Twitch allowing more nudity after disproportionately banning female streamers | Twitch confirmed its policy banning nudity was sexist.::Twitch confirmed its policy banning nudity was sexist.

  • Signtist@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    As do you, insinuating hormones making people want to do things is reason enough to expect them to do it. Society relies upon people having the self control to not behave based solely on the way their body tells them to, and instead to behave as society deems appropriate. People want to take things, to hurt others when they feel hurt, and to have sex with people they’re attracted to, but for us to live together, people need to have control over that. If they don’t, they need to be taught, and if society deems something inappropriate that shouldn’t