn (yet Twitter doesn't censor porn, with no ill consequence to their business). What she's doing isn't porn.
- XorNot 5y ago
  This is pretty closely related to hot tub channels on Twitch though. There is, very obviously, a whole strain of content aimed at "sexual content where you normally can't have sexual content" - and the problem for providers is not dealing with it at some point means that is now what your platform is for (which ironically pretty much devalues the original content - the taboo is the appeal).
- chii 5y ago
  > yet Twitter doesn't censor porn they do - if it's explicit, you must login to view it. I'd consider that a partial censorship.
coldtea 5y ago
>She pretends to be some women's rights activist when she's really just a purveyor of some weird type of titillation. Thankfully men know better than her what she is (as opposed as what she claims to be), and can put her in her place After all this demonization happens to everybody who claims to be X when they're something else (e.g. a champion of rights vs an opportunist careerist, or a tech reviewer vs a sponsor shill). /s
xenomachina 5y ago
> she's clearly making a bust of herself naked. I'm sure if I put my balls on YouTube they'd be more than demonetized. She's posted many examples of videos by other YouTubers (most, if not all, men) that show reconstructions of nude female busts. Here are some: https://twitter.com/RealSexyCyborg/status/1484351771225260033 https://twitter.com/RealSexyCyborg/status/148435177122526003...
- M4v3R 5y ago
  Her videos are not taken down, just have what YT calls "limited monetization". How does she know the same does not apply to other YouTubers she pointed out? Afaik the monetization status is not displayed anywhere on the site for anyone else than the channel owner.
  - dragonwriter 5y ago
    > How does she know the same does not apply to other YouTubers she pointed out? She could have just watched the videos from a non-Premium account (or not logged in) and tracked the kinds of ads shown.
    - M4v3R 5y ago
      If that's the case then I would love to know how reliable this method is, and whether she actually did this research before making the claim that other videos are not demonetized. If there really are not while hers is, then obviously YouTube has a problem.
      - loup-vaillant 5y ago
        Good luck writing a paper then squeezing it into a Twitter post. She almost certainly did that kind of research. She's basically forced to at this point.
        tsol 5y ago
        Seems like everyone is just guessing at this point. She's in this thread right now, why not ask her? Everyone is fighting over one another for women's rights while ignoring the actual woman
NicoJuicy 5y ago
Isn't this just business? I think the businesses that receive complaints that they saw 'tits' with their commercial is pretty large. 'Cardboard nudity' or not. ( if they ever see it ofc)
colechristensen 5y ago
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.
- pjc50 5y ago
  > 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.
  - Seattle3503 5y ago
    A Christian group Exodus Cry got Pornhub's payment processing capabilities revoked over involuntary porn hysteria.
    - colechristensen 5y ago
      The involuntary porn thing seemed pretty real and the not so fringe group… er the New York Times certainly helped.
      - Seattle3503 5y ago
        Facebook allowed users to foment genocide (also NYT article). They didn't lose payment processing. The point that puritanical elements are seeking to push sexuality away still stands. Facebook apologizes and promises to moderate better. Pornhub gets cut off at the knees.
- pasquinelli 5y ago
  the united states is puritan. we always think we've broken away from our puritanical roots, when really we've just found new expressions of our puritanism.
Ancapistani 5y ago
> she is constantly pushing the boundaries of taste and the YouTube TOS to gain subscribers. Yeah, she’s definitely pushing the boundaries… but I’m not convinced that she does it to gain subscribers. I recall speaking with her in what I believe was her first “public” appearance on the Internet, on Reddit, several years ago. She put up with a lot of sexist crap[1], and disappeared for a while shortly thereafter. I think her reasons for her body modifications and the somewhat sexual tone of her projects are inherent to her personality; I think she’d be doing exactly the same stuff if she wasn’t getting paid for it. 1: … and bear in mind this is coming from someone who has a generally low tolerance for “wokeness”. The things people said to her were really bad.
- darkerside 5y ago
  She's doing it for attention, and that's ok, right? People want to be noticed, and they want to control what others notice about them (see fashion industry). I think there's some give and take that comes along with that. I don't find it that surprising that the bust video was demonetized, or any of the others, frankly. That's the cost of expanding the Overton window, I guess.
  - Ancapistani 5y ago
    > She's doing it for attention, and that's ok, right? I have no problem with her doing it for attention. I’m only saying that I don’t believe that’s her motivation.
