29 ms·

> It's sad to me how successful people have been sanitizing the internet. Not just sanitizing, but sanitizing to US social mores. Showing a naked boob is consi

> It's sad to me how successful people have been sanitizing the internet. Not just sanitizing, but sanitizing to US social mores. Showing a naked boob is considered porn and banned on most of these platform while public toplessness is perfectly legal in many jurisdictions worldwide. I guess it's lucky that at least these companies are not based in an even more restrictive society like China or we would see further restrictions become commonplace.

Conan_Kudo 4y ago
Public toplessness is also legal in most of the United States. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Topfreedom_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Topfreedom_in_the_United_State...
- silisili 4y ago
  Warning - Above link is NSFW(images of topless women). That said, I found it very interesting. I honestly had no idea it was legal anywhere outside of private or 'cordoned off' places.
  - ekanes 4y ago
    For the folks downvoting the above comment, it doesn’t necessarily reflect a viewpoint (that you could disagree with) but could simply be a heads up for people at a workplace with policies against viewing that content at work. (A policy that you might also disagree with… but the warning itself is still useful to some.)
    - eyegouging 4y ago
      Yup, a lot of policies are dumb and and you can’t tilt all the time. A useful heads up for some I reckon.
    - misterS 4y ago
      I did not and can't downvote, no I have no stake in this. That said, in my opinion people working in such a workplace reading a post "Why “go nuts, show nuts” doesn’t work in 2022" should be savvy enough to not click links, or read the post in the first place. Also, ironically, the fact that we have to mark such links (to Wikipedia!) as NSFW is exactly what this particular comment chain is about, no?
      - Shocka1 4y ago
        Ah, the ol' Hacker News "being a contrarian just to be a contrarian" thing. Boobs on the screen isn't the greatest look at work or any public location, and I don't really think it requires going any deeper than that. I can appreciate the pointless debate here and there, but this isn't some great philosophical question we have here lol.
        ghaff 4y ago
        Yeah. It's not just a prudish workplace policy thing. There is definitely stuff I wouldn't want on a screen in an office workplace policies notwithstanding because someone could take offense whether reasonably IMO or not. For that matter, there are almost certainly (non-porn) films I wouldn't go out of my way to watch on a plane especially if there were children nearby.
      - zigman1 4y ago
        You're overthinking it. Well, it's in the name right? Its not safe for work. I'm in a semi-full conference room currently, and opening the link would be a bit awkward, as it would be really out of context for osmeone who have a view onto my screen. It was definitely a valid remark, and in this case, it was useful at least for me.
        jeffreygoesto 4y ago
        Then why don't you just work at work? Is it not awkward if your open a live gaming stream at work?
    - silisili 4y ago
      Thanks for clarifying. I wasn't trying to be moral police, just warning folks of what was on the page. Like it or not, there are plenty of jobs that would be very unhappy with you viewing said images in an office setting.
  - thaumasiotes 4y ago
    > I honestly had no idea it was legal anywhere outside of private or 'cordoned off' places. It generally isn't. The map image in the article colors a state blue for "legal at the State/Territory level". But that's not where the laws banning nudity come from anyway, so it's almost purely uninformative.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - layer8 4y ago
    The fact that this apparently has to be categorized as NSFW is sad in itself.
    - arinlen 4y ago
  - sterlind 4y ago
    Decency laws prohibiting toplessness were challenged back in the day under Equal Protection and Due Process. Both sexes have nipples, some men have larger moobs than women. There's just not much biological difference, and thus no basis to legislate on other than the sex of the person bearing their breasts - nipples are nipples, basically. This was all back in the day, long before trans awareness even hit the mainstream.
    - zaphirplane 4y ago
      > There's just not much biological difference, … - nipples are nipples I have nipples, Greg. Can you milk me? [Meet the Parents]
      - InitialLastName 4y ago
        With the right hormones, stimulus, and/or medical issues you can get a male mammal's nipples to produce milk [0]. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Male_lactation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Male_lactation
  - int_19h 4y ago
    Images of topless women and men.
    - silisili 4y ago
