6 ms·

Its wild that in the current year we are still allowing prehistoric puritan "ethics" to make decisions for us. I dont use twitch and never have but our societie

Its wild that in the current year we are still allowing prehistoric puritan "ethics" to make decisions for us. I dont use twitch and never have but our societies sexual repression is so pervasive its shocking.

mngdtt 3y ago
On one hand you are right. On the other I understand they don't want their website to turn into Chaturbate.
thegrim22 3y ago
Maybe the morals our societies have held for hundreds/thousands of years around moral decency and civility had a point. But I guess I'm glad you're wiser than all the generations that came before you, and you know better than all of them.
- chromatin 3y ago
  A sort of Chesterton's fence of morality, if you will.
  - MeImCounting 3y ago
    I think the reason behind medieval "morality" is pretty well understood. I dont necessarily think HN is the best place to discuss this as it could be seen as pretty political. Regardless there is plenty of literature out there talking about this and it comes down to maintaining the hierarchy of the genders, property rights and religious sects seeking societal control (think Calvinism)
- __s 3y ago
  This puritanism is neither so greatly long lived, nor globally distributed
  - theonething 3y ago
    It's been around for at least 2000 years.
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
    - jrflowers 3y ago
      Exactly. When you look back 2000 years to Greek and Roman societies they shied away from any nude depictions of the human form. Nudity as we see it in society nowadays has only been around since the invention of Playboy in the 1950s
      - theonething 3y ago
        > Exactly. When you look back 2000 years to Greek and Roman societies they shied away from any nude depictions of the human form. Nudity as we see it in society nowadays has only been around since the invention of Playboy in the 1950s Right. When I stated that puritan morality existed 2000 years ago, that totally means that there were no displays of nudity at all back then. Everything has to be 100% one way or the other after all. The idea that different kinds of morality could exist among different groups of people, even across individuals, in the world in the same time period is just absurd isn't it?
        deleted 3y ago
        [deleted]
        deleted 3y ago
        [deleted]
        deleted 3y ago
        [deleted]
        jrflowers 3y ago
        > The idea that different kinds of morality could exist among different groups of people, even across individuals, in the world in the same time period is just absurd isn't it? I am sorry I thought that you meant that puritan morals have existed for over 2000 years not that they could have existed over 2000 years. The fact that modern interpretation of Puritanism may have existed at any point in time is proof positive that pornography as currently defined is bad and should be banned
- krapp 3y ago
  The morals our societies held for hundreds/thousands of years were held to justify slavery, blood sacrifice, antisemitism, genocide, rape, witch hunts, inquisitions, white supremacy, child labor and countless other once noble and virtuous ends now considered among humanity's greatest atrocities and horrors. Of course that also depends on when and where you look, because those morals have also evolved over time even within the window of what one might consider "traditional values." Yes, we can be wiser than all the generations that came before us. The premise that all morality and ethics were solved before humanity even learned to smelt iron is absurd.
  - alanwreath 3y ago
    > morals our societies held for hundreds/thousands of years were held to justify slavery, blood sacrifice, antisemitism, genocide… People will be people with or without religion, no need to make the leap and claim the reason for the season was to retain all the horrible practices you describe.
    - MeImCounting 3y ago
      Religion may not have been the reason those things were done but has absolutely been used to justify every one of those things. Religion is the tool not necessarily the cause.
      - filoleg 3y ago
        Absolurely agreed. If it wasn’t for religion, it would’ve been for something else. Religion was just a background theme/cause for it, but not the reason. A good analogy that comes to mind is what triggered WW1. Sure, we all know that it kicked off due to the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand. One thing I remember vividly from that time period being covered in my history classes is the teacher going very in-depth on all the tensions and confilcts between the sides piling up for quite some time before the assassination, and how those countries were all already at their throats itching to get into a fight. The teacher spent multiple lessons going into all of this, which made it rather plain obvious that if it wasn’t for the Archduke’s assassination, it would’ve been for something else. That’s one thing from that teacher that stuck with me forever, the teacher’s explanation of how major the difference is between a cause and a reason, despite people using them synonymously often. Archduke’s assassination was the cause/trigger for the start of WW1, but it was not the reason for it. Causes/triggers are direct, quick, simple, interchangeable, standalone, and specific. Reasons are fundamental, complex, and often come in multiples, all interacting and feeding off each other in complex ways. Same with the religion-caused conflicts/atrocities mentioned in this thread of comments. Religion was not the reason for those imo, it was just the cause/trigger, but not the reason. Hell, I am halfway thinking that it could even be that