    - darkerside 5y ago
      Eh. I think we're all fooling ourselves when we say we're just doing anything for ourselves. People are just hardwired to seek the respect and approval and, yes, attention, of our peers.
bsder 5y ago
> She pretends to be some women's rights activist when she's really just a purveyor of some weird type of titillation. You are over-reading this. I would chalk it up to "Chinese market is different from the US. Shrug." When I was looking for Cantonese lessons for my work many moons ago, the tutors made a point of emphasizing their modeling credentials (both men and women). HUHWUT? It was a very strange experience for me having come from the US where "sexual-type discussions are considered unprofessional". I simply shrugged it off, tried a couple tutors until one clicked, never talked about their "modeling career", and got on with butchering Cantonese horribly. :)
jessikat 5y ago
It's basically the digital equivalent of body shaming. And this sort of thing will feed into biased AI algorithms, and shape the world of "acceptable media" in the years to come. It may seem harmless on the surface, but the ramifications run deep.
- bayesian_horse 5y ago
  It's not body shaming, it's sexism by enforcing a questionable modesty standard. If anything, she is punished for looking too good.
  - xboxnolifes 5y ago
    That's still body shaming though. It's sexism because it doesn't apply to men, but it's body shaming because it's only applying since she is good looking and doesn't hide it.
pasquinelli 5y ago
> She pretends to be some women's rights activist when she's really just a purveyor of some weird type of titillation. fine, you win, i'll go look her up.
YEwSdObPQT 5y ago
> She pretends to be some women's rights activist when she's really just a purveyor of some weird type of titillation There are 1000s of videos of young women doing Yoga in such tight clothes you would know exactly what the nether regions look like and even without clothes with no age restriction on there. If people wanna watch such content that is their business. It is none of my business however maybe have a age restriction for over 18s.
nirui 5y ago
> She pretends to be some women's rights activist when she's really just a purveyor of some weird type of titillation. Naomi Wu was influenced by the cartoon (animate) culture. She designed her character according to the public perception of a girl in animation, it's her persona. And based on how I look at it, her wearing style is a rebellion against the traditional idea of what a woman should be wearing, maybe it's a political statement of some sort. I do agree that she maybe wearing a little too less. If she were my own sister, I would probably constantly annoying her so she can dress more properly at least for her own safety concern (you don't want to test the dark side of people). However, if it was truly an act of political statement, then maybe it's reasonable that she wants to make it louder. (Seriously, I would recommend that she remove the "Sexy" reference in her banding to avoid serious legal issues)
bayesian_horse 5y ago
"Balls" are primary sexual organs, breasts, male or female, are not. Shoving your genitals in someones face is definitely aggression. Just showing breasts is not.
gfykvfyxgc 5y ago
bborud 5y ago
> She pretends to be some women's rights activist when she's really just a > purveyor of some weird type of titillation. I don't see why she can't both be a women's rights activist and be a "purveyor of some weird type of titillation". It gets dangerously close to another ugly argument: that immodest clothing diminishes the culpability of a rapist.
cafard 5y ago
"A bust of herself naked". The expression you may be looking for is "a dressmaker's dummy". Or, in the US one finds "mannequins" in the department stores, with clothes hung on them. I have no problem with her personally, either, for before this morning I had never heard of her.
Mikeb85 5y ago
> But she's clearly making a bust of herself naked. I mean, who else would you make a bust of if not yourself?
naasking 5y ago
> She pretends to be some women's rights activist when she's really just a purveyor of some weird type of titillation. You seem to be implying these are somehow mutually exclusive. I don't see how that follows though. Pushing the boundaries by purveying a weird type of titillation could very well be a form of women's rights activism.
mcphage 5y ago
> Sigh... while talented, she is constantly pushing the boundaries of taste and the YouTube TOS to gain subscribers. So, we have an article about the negative consequences of dressing like she does, and you're still here pushing the "she does this only 'cause she benefits from it"?! She really, obviously does not benefit from it. > She pretends to be some women's rights activist when she's really just a purveyor of some weird type of titillation. Dude, this is so beyond false it's insulting. She's an accomplished engineer. Sorry you don't like how she dresses—hell, I don't especially, either. But to ignore everything she has accomplished and act like she's a pornographer because of it? Your misogyny is appalling.