      There are 9 topless women on the page, and 2 topless men if I counted right, who are both obscured and in the background. Like it or not, in some US workplaces, a background shirtless man isn't probably a big deal. A front and center topless lady in a thong probably is. I'd make the same declaration if it was a front and center pic of some dude in a banana hammock. I'm making no judgement on laws or society, just trying to give a heads up to folks who might not expect that from a wikipedia link.
- giantg2 4y ago
  "Public toplessness is also legal in most of the United States." Sort of. Many states don't have laws specifically against it, but some of the ones listed as legal on that map may not actually be (PA should be marked yellow at best). Most of these states also do not appear to restrict localities from enacting their own ordinances (obviously excluding under the jurisdictions where the courts have ruled).
  - WesternWind 4y ago
    States often regulate nudity in places that serve alcohol though.
    - giantg2 4y ago
      And in schools, eating establishments, etc.
- outworlder 4y ago
  But not on TV and other media. They have to cater to the lowest common denominator.
largepeepee 4y ago
Having grown up in an authoritarian country, then having the internet basically force it to liberalize was a great feeling. Ironically some liberties offered even less than a decade ago are eroding away because of the new internet overlords, often under the guise of some trumped up reason like "security" or "social" cause. These day they don't even try to hide their true greedy objectives anymore, as seen in the removal of the YouTube dislike button or manifestv3.
- dandellion 4y ago
  And having grown up in a liberal country, then having the internet and Hollywood dominance basically force it to implement US copyright laws and prudish censorship has been really sad.
  - sdoering 4y ago
    I couldn't agree more. It is disturbing how quickly things change in regards to the freedom and the liberal way we see naked bodies. While my example gas nothing to do with the internet it might still be interesting. When I grew up nudism wasn't uncommon in the GDR, but after being unified with western Germany not one generation later it is more than fringe. We only see unified filtered body types and the normality of seeing many different bodies in a non sexual way. While on the other hand even non nude bodies on Instagram often are sexualized beyond belief to maximize engagement. We denormalized nudity, the regular body but commoditized the stereotypical filtered body.
    - voxic11 4y ago
      I don't really know if it supports or opposes you point here, but pornography in the GDR was illegal while in unified Germany it is generally legal. I guess it kind of supports your claims that peoples bodies have become more commoditized, that porn is more acceptable than simple nakedness. On the other hand it kind of shows how the previous regime had its own hangups about human sexuality.
      - 4y ago
mrkramer 4y ago
>Showing a naked boob is considered porn and banned on most of these platform Probably because a lot of kids use these platforms aka social networks.
- t_mann 4y ago
  Is there any evidence that seeing topless women is bad for kids in some way, or is that just a US cultural norm?
  - djbusby 4y ago
    In the USA we can show bloody violence on over-the-air TV, guns and shooting. Naked humans are too scary for us.
    - rippercushions 4y ago
      Somebody once summarized this as hacking off a boob with a machete is R-rated, while kissing the same boob is X-rated. Only in America.
    - Tao3300 4y ago
      I remember a Louis CK bit about a crime serial he was watching where the (albeit fake) ejaculate on a dead woman could be shown but the breasts had to be censored. Of course, he turned out to be a creep and good luck ever finding one bit on that topic considering the massive news coverage of his bad behavior. But ad hominems aside, he had a point. It's really disturbed when you think about it: the degree to which an influential subculture in America elevates and defends violence while censoring and degrading women's bodies exposes a sick preference for death over life. Even if portions of it claim to be "pro-life" they are, to all intents and purposes, a death cult.
  - mrkramer 4y ago
    Idk I'm not an expert in this matters but people talk about exposing kids to anything including nudity is harmful to them. I really don't know but I think there is consensus that kids shouldn't be exposed to nudity.
giantg2 4y ago
"Not just sanitizing, but sanitizing to US social mores." I somewhat agree, but might characterize it as meeting the tightest western restrictions. I have tons of cookie pop-ups now that GDPR happened, but that doesn't really apply to the US. So the influence isn't fully unilateral. Considering the companies started in and are headquartered in the US, it makes sense they follow US regulations more closely.
refurb 4y ago
They aren’t banning it for social mores, they are banning it the same way Vegas was made “family friendly” -> to make money