some religions in those ancient days were partially formed in response as to justify certain behaviors, rather than religions causing/triggering those behaviors, but that’s just a baseless speculation on my part that I myself have zero certainty in. Off-tangent sidenote: without trying to take a dig at any specific religion, as I have no issues with religions themselves or their followers at all in present times, it does seem rather convenient that one of the most mainstream religions these days was found on the premise of a married woman giving a “virgin birth” to a child that wasn’t her husband’s son. Sensibly, once couldn’t explain it any way other than getting pregnant by someone other than the husband or a miraculous divine intervention. And knowing the very real life-ending consequences those days for women for that and, on top of it, giving birth to that child, the choice would be rather obvious.
belthesar 3y ago
If you really want to look at the source of truth of why these decisions are made, all you have to do is Follow The Money. Two key reasons I can posit: Advertisers do not want their products advertised next to adversarial content. The exodus of advertisers on Twitter/X is a great parallel - flood a user generated content platform with content that does not bode for positive brand associations, and brands stop paying. You can argue that it's "puritanical ethics" at play here if you'd like, but I see this more as wanting to associate their brands with mass market appeal. Secondly, the moment you cross into pornographic content, your payment processors start bailing. This, in my opinion, plays more into your perception that mass standards for acceptable content influence the decision. I can't think of a major payment processor that permits their service to be used to pay for pornographic content, and that is because it's high risk. It's high risk because it's rife with chargebacks. Things like claims "I didn't pay for this!" when a partner happens to see a charge for a pornographic product, buyer's remorse as the truth of a parasocial relationship plays out to an unsatisfying conclusion, whatever the reason, payment processors just don't want to be associated with it. You don't have to like it, you don't have to agree with it, but in a sense, this is companies choosing what markets they want to serve.
- MeImCounting 3y ago
  This is a great and thoughtful comment. I think part of the sexual repression I was talking about is a big reason why porn is so popular and why: "Things like claims "I didn't pay for this!" when a partner happens to see a charge for a pornographic product, buyer's remorse as the truth of a parasocial relationship plays out to an unsatisfying conclusion, whatever the reason" are so prevalent. It is a sad thing and something that I really wish we could address as a society but corporate owned streaming sites/other social media are really not the place for this type of conversation because of the inherently ad revenue based structure of these sites.
  - filoleg 3y ago
    I thought about it just now, and it made me think of a potential solution. Though it feels so simple and naive (I feel like it shouldn’t work), but I couldn’t find a reason for why it wouldn’t, so I am curious what people think about this. Imagine there was a special type of a payment card that would work with only adult-content provider websites (aka porn). It would function sort of like a debit card, you can load up money on it from other sources, you can withdraw money from it at any time, etc. However, no chargebacks allowed (which are already not really a thing with regular debit cards anyway, it is mostly a credit card feature). For bonus points, you can have some sort of a verification (maybe requiring 2FA, maybe something else) that would kick in every time you load money on that card, but NOT when you use that card to pay for anything. So adult content providers won’t need any verification to do on their part (aka you won’t need to give them any of your identifying info). I guess what I am describing is literally just a quirky kind of a debit card/account that attempts to resolve issues that stem from the whole “chargeback of shame” scenario, thus making the transactions less high-risk for payment processors/providers. Which would, conversely, make payment processing less of a problem for the adult-content providers and, therefore, customers. P.S. do adult-content providers currently have any issues with debit cards as the payment source? Asking because if chargebacks were the main concern for the payment processors (which would refuse to work with adult-content providers due to chargebacks making it high-risk), then by that logic they should have no problem with debit cards, since they feature no chargebacks. The only thing my proposal adds on top of that is the verification/dispute with the bank/card issuer would be done not on the level of each individual transaction for an adult service, but on the level of loading up that “adult-only” card (and what happens from that point on is not accessible to your bank). Which also makes the situation a bit less “embarrassing” for the customer too.
freshbus 3y ago
[flagged]
- MeImCounting 3y ago
  It seems like you use twitch a lot. Why is twitch different from say deviantart where theres lots of non-pornographic art as well a significant amount of NSFW art? Is this to say that the twitch community is more likely to draw CP compared to other online communities? Or perhaps that all porn should be banned across the web? I dont really understand why twitch should be different from any other platform where people share that kind of content

mngdtt 3y ago

On one hand you are right. On the other I understand they don't want their website to turn into Chaturbate.