SexyCyborg 5y ago

"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 Fans, weekly photo video sets, and a decent copywriter and make 10x as much money? Why go through all this work? "she's clearly making a bust of herself naked." It's a dressmakers dummy, for sewing. It's a tool, it's not even decorative. It's of me because the clothes are for me. You can't make it with clothes on it or it won't work, I decimated the mesh instead. Men have been 3D printing far higher resolution models of nude female torsos without complaint from YouTube for a decade.

fjhfhgf 5y ago
Upvoted you and oceanghost just so you dont have to reply the same idiocy over and over if they are buried in downvotes
spacexsucks 5y ago
I am a huge fan. Keep being you. And you are brave.
fifteenforty 5y ago
If YouTube put as much effort into addressing the pandemic of health misinformation as they do into making your life difficult, the world would be a better place. Thank you for spreading such good information on masks.
twofornone 5y ago
>Why not just have an Only Fans, weekly photo video sets, and a decent copywriter and make 10x as much money? Why go through all this work? I mean, I cant help but agree that you're being a little dishonest here. Without passing judgement on whether what you're doing is right or wrong, a quick glance through the Twitter link in the OP and its quite obvious that you are well endowed and using it to your advantage by wearing revealing clothing. Can we acknowledge that some probably significant proportion of your channel views are at least initially due to your physique and the way you happily show it off?
- ghosty141 5y ago
  >its quite obvious that you are well endowed and using it to your advantage by wearing revealing clothing What is "revealing clothing" to you. We are not in the 1900s where it's a crime to show a little ankle. Her clothing is nothing out of the ordinary in many videos. If you have big boobs people will notice no matter what you wear, youtube shouldn't act different based on your body... If another youtube would exist who has very small "assets" I can assure you nothing would've happened.
  - twofornone 5y ago
    It's so weird that this is the default response. Again, I'm not making a moral judgement. But the first three tweets in the linked thread: 1. Bare midriff and tiny shorts 2. Deliberately fully exposed cleavage 3. A tiny spaghetti strap Wear whatever you want, but don't be surprised when you get sexual attention, and don't pretend that as a public figure who makes money off of eyeballs that you're not deliberately taking advantage of your assets. It's like we're not allowed to acknowledge that people dress for attention without being accused of puritanism or shaming. And while we're on the subject, it is disingenuous to ignore the fact that the female figure induces a instinctual physiological and psychological responses in men. Social norms around modest dress may exist for a reason beyond oppression or patriarchy or what have you. It's tens of millions of years of evolution - not quite fair to pretend that revealing clothing does not force an onus onto men to suppress visceral urges.
    - 5y ago
somerando7 5y ago
1 question: how do you know their videos aren't demonetized? Also, in my understanding, youtube only demonetizes PER VIDEO, not your whole account unless you do something serious, is that right?
- SexyCyborg 5y ago
  >how do you know their videos aren't demonetized? “No, there won't be an answer as to why men making nude female torsos will not be subject to the same enforcement and never have been.” I pressed YouTube on are or would those videos with identical content be treated identically, over several emails- they refuse to answer. That model is an extremely common test print in the community and I’ve never heard of anyone being demonetized for it. I’m hardly going to test it by reporting them and I’m also worried that people may now go and report or otherwise brigade those videos- many of whom are incredibly supportive friends in the community so I don’t want to over emphasize this and have them somehow blamed for doing nothing wrong. >Also, in my understanding, youtube only demonetizes PER VIDEO, not your whole account unless you do something serious, is that right? That is correct, although in my case it has been becoming more common every month and more ridiculous each time. None of the adult content rulings have fallen within their own definition.
  - hd4 5y ago
    Hold on, this is important. You're claiming gender-based discrimination but you don't actually know for sure if you're being treated differently from the male content creators.
    - pseudalopex 5y ago