- lmm 4y ago
  But it doesn't make money for them. No-one's actually losing consumer sales by allowing porn. It's all 50+ CEOs worrying about what other 50+ CEOs will think.
  - jjeaff 4y ago
    Of course they are. There is a lot of money in family friendly entertainment. Take movies for example. On average, the more family friendly rating, the more popular. G rated movies are the most profitable while R rated movies are the least profitable.
    - chipotle_coyote 4y ago
      Have you checked that assertion? Because it didn’t ring true to me based on what I remember (which was that PG-13 tends to be the sweet spot), and it doesn’t match the data I can find, e.g.: https://stephenfollows.com/which-mpaa-rating-earns-the-most-money/ https://stephenfollows.com/which-mpaa-rating-earns-the-most-... PG-13 is far and away the leader in terms of both highest-grossing films and percentage of box office revenue; R-rated films are actually the second in terms of highest-grossing and, depending on the year, bounce around between second and third. G-rated films, by contrast, are at the bottom across the board. There is a difference between “family entertainment” and “adults-only” which matters in terms of the discussion around Tumblr’s content. If we’re using MPAA ratings as an analogy, Tumblr’s “no porn” position isn’t “everything must be G-rated,” it’s “nothing can be NC-17.” One can argue about whether the latter is a good stance to take, but it’s important to be arguing about the actual restriction.
      - PraetorianGourd 4y ago
        You could both ne right. G rated films generally use no-name or d-list actors and aren’t trying to impress for awards in almost any category. They tend to be low-budget/high-profit. If we are talking revenue, PG-13 for sure. Profit? I would put my money on G.
thrown_22 4y ago
The web is dead, long live the dark web. The disturbing thing is that the hives of scum and villainy you find there are for the most part no more subversive than reddit in 2010. And they are actually fun which is more than I can say for _anything_ on the regular web.
- rhn_mk1 4y ago
  What are your recommendations for those who want to join in on the fun?
  - thrown_22 4y ago
    Rules 1 and 2.
  - simonswords82 4y ago
    I find 4chan to be reminiscent of early Internet and makes me feel nostalgic for how the internet used to be before various mega corps scrubbed it clean.
unity1001 4y ago
> Showing a naked boob is considered porn and banned on most of these platform while public toplessness is perfectly legal in many jurisdictions worldwide Yep. Im wondering when will countries start preventing US tech platforms from enforcing US laws and US morals on the people of those countries.
- lucideer 4y ago
  > US laws I don't really think this is about laws, but even in that arena, companies already do their best to avoid those within the US, nevermind internationally. See e.g. recent Patreon controversy for an example of this. There's man others. So I don't really think law is the problem here. > US morals This is the real issue and unfortunately these are finely weaved deep inside US corporate culture itself - they're part of culture fit for hiring in US multinationals and are thus highly unlikely to ever be disrupted from within the workforce of those companies.
  - unity1001 4y ago
    > US laws If companies 'willingly' comply with the existing social and regulatory landscape proactively, that's not something that happens 'willingly'. Its mental gymnastics to claim that they are doing it freely and not out of being obliged to.
- deaddodo 4y ago
  What are you even asking for here? Sites like Reddit, Twitter and Tumblr cater to "American laws" (most of these aren't even laws, the US is generally quite liberal on sexual content and nudity; thus producing a significant chunk of the global supply of pornography) is due to their primary target or largest slice of ad revenue coming from Americans[1][2][3]. There's no law forcing themselves to self-censor, they generally do it for financial/accessibility (American traffic) reasons. What it sounds like you're proposing is, if Denmark has carte blanche topless legality, that websites that want to operate in Denmark must respect their liberalism and allow said content. Which is far more draconian and intrusive. If a site wants owner wants to err on the side of conservative social values, that's their prerogative; create an alternative to fill the niche if you feel it's lacking. OnlyFans filled an entire void in that manner. 1 - "Two hundred twenty-two million users live in the US, which makes up 48% of the Reddit community." / https://thrivemyway.com/reddit-statistics/#Reddit-Usage-Statistics https://thrivemyway.com/reddit-statistics/#Reddit-Usage-Stat... 2 - "The United States of America has at least 83.4 million active Twitter users" - https://datareportal.com/essential-twitter-stats https://datareportal.com/essential-twitter-stats 3 - "While Tumblr is used worldwide, the vast majority of its users are based in the U.S. Domestic visitors alone account for 42% of its overall traffic." - https://cloudincome.com/tumblr-statistics/ https://cloudincome.com/tumblr-statistics/