thegrim22 3y ago

Maybe the morals our societies have held for hundreds/thousands of years around moral decency and civility had a point. But I guess I'm glad you're wiser than all the generations that came before you, and you know better than all of them.

chromatin 3y ago
A sort of Chesterton's fence of morality, if you will.
- MeImCounting 3y ago
  I think the reason behind medieval "morality" is pretty well understood. I dont necessarily think HN is the best place to discuss this as it could be seen as pretty political. Regardless there is plenty of literature out there talking about this and it comes down to maintaining the hierarchy of the genders, property rights and religious sects seeking societal control (think Calvinism)
__s 3y ago
This puritanism is neither so greatly long lived, nor globally distributed
- theonething 3y ago
  It's been around for at least 2000 years.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
  - jrflowers 3y ago
    Exactly. When you look back 2000 years to Greek and Roman societies they shied away from any nude depictions of the human form. Nudity as we see it in society nowadays has only been around since the invention of Playboy in the 1950s
    - theonething 3y ago
      > Exactly. When you look back 2000 years to Greek and Roman societies they shied away from any nude depictions of the human form. Nudity as we see it in society nowadays has only been around since the invention of Playboy in the 1950s Right. When I stated that puritan morality existed 2000 years ago, that totally means that there were no displays of nudity at all back then. Everything has to be 100% one way or the other after all. The idea that different kinds of morality could exist among different groups of people, even across individuals, in the world in the same time period is just absurd isn't it?
      - deleted 3y ago
        [deleted]
      - deleted 3y ago
        [deleted]
      - deleted 3y ago
        [deleted]
      - jrflowers 3y ago
        > The idea that different kinds of morality could exist among different groups of people, even across individuals, in the world in the same time period is just absurd isn't it? I am sorry I thought that you meant that puritan morals have existed for over 2000 years not that they could have existed over 2000 years. The fact that modern interpretation of Puritanism may have existed at any point in time is proof positive that pornography as currently defined is bad and should be banned
krapp 3y ago
The morals our societies held for hundreds/thousands of years were held to justify slavery, blood sacrifice, antisemitism, genocide, rape, witch hunts, inquisitions, white supremacy, child labor and countless other once noble and virtuous ends now considered among humanity's greatest atrocities and horrors. Of course that also depends on when and where you look, because those morals have also evolved over time even within the window of what one might consider "traditional values." Yes, we can be wiser than all the generations that came before us. The premise that all morality and ethics were solved before humanity even learned to smelt iron is absurd.
- alanwreath 3y ago
  > morals our societies held for hundreds/thousands of years were held to justify slavery, blood sacrifice, antisemitism, genocide… People will be people with or without religion, no need to make the leap and claim the reason for the season was to retain all the horrible practices you describe.
  - MeImCounting 3y ago
    Religion may not have been the reason those things were done but has absolutely been used to justify every one of those things. Religion is the tool not necessarily the cause.
    - filoleg 3y ago
      Absolurely agreed. If it wasn’t for religion, it would’ve been for something else. Religion was just a background theme/cause for it, but not the reason. A good analogy that comes to mind is what triggered WW1. Sure, we all know that it kicked off due to the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand. One thing I remember vividly from that time period being covered in my history classes is the teacher going very in-depth on all the tensions and confilcts between the sides piling up for quite some time before the assassination, and how those countries were all already at their throats itching to get into a fight. The teacher spent multiple lessons going into all of this, which made it rather plain obvious that if it wasn’t for the Archduke’s assassination, it would’ve been for something else. That’s one thing from that teacher that stuck with me forever, the teacher’s explanation of how major the difference is between a cause and a reason, despite people using them synonymously often. Archduke’s assassination was the cause/trigger for the start of WW1, but it was not the reason for it. Causes/triggers are direct, quick, simple, interchangeable, standalone, and specific. Reasons are fundamental, complex, and often come in multiples, all interacting and feeding off each other in complex ways. Same with the religion-caused conflicts/atrocities mentioned in this thread of comments. Religion was not the reason for those imo, it was just the cause/trigger, but not the reason. Hell, I am halfway thinking that it could even be that some religions in those ancient days were partially formed in response as to justify certain behaviors, rather than religions causing/triggering those behaviors, but that’s just a baseless speculation on my part that I myself have zero certainty in. Off-tangent sidenote: without trying to take a dig at any specific religion, as I have no issues with religions themselves or their followers at all in present times, it does seem rather convenient that one of the most mainstream religions these days was found on the premise of a married woman giving a “virgin birth” to a child that wasn’t her husband’s son. Sensibly, once couldn’t explain it any way other than getting pregnant by someone other than the husband or a miraculous divine intervention. And knowing the very real life-ending consequences those days for women for that and, on top of it, giving birth to that child, the choice would be rather obvious.