      She said many of them are friends. The strongest plausible interpretation is she asked them.
robinduckett 5y ago
> mainland Chinese citizen Which is a hugely touchy subject around here on its own, for some reason
- throwaway4good 5y ago
  - throwaway4good 5y ago
    And I am only slightly joking. YouTube is chuck-full of soft porn, so that is obviously not the problem here. Moderation and demonetarization of this sort is done by an (anonymous) human not by an algorithm. So why is mrs. Sexy controversial? Look at her twitter-profile and see where she is getting the most flak ...
    - throwaway4good 5y ago
      You can see an example of what I am referring to here: https://twitter.com/RealSexyCyborg/status/1483974791132762112 https://twitter.com/RealSexyCyborg/status/148397479113276211... Believe me, saying something like that is far more controversial, and will generate far more hate, than showing off some artificial boobies in a tech video.
  - pjc50 5y ago
    Fairly sure she's already reported being visited by the police over the contents of her Twitter and youtube. In addition to being "outed". While you're suggesting that she do things that will result in her being silenced, for your own laughs.
    - throwaway4good 5y ago
      I realize the for-all-over-an-empty-set joke may be lost on some ...
- Freak_NL 5y ago
  From what I understand it is as often a problem with translation as it a clear political standpoint. What makes the phrase 'mainland China' problematic in English, is that it can mean a number of things. Someone from China using it may do so because: * They were taught to do so and simply understand it to mean 'someone from the People's Republic of China'. No political subtext intended. * They use it to mean that they are from the literal mainland of the People's Republic of China, but not Hong Kong or Macau. * They use it because they genuinely see Taiwan as 'that other part of China' that needs to be unified with the People's Republic of China, despite having been a sovereign democracy for over 70 years. When you say "I am from China" (or "I am from the PRC"), there is no chance of this having any deeper political meaning. When you say "I am from mainland China", there is a good chance that you do see Taiwan as a 'rogue province' and may support its 'inevitable' reunification by any means, including force. That latter sense is the one that is highly political and irks many people. Note: there is no need to get into the justness or wrongness of Chinese reunification here; it would be off-topic and not likely to be fruitful. I do think it is important that people understand that the phrase 'mainland China' is not bereft of connotations and may cause readers to form an opinion of the person using it that may not be in line with that person's actual intent.
ialyos 5y ago
I don't have a nuanced thought to add. I think it sucks these videos were demonetized and I agree there's something weird going on when 3d bust test prints abound. Sorry you have to fit so hard to get people on the same page
black_puppydog 5y ago
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 thought about your financials, simply assuming that with such a prolific youtube chain you would be fine. Your first twitter thread about this a few days ago made me reconsider, and given that youtube are being so arrogant about this I just signed up for a small $5 subscription on your tipeee. @everyone: if your stance is "just ditch youtube" then this is your chance to make it possible: https://en.tipeee.com/naomiwu/ https://en.tipeee.com/naomiwu/ Edit: wow, just read through the rest of the thread. Actually a lot of back and forth going on. I stand corrected. :)
- SexyCyborg 5y ago
  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.
  - 3np 5y ago
    Would you be up for receiving cryptocurrency, either as sponsoring (like your tipeee site) or just as donations? EDIT: See now that you already accept the main ones <3 Pro tip for when you have the time: Generate a new BTC address (native segwit bech32; starts with "bc1" instead of "1"). It will lower fees significantly, which can be a difference between a smaller donation being meaningful or not when fees are higher)
    - kragen 5y ago
      All her recent YouTube videos have cryptocurrency donation addresses for BTC, BCH, LTC, ETH, and XMR (Monero).
timwaagh 5y ago
You're not wrong. You are being discriminated against. I mean you have so many things that 'family friendly' reactionaries would object to: Chinese, LGBTQ, cup size, making naked torso. I guess they all count. If it was only one you'd probably be fine. It's not a surprise. For what it's worth I do not support such discrimination and in a better world this wouldn't happen.