hoseja 4y ago
Oh, not YET you mean.
davidgay 4y ago
> Not just sanitizing, but sanitizing to US social mores. Showing a naked boob is considered porn and banned on most of these platform while public toplessness is perfectly legal in many jurisdictions worldwide. Ironically, that set of jurisdictions includes all US national parks... See, for instance, https://www.tripsavvy.com/visiting-limantour-beach-1478617 https://www.tripsavvy.com/visiting-limantour-beach-1478617 - it's a lack of federal laws against public nudity.
hnick 4y ago
And it seems these days, all nudity is automatically treated as pornographic. When I was a child, my parents took photos of me - clothed or not, I might be doing something silly or endearing and those photos were created, whether in the backyard or the bathtub, given to some guy in a kiosk to print, and placed in the family photo album. I wonder if parents do the same these days, and if they share them online like how they used to pass around the family photo album?
- wst_ 4y ago
  I think quite a lot still do. If not exposing in albums, at least taking a shots. At least I do. It was what parents did when I've been toddler and I'm not going to bend under someone's pointing finger today. Just look at the Totoro movie - a great piece of animation for whole family - and you'll see father taking bath with their children and no one's complaining about it. It's perfectly fine. I'm taking bath with my child as well. Our child saw us naked on multiple occasions and, for us, it's normal. I wish it would be a common sense.
  - MaKey 4y ago
    Just be careful not to sync those pictures to Google Photos or some other cloud provider that scans your files, otherwise your account might get blocked forever (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32560361 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32560361).
  - chatterhead 4y ago
    Seriously, go watch the first 5 minutes of Lethal Weapon and you'll go.... "Wait... wtf. How long ago was this made..." I promise you.
- pixl97 4y ago
  Only if they want Google to ban their account.
lucideer 4y ago
This but much broader. One of the things that really bothers me is the suppression of non-US use of language (or, from the opposite perspective, the incentivisation of US-like language & conformance to US cultural norms). Take Youtube "content-creators" as an example making a living from ad revenue: Aussie / Scottish other native-English-speaking contributors face "de-monetisation" for presenting their natural selves and instead are asked to present according to US cultural norms in order to use the platform. And this isn't unique to Google/Youtube - the same applies to content-moderation across the internet.
- spaniard89277 4y ago
  It's a problem in the spanish speaking world. It's a recurring theme saying that you have to conform to your ad-revenue overlord, and that certain topics can't be discussed. Some people does the content anyway but publish in non-US platforms, or at least somewhere small that can't curate content.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - Tijdreiziger 4y ago
    It's a problem in the English-speaking world too. IIRC the reason why YouTubers always say 'the pandemic' instead of 'COVID-19' or 'the coronavirus' is because of the risk of demonetization. Some channels (e.g. RealLifeLore) even gate their videos on more controversial topics (e.g. war) behind a Nebula or Patreon subscription, with the rationale that they would get demonetized on YouTube.
- exikyut 4y ago
  Do you have any more info about this? I'm not sure what you mean and imagining people in AU going through accent training to sound like they're from the US... please tell me it's not that bad
  - hrnnnnnn 4y ago
    One notable difference is the c-word, which is a gendered slur in the US, but not in Scotland or Australia. I'm self censoring here because this is a US-run site and I'm afraid I'll get shadowbanned if I use it in full. I am not from the US and this word does not carry the same weight for me.
hardnose 4y ago
>Not just sanitizing, but sanitizing to US social mores. Not to US social mores, to some weird averaged out amalgamation of Western social mores. In the US, firearms are very normal and a regular part of life, but try doing a YouTube stream or channel about them and you'll quickly find yourself "sanitized" anyway.
peanut_worm 4y ago
It seems like it all comes back to advertising. No one wants their legitimate ad shown next to porn.
- lucideer 4y ago
  You're right but even this comment seems to demonstrate that oh so very odd cultural bias in the use of the word "legitimate"...
Tao3300 4y ago
Sorry Europe. Our religious disease is contagious. Kicking the Puritans out didn't work after all, it only incubated the problem.