belthesar 3y ago

If you really want to look at the source of truth of why these decisions are made, all you have to do is Follow The Money. Two key reasons I can posit: Advertisers do not want their products advertised next to adversarial content. The exodus of advertisers on Twitter/X is a great parallel - flood a user generated content platform with content that does not bode for positive brand associations, and brands stop paying. You can argue that it's "puritanical ethics" at play here if you'd like, but I see this more as wanting to associate their brands with mass market appeal. Secondly, the moment you cross into pornographic content, your payment processors start bailing. This, in my opinion, plays more into your perception that mass standards for acceptable content influence the decision. I can't think of a major payment processor that permits their service to be used to pay for pornographic content, and that is because it's high risk. It's high risk because it's rife with chargebacks. Things like claims "I didn't pay for this!" when a partner happens to see a charge for a pornographic product, buyer's remorse as the truth of a parasocial relationship plays out to an unsatisfying conclusion, whatever the reason, payment processors just don't want to be associated with it. You don't have to like it, you don't have to agree with it, but in a sense, this is companies choosing what markets they want to serve.

MeImCounting 3y ago
This is a great and thoughtful comment. I think part of the sexual repression I was talking about is a big reason why porn is so popular and why: "Things like claims "I didn't pay for this!" when a partner happens to see a charge for a pornographic product, buyer's remorse as the truth of a parasocial relationship plays out to an unsatisfying conclusion, whatever the reason" are so prevalent. It is a sad thing and something that I really wish we could address as a society but corporate owned streaming sites/other social media are really not the place for this type of conversation because of the inherently ad revenue based structure of these sites.
- filoleg 3y ago
  I thought about it just now, and it made me think of a potential solution. Though it feels so simple and naive (I feel like it shouldn’t work), but I couldn’t find a reason for why it wouldn’t, so I am curious what people think about this. Imagine there was a special type of a payment card that would work with only adult-content provider websites (aka porn). It would function sort of like a debit card, you can load up money on it from other sources, you can withdraw money from it at any time, etc. However, no chargebacks allowed (which are already not really a thing with regular debit cards anyway, it is mostly a credit card feature). For bonus points, you can have some sort of a verification (maybe requiring 2FA, maybe something else) that would kick in every time you load money on that card, but NOT when you use that card to pay for anything. So adult content providers won’t need any verification to do on their part (aka you won’t need to give them any of your identifying info). I guess what I am describing is literally just a quirky kind of a debit card/account that attempts to resolve issues that stem from the whole “chargeback of shame” scenario, thus making the transactions less high-risk for payment processors/providers. Which would, conversely, make payment processing less of a problem for the adult-content providers and, therefore, customers. P.S. do adult-content providers currently have any issues with debit cards as the payment source? Asking because if chargebacks were the main concern for the payment processors (which would refuse to work with adult-content providers due to chargebacks making it high-risk), then by that logic they should have no problem with debit cards, since they feature no chargebacks. The only thing my proposal adds on top of that is the verification/dispute with the bank/card issuer would be done not on the level of each individual transaction for an adult service, but on the level of loading up that “adult-only” card (and what happens from that point on is not accessible to your bank). Which also makes the situation a bit less “embarrassing” for the customer too.

freshbus 3y ago

[flagged]

MeImCounting 3y ago
It seems like you use twitch a lot. Why is twitch different from say deviantart where theres lots of non-pornographic art as well a significant amount of NSFW art? Is this to say that the twitch community is more likely to draw CP compared to other online communities? Or perhaps that all porn should be banned across the web? I dont really understand why twitch should be different from any other platform where people share that kind of content