kstenerud 5y ago

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 time that the emperor has no clothes. Naomi is doing a good thing, and a service to women's rights.

jb1991 5y ago
Madonna explicitly wanted to be seen that way and did not attempt to suggest otherwise.
- kstenerud 5y ago
  Yes, she did. And she wanted the right to do it. She wanted the right to do with her body as she pleases, and the right to be seen as she pleases. And in doing so she fought censors, TV networks, the FBI, you name it. She fought her whole life against this kind of bullshit. And now Naomi has taken up the fight too, and is probably discovering just how unnecessarily heavy a burden it is.
  - jb1991 5y ago
    My point is different. Is it the same fight? Is explicitly pushing boundaries because you want to be seen as sexualized and have the right to do so the same as trying to push those boundaries while claiming not to aim for sexualization? Honest question as they don’t seem the same. But maybe they are?
    - kstenerud 5y ago
      It's the same thing. It's fighting against the stupid view that two lumps under your flesh are somehow evil and must be hidden away or punished somehow (but only if you're a woman), or that touching your crotch on television is an arrestable offence, or any other thing in that long list of stupidity. It's about having rights over your own body, such that you can say "You don't like what you see? Well too bad, because it's my body and my right and you can't do a damn thing about it, nor do I have any obligation to explain myself." It's primarily women who fight this battle because the rules are tilted far more against them. Most men can't even see the problem. Here's an interesting thought experiment: A man gets breast implants and then goes around topless like he did before. Can you imagine the chaos that ensues? The legal questions? The social commentary about "decency"? The traumatized children? Can you see the hypocracy?

drewcoo 5y ago

If those are the boundaries of taste, taste is not big enough for me.

robinduckett 5y ago

helsinkiandrew 5y ago

She is a conundrum: is she titillating or expressing herself, or maximising her reach? It is a sad fact that if you took two women on youtube with equal talents and content - the one that "dressed up a little" would be more successful. I don't think that's the case with men (although Colin Furze and Integza do wear ties, maybe that's a factor in their success) It hard to see how YouTube can defend their actions - her videos are far less titillating than many (most) music videos available (do a youtube video for "female rap video").

SexyCyborg 5y ago
>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/1396604667094736900 https://twitter.com/RealSexyCyborg/status/139660466709473690... But as to the rest, I'm still on the fence. I'd like to explain, but these things are very personal, and if I won't explain, I understand why people assume the most likely explanation even if it's unflattering to me. As I said, I'm very aware of my own role in all this.
- helsinkiandrew 5y ago
  > I'd like to explain, but these things are very personal And you don't need to. Unfortunately people are people - titillation and everything else is in the eye of the beholder - and they will interpret what they see in a way that fits in with their perspective.
- throwaway_4ever 5y ago
  - Foobar8568 5y ago

ur-whale 5y ago

> boundaries of taste Do you realize how totally subjective this sentence is?

meheleventyone 5y ago

If you think nude statues are tasteless wait until you learn about fine art!