Conan_Kudo 4y ago

Public toplessness is also legal in most of the United States. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Topfreedom_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Topfreedom_in_the_United_State...

silisili 4y ago
Warning - Above link is NSFW(images of topless women). That said, I found it very interesting. I honestly had no idea it was legal anywhere outside of private or 'cordoned off' places.
- ekanes 4y ago
  For the folks downvoting the above comment, it doesn’t necessarily reflect a viewpoint (that you could disagree with) but could simply be a heads up for people at a workplace with policies against viewing that content at work. (A policy that you might also disagree with… but the warning itself is still useful to some.)
  - eyegouging 4y ago
    Yup, a lot of policies are dumb and and you can’t tilt all the time. A useful heads up for some I reckon.
  - misterS 4y ago
    I did not and can't downvote, no I have no stake in this. That said, in my opinion people working in such a workplace reading a post "Why “go nuts, show nuts” doesn’t work in 2022" should be savvy enough to not click links, or read the post in the first place. Also, ironically, the fact that we have to mark such links (to Wikipedia!) as NSFW is exactly what this particular comment chain is about, no?
    - Shocka1 4y ago
      Ah, the ol' Hacker News "being a contrarian just to be a contrarian" thing. Boobs on the screen isn't the greatest look at work or any public location, and I don't really think it requires going any deeper than that. I can appreciate the pointless debate here and there, but this isn't some great philosophical question we have here lol.
      - ghaff 4y ago
        Yeah. It's not just a prudish workplace policy thing. There is definitely stuff I wouldn't want on a screen in an office workplace policies notwithstanding because someone could take offense whether reasonably IMO or not. For that matter, there are almost certainly (non-porn) films I wouldn't go out of my way to watch on a plane especially if there were children nearby.
    - zigman1 4y ago
      You're overthinking it. Well, it's in the name right? Its not safe for work. I'm in a semi-full conference room currently, and opening the link would be a bit awkward, as it would be really out of context for osmeone who have a view onto my screen. It was definitely a valid remark, and in this case, it was useful at least for me.
      - jeffreygoesto 4y ago
        Then why don't you just work at work? Is it not awkward if your open a live gaming stream at work?
  - silisili 4y ago
    Thanks for clarifying. I wasn't trying to be moral police, just warning folks of what was on the page. Like it or not, there are plenty of jobs that would be very unhappy with you viewing said images in an office setting.
- thaumasiotes 4y ago
  > I honestly had no idea it was legal anywhere outside of private or 'cordoned off' places. It generally isn't. The map image in the article colors a state blue for "legal at the State/Territory level". But that's not where the laws banning nudity come from anyway, so it's almost purely uninformative.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- layer8 4y ago
  The fact that this apparently has to be categorized as NSFW is sad in itself.
  - arinlen 4y ago
- sterlind 4y ago
  Decency laws prohibiting toplessness were challenged back in the day under Equal Protection and Due Process. Both sexes have nipples, some men have larger moobs than women. There's just not much biological difference, and thus no basis to legislate on other than the sex of the person bearing their breasts - nipples are nipples, basically. This was all back in the day, long before trans awareness even hit the mainstream.
  - zaphirplane 4y ago
    > There's just not much biological difference, … - nipples are nipples I have nipples, Greg. Can you milk me? [Meet the Parents]
    - InitialLastName 4y ago
      With the right hormones, stimulus, and/or medical issues you can get a male mammal's nipples to produce milk [0]. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Male_lactation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Male_lactation
- int_19h 4y ago
  Images of topless women and men.
  - silisili 4y ago
    There are 9 topless women on the page, and 2 topless men if I counted right, who are both obscured and in the background. Like it or not, in some US workplaces, a background shirtless man isn't probably a big deal. A front and center topless lady in a thong probably is. I'd make the same declaration if it was a front and center pic of some dude in a banana hammock. I'm making no judgement on laws or society, just trying to give a heads up to folks who might not expect that from a wikipedia link.
giantg2 4y ago
"Public toplessness is also legal in most of the United States." Sort of. Many states don't have laws specifically against it, but some of the ones listed as legal on that map may not actually be (PA should be marked yellow at best). Most of these states also do not appear to restrict localities from enacting their own ordinances (obviously excluding under the jurisdictions where the courts have ruled).
- WesternWind 4y ago
  States often regulate nudity in places that serve alcohol though.
  - giantg2 4y ago
    And in schools, eating establishments, etc.
outworlder 4y ago
But not on TV and other media. They have to cater to the lowest common denominator.