4gotunameagain 5y ago
- colechristensen 5y ago
  So you think a Roman temple or senator weren’t commissioning statues of beautiful naked women for effectively marketing purposes? Like people who think anything Mozart or Shakespeare is high art but fail to realize both are full of dirty jokes.
  - 4gotunameagain 5y ago
    Past achievements should be considered within their timescale. If I build a water clock now, it would be cool. But Ctesibius building a water clock in 250 BC, now that's fucking impressive. 3D printing a human bust is cool. Sculpting a human bust three thousand years ago? That's incredible. Will those videos or that dressmaker's dummy have any artistic value in the future ? Please.
    - colechristensen 5y ago
      A modern day engineer designing and building 3d printers then scanning themselves in to building a physical model of themselves is I think roughly equivalent to a 2000 year old sculptor learning the by then commodity trade of stonecarving. Both skilled artisans doing things which did require a lot of training but also not uncommon in their own age. Let’s not infantilize the past and pretend everything they did was mindblowing.
- delecti 5y ago
  > I don't think it is controversial to state that it could be perceived as tasteless "Controversial" is doing a lot of work here. Much of what is considered acceptable is only in retrospect. Much fine art was considered "controversial" in its tim.

sebow 5y ago

What boundaries?As in, who knows (besides the higher ups at youtube, of course) what are the boundaries of the YT TOS?This is the problem with your argument(if you made it, i'm not sure).Nobody knows literally what the boundaries are because they are too vague and YT has clearly a double-standard in both applying it to certain people and letting people know what is allowed.Then again most people, and definitely creators (should) know that YT has stopped being the platform of edgy interesting videos which actually made it explode (especially after 2007). I will not pretend to care for her for 2 simple reasons: I don't know anything about her, and I don't pity people who dance with YT "anymore"(As in 2014 and later, when Youtube de facto became sh1t, and later in 2016-2017 when this was already established as a way going forward for youtube, resulting in what's known by the masses as "adpocalypse", further censorship post 2016, etc.)

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

chrischen 5y ago

Youtube has a checkbox for not for kids and she points out that she checks this for all her videos.

gorgoiler 5y ago
Thank you for this comment — this is such an important part of the story. The only reason I could think of for the demonetisation was because family brands didn’t want to be alongside this content. What kind of family advertiser opts to display their content on “not for kids” videos? Unless — forgive some hyperbole — Oreos want in on the Megan Thee Stallion hype with amongst 9 year olds.
- jcelerier 5y ago
  As far as I know YouTube has video "for kids", meaning video especially and solely made for kids, kids shows, etc. The "not for kids" is literally everything else. There's no real "family friendly" category, all the "not for kids" videos are still supposed to not be NSFW.
circlefavshape 5y ago
That youtube checkbox is to highlight content specifically made for children, not content unsuitable for children
- chrischen 5y ago
  While true the tweet where she mentions this also shows that sexual content is permitted, and advertisers can opt in for monetization.
dncornholio 5y ago
If she is pointing this as an excuse, it just shows how ignorant and/or manipulative she is. This checkbox is not how she says it works. It doesn't mark video's unsuitable for children..
- 5y ago

bambax 5y ago

You may not be completely wrong, but this is her answer: > YouTube's criteria are patriarchal, and male gaze focused- if men like it, it's bad and women need to change I think she's right. The kind of puritanism enforced by Youtube (or Facebook) is based on, and obsessed by, male gaze, and therefore patriarchal and retrograde. I would agree that there's a limit, and that limit is porn (yet Twitter doesn't censor porn, with no ill consequence to their business). What she's doing isn't porn.

XorNot 5y ago
This is pretty closely related to hot tub channels on Twitch though. There is, very obviously, a whole strain of content aimed at "sexual content where you normally can't have sexual content" - and the problem for providers is not dealing with it at some point means that is now what your platform is for (which ironically pretty much devalues the original content - the taboo is the appeal).
chii 5y ago
> yet Twitter doesn't censor porn they do - if it's explicit, you must login to view it. I'd consider that a partial censorship.

coldtea 5y ago

>She pretends to be some women's rights activist when she's really just a purveyor of some weird type of titillation. Thankfully men know better than her what she is (as opposed as what she claims to be), and can put her in her place After all this demonization happens to everybody who claims to be X when they're something else (e.g. a champion of rights vs an opportunist careerist, or a tech reviewer vs a sponsor shill). /s

xenomachina 5y ago

> she's clearly making a bust of herself naked. I'm sure if I put my balls on YouTube they'd be more than demonetized. She's posted many examples of videos by other YouTubers (most, if not all, men) that show reconstructions of nude female busts. Here are some: https://twitter.com/RealSexyCyborg/status/1484351771225260033 https://twitter.com/RealSexyCyborg/status/148435177122526003...