largepeepee 4y ago

Having grown up in an authoritarian country, then having the internet basically force it to liberalize was a great feeling. Ironically some liberties offered even less than a decade ago are eroding away because of the new internet overlords, often under the guise of some trumped up reason like "security" or "social" cause. These day they don't even try to hide their true greedy objectives anymore, as seen in the removal of the YouTube dislike button or manifestv3.

dandellion 4y ago
And having grown up in a liberal country, then having the internet and Hollywood dominance basically force it to implement US copyright laws and prudish censorship has been really sad.
- sdoering 4y ago
  I couldn't agree more. It is disturbing how quickly things change in regards to the freedom and the liberal way we see naked bodies. While my example gas nothing to do with the internet it might still be interesting. When I grew up nudism wasn't uncommon in the GDR, but after being unified with western Germany not one generation later it is more than fringe. We only see unified filtered body types and the normality of seeing many different bodies in a non sexual way. While on the other hand even non nude bodies on Instagram often are sexualized beyond belief to maximize engagement. We denormalized nudity, the regular body but commoditized the stereotypical filtered body.
  - voxic11 4y ago
    I don't really know if it supports or opposes you point here, but pornography in the GDR was illegal while in unified Germany it is generally legal. I guess it kind of supports your claims that peoples bodies have become more commoditized, that porn is more acceptable than simple nakedness. On the other hand it kind of shows how the previous regime had its own hangups about human sexuality.
    - 4y ago

mrkramer 4y ago

>Showing a naked boob is considered porn and banned on most of these platform Probably because a lot of kids use these platforms aka social networks.

t_mann 4y ago
Is there any evidence that seeing topless women is bad for kids in some way, or is that just a US cultural norm?
- djbusby 4y ago
  In the USA we can show bloody violence on over-the-air TV, guns and shooting. Naked humans are too scary for us.
  - rippercushions 4y ago
    Somebody once summarized this as hacking off a boob with a machete is R-rated, while kissing the same boob is X-rated. Only in America.
  - Tao3300 4y ago
    I remember a Louis CK bit about a crime serial he was watching where the (albeit fake) ejaculate on a dead woman could be shown but the breasts had to be censored. Of course, he turned out to be a creep and good luck ever finding one bit on that topic considering the massive news coverage of his bad behavior. But ad hominems aside, he had a point. It's really disturbed when you think about it: the degree to which an influential subculture in America elevates and defends violence while censoring and degrading women's bodies exposes a sick preference for death over life. Even if portions of it claim to be "pro-life" they are, to all intents and purposes, a death cult.
- mrkramer 4y ago
  Idk I'm not an expert in this matters but people talk about exposing kids to anything including nudity is harmful to them. I really don't know but I think there is consensus that kids shouldn't be exposed to nudity.

giantg2 4y ago

"Not just sanitizing, but sanitizing to US social mores." I somewhat agree, but might characterize it as meeting the tightest western restrictions. I have tons of cookie pop-ups now that GDPR happened, but that doesn't really apply to the US. So the influence isn't fully unilateral. Considering the companies started in and are headquartered in the US, it makes sense they follow US regulations more closely.