M4v3R 5y ago
Her videos are not taken down, just have what YT calls "limited monetization". How does she know the same does not apply to other YouTubers she pointed out? Afaik the monetization status is not displayed anywhere on the site for anyone else than the channel owner.
- dragonwriter 5y ago
  > How does she know the same does not apply to other YouTubers she pointed out? She could have just watched the videos from a non-Premium account (or not logged in) and tracked the kinds of ads shown.
  - M4v3R 5y ago
    If that's the case then I would love to know how reliable this method is, and whether she actually did this research before making the claim that other videos are not demonetized. If there really are not while hers is, then obviously YouTube has a problem.
    - loup-vaillant 5y ago
      Good luck writing a paper then squeezing it into a Twitter post. She almost certainly did that kind of research. She's basically forced to at this point.
      - tsol 5y ago
        Seems like everyone is just guessing at this point. She's in this thread right now, why not ask her? Everyone is fighting over one another for women's rights while ignoring the actual woman

NicoJuicy 5y ago

Isn't this just business? I think the businesses that receive complaints that they saw 'tits' with their commercial is pretty large. 'Cardboard nudity' or not. ( if they ever see it ofc)

colechristensen 5y ago

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.

pjc50 5y ago
> 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.
- Seattle3503 5y ago
  A Christian group Exodus Cry got Pornhub's payment processing capabilities revoked over involuntary porn hysteria.
  - colechristensen 5y ago
    The involuntary porn thing seemed pretty real and the not so fringe group… er the New York Times certainly helped.
    - Seattle3503 5y ago
      Facebook allowed users to foment genocide (also NYT article). They didn't lose payment processing. The point that puritanical elements are seeking to push sexuality away still stands. Facebook apologizes and promises to moderate better. Pornhub gets cut off at the knees.
pasquinelli 5y ago
the united states is puritan. we always think we've broken away from our puritanical roots, when really we've just found new expressions of our puritanism.

Ancapistani 5y ago

> she is constantly pushing the boundaries of taste and the YouTube TOS to gain subscribers. Yeah, she’s definitely pushing the boundaries… but I’m not convinced that she does it to gain subscribers. I recall speaking with her in what I believe was her first “public” appearance on the Internet, on Reddit, several years ago. She put up with a lot of sexist crap[1], and disappeared for a while shortly thereafter. I think her reasons for her body modifications and the somewhat sexual tone of her projects are inherent to her personality; I think she’d be doing exactly the same stuff if she wasn’t getting paid for it. 1: … and bear in mind this is coming from someone who has a generally low tolerance for “wokeness”. The things people said to her were really bad.

darkerside 5y ago
She's doing it for attention, and that's ok, right? People want to be noticed, and they want to control what others notice about them (see fashion industry). I think there's some give and take that comes along with that. I don't find it that surprising that the bust video was demonetized, or any of the others, frankly. That's the cost of expanding the Overton window, I guess.
- Ancapistani 5y ago
  > She's doing it for attention, and that's ok, right? I have no problem with her doing it for attention. I’m only saying that I don’t believe that’s her motivation.
  - darkerside 5y ago
    Eh. I think we're all fooling ourselves when we say we're just doing anything for ourselves. People are just hardwired to seek the respect and approval and, yes, attention, of our peers.

bsder 5y ago

> She pretends to be some women's rights activist when she's really just a purveyor of some weird type of titillation. You are over-reading this. I would chalk it up to "Chinese market is different from the US. Shrug." When I was looking for Cantonese lessons for my work many moons ago, the tutors made a point of emphasizing their modeling credentials (both men and women). HUHWUT? It was a very strange experience for me having come from the US where "sexual-type discussions are considered unprofessional". I simply shrugged it off, tried a couple tutors until one clicked, never talked about their "modeling career", and got on with butchering Cantonese horribly. :)

jessikat 5y ago

It's basically the digital equivalent of body shaming. And this sort of thing will feed into biased AI algorithms, and shape the world of "acceptable media" in the years to come. It may seem harmless on the surface, but the ramifications run deep.

bayesian_horse 5y ago
It's not body shaming, it's sexism by enforcing a questionable modesty standard. If anything, she is punished for looking too good.
- xboxnolifes 5y ago
  That's still body shaming though. It's sexism because it doesn't apply to men, but it's body shaming because it's only applying since she is good looking and doesn't hide it.

pasquinelli 5y ago

> She pretends to be some women's rights activist when she's really just a purveyor of some weird type of titillation. fine, you win, i'll go look her up.

YEwSdObPQT 5y ago

> She pretends to be some women's rights activist when she's really just a purveyor of some weird type of titillation There are 1000s of videos of young women doing Yoga in such tight clothes you would know exactly what the nether regions look like and even without clothes with no age restriction on there. If people wanna watch such content that is their business. It is none of my business however maybe have a age restriction for over 18s.

nirui 5y ago

> She pretends to be some women's rights activist when she's really just a purveyor of some weird type of titillation. Naomi Wu was influenced by the cartoon (animate) culture. She designed her character according to the public perception of a girl in animation, it's her persona. And based on how I look at it, her wearing style is a rebellion against the traditional idea of what a woman should be wearing, maybe it's a political statement of some sort. I do agree that she maybe wearing a little too less. If she were my own sister, I would probably constantly annoying her so she can dress more properly at least for her own safety concern (you don't want to test the dark side of people). However, if it was truly an act of political statement, then maybe it's reasonable that she wants to make it louder. (Seriously, I would recommend that she remove the "Sexy" reference in her banding to avoid serious legal issues)

bayesian_horse 5y ago

"Balls" are primary sexual organs, breasts, male or female, are not. Shoving your genitals in someones face is definitely aggression. Just showing breasts is not.

gfykvfyxgc 5y ago

bborud 5y ago

> She pretends to be some women's rights activist when she's really just a > purveyor of some weird type of titillation. I don't see why she can't both be a women's rights activist and be a "purveyor of some weird type of titillation". It gets dangerously close to another ugly argument: that immodest clothing diminishes the culpability of a rapist.

cafard 5y ago

"A bust of herself naked". The expression you may be looking for is "a dressmaker's dummy". Or, in the US one finds "mannequins" in the department stores, with clothes hung on them. I have no problem with her personally, either, for before this morning I had never heard of her.

Mikeb85 5y ago

> But she's clearly making a bust of herself naked. I mean, who else would you make a bust of if not yourself?

naasking 5y ago

> She pretends to be some women's rights activist when she's really just a purveyor of some weird type of titillation. You seem to be implying these are somehow mutually exclusive. I don't see how that follows though. Pushing the boundaries by purveying a weird type of titillation could very well be a form of women's rights activism.

mcphage 5y ago

> Sigh... while talented, she is constantly pushing the boundaries of taste and the YouTube TOS to gain subscribers. So, we have an article about the negative consequences of dressing like she does, and you're still here pushing the "she does this only 'cause she benefits from it"?! She really, obviously does not benefit from it. > She pretends to be some women's rights activist when she's really just a purveyor of some weird type of titillation. Dude, this is so beyond false it's insulting. She's an accomplished engineer. Sorry you don't like how she dresses—hell, I don't especially, either. But to ignore everything she has accomplished and act like she's a pornographer because of it? Your misogyny is appalling.