refurb 4y ago

They aren’t banning it for social mores, they are banning it the same way Vegas was made “family friendly” -> to make money

lmm 4y ago
But it doesn't make money for them. No-one's actually losing consumer sales by allowing porn. It's all 50+ CEOs worrying about what other 50+ CEOs will think.
- jjeaff 4y ago
  Of course they are. There is a lot of money in family friendly entertainment. Take movies for example. On average, the more family friendly rating, the more popular. G rated movies are the most profitable while R rated movies are the least profitable.
  - chipotle_coyote 4y ago
    Have you checked that assertion? Because it didn’t ring true to me based on what I remember (which was that PG-13 tends to be the sweet spot), and it doesn’t match the data I can find, e.g.: https://stephenfollows.com/which-mpaa-rating-earns-the-most-money/ https://stephenfollows.com/which-mpaa-rating-earns-the-most-... PG-13 is far and away the leader in terms of both highest-grossing films and percentage of box office revenue; R-rated films are actually the second in terms of highest-grossing and, depending on the year, bounce around between second and third. G-rated films, by contrast, are at the bottom across the board. There is a difference between “family entertainment” and “adults-only” which matters in terms of the discussion around Tumblr’s content. If we’re using MPAA ratings as an analogy, Tumblr’s “no porn” position isn’t “everything must be G-rated,” it’s “nothing can be NC-17.” One can argue about whether the latter is a good stance to take, but it’s important to be arguing about the actual restriction.
    - PraetorianGourd 4y ago
      You could both ne right. G rated films generally use no-name or d-list actors and aren’t trying to impress for awards in almost any category. They tend to be low-budget/high-profit. If we are talking revenue, PG-13 for sure. Profit? I would put my money on G.

thrown_22 4y ago

The web is dead, long live the dark web. The disturbing thing is that the hives of scum and villainy you find there are for the most part no more subversive than reddit in 2010. And they are actually fun which is more than I can say for _anything_ on the regular web.

rhn_mk1 4y ago
What are your recommendations for those who want to join in on the fun?
- thrown_22 4y ago
  Rules 1 and 2.
- simonswords82 4y ago
  I find 4chan to be reminiscent of early Internet and makes me feel nostalgic for how the internet used to be before various mega corps scrubbed it clean.

unity1001 4y ago

> Showing a naked boob is considered porn and banned on most of these platform while public toplessness is perfectly legal in many jurisdictions worldwide Yep. Im wondering when will countries start preventing US tech platforms from enforcing US laws and US morals on the people of those countries.

lucideer 4y ago
> US laws I don't really think this is about laws, but even in that arena, companies already do their best to avoid those within the US, nevermind internationally. See e.g. recent Patreon controversy for an example of this. There's man others. So I don't really think law is the problem here. > US morals This is the real issue and unfortunately these are finely weaved deep inside US corporate culture itself - they're part of culture fit for hiring in US multinationals and are thus highly unlikely to ever be disrupted from within the workforce of those companies.
- unity1001 4y ago
  > US laws If companies 'willingly' comply with the existing social and regulatory landscape proactively, that's not something that happens 'willingly'. Its mental gymnastics to claim that they are doing it freely and not out of being obliged to.
deaddodo 4y ago
What are you even asking for here? Sites like Reddit, Twitter and Tumblr cater to "American laws" (most of these aren't even laws, the US is generally quite liberal on sexual content and nudity; thus producing a significant chunk of the global supply of pornography) is due to their primary target or largest slice of ad revenue coming from Americans[1][2][3]. There's no law forcing themselves to self-censor, they generally do it for financial/accessibility (American traffic) reasons. What it sounds like you're proposing is, if Denmark has carte blanche topless legality, that websites that want to operate in Denmark must respect their liberalism and allow said content. Which is far more draconian and intrusive. If a site wants owner wants to err on the side of conservative social values, that's their prerogative; create an alternative to fill the niche if you feel it's lacking. OnlyFans filled an entire void in that manner. 1 - "Two hundred twenty-two million users live in the US, which makes up 48% of the Reddit community." / https://thrivemyway.com/reddit-statistics/#Reddit-Usage-Statistics https://thrivemyway.com/reddit-statistics/#Reddit-Usage-Stat... 2 - "The United States of America has at least 83.4 million active Twitter users" - https://datareportal.com/essential-twitter-stats https://datareportal.com/essential-twitter-stats 3 - "While Tumblr is used worldwide, the vast majority of its users are based in the U.S. Domestic visitors alone account for 42% of its overall traffic." - https://cloudincome.com/tumblr-statistics/ https://cloudincome.com/tumblr-statistics/

hoseja 4y ago

Oh, not YET you mean.

davidgay 4y ago

> Not just sanitizing, but sanitizing to US social mores. Showing a naked boob is considered porn and banned on most of these platform while public toplessness is perfectly legal in many jurisdictions worldwide. Ironically, that set of jurisdictions includes all US national parks... See, for instance, https://www.tripsavvy.com/visiting-limantour-beach-1478617 https://www.tripsavvy.com/visiting-limantour-beach-1478617 - it's a lack of federal laws against public nudity.

hnick 4y ago

And it seems these days, all nudity is automatically treated as pornographic. When I was a child, my parents took photos of me - clothed or not, I might be doing something silly or endearing and those photos were created, whether in the backyard or the bathtub, given to some guy in a kiosk to print, and placed in the family photo album. I wonder if parents do the same these days, and if they share them online like how they used to pass around the family photo album?

wst_ 4y ago
I think quite a lot still do. If not exposing in albums, at least taking a shots. At least I do. It was what parents did when I've been toddler and I'm not going to bend under someone's pointing finger today. Just look at the Totoro movie - a great piece of animation for whole family - and you'll see father taking bath with their children and no one's complaining about it. It's perfectly fine. I'm taking bath with my child as well. Our child saw us naked on multiple occasions and, for us, it's normal. I wish it would be a common sense.
- MaKey 4y ago
  Just be careful not to sync those pictures to Google Photos or some other cloud provider that scans your files, otherwise your account might get blocked forever (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32560361 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32560361).
- chatterhead 4y ago
  Seriously, go watch the first 5 minutes of Lethal Weapon and you'll go.... "Wait... wtf. How long ago was this made..." I promise you.
pixl97 4y ago
Only if they want Google to ban their account.

lucideer 4y ago

This but much broader. One of the things that really bothers me is the suppression of non-US use of language (or, from the opposite perspective, the incentivisation of US-like language & conformance to US cultural norms). Take Youtube "content-creators" as an example making a living from ad revenue: Aussie / Scottish other native-English-speaking contributors face "de-monetisation" for presenting their natural selves and instead are asked to present according to US cultural norms in order to use the platform. And this isn't unique to Google/Youtube - the same applies to content-moderation across the internet.

spaniard89277 4y ago
It's a problem in the spanish speaking world. It's a recurring theme saying that you have to conform to your ad-revenue overlord, and that certain topics can't be discussed. Some people does the content anyway but publish in non-US platforms, or at least somewhere small that can't curate content.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- Tijdreiziger 4y ago
  It's a problem in the English-speaking world too. IIRC the reason why YouTubers always say 'the pandemic' instead of 'COVID-19' or 'the coronavirus' is because of the risk of demonetization. Some channels (e.g. RealLifeLore) even gate their videos on more controversial topics (e.g. war) behind a Nebula or Patreon subscription, with the rationale that they would get demonetized on YouTube.
exikyut 4y ago
Do you have any more info about this? I'm not sure what you mean and imagining people in AU going through accent training to sound like they're from the US... please tell me it's not that bad
- hrnnnnnn 4y ago
  One notable difference is the c-word, which is a gendered slur in the US, but not in Scotland or Australia. I'm self censoring here because this is a US-run site and I'm afraid I'll get shadowbanned if I use it in full. I am not from the US and this word does not carry the same weight for me.

hardnose 4y ago

>Not just sanitizing, but sanitizing to US social mores. Not to US social mores, to some weird averaged out amalgamation of Western social mores. In the US, firearms are very normal and a regular part of life, but try doing a YouTube stream or channel about them and you'll quickly find yourself "sanitized" anyway.

peanut_worm 4y ago

It seems like it all comes back to advertising. No one wants their legitimate ad shown next to porn.

lucideer 4y ago
You're right but even this comment seems to demonstrate that oh so very odd cultural bias in the use of the word "legitimate"...

Tao3300 4y ago

Sorry Europe. Our religious disease is contagious. Kicking the Puritans out didn't work after all, it only incubated the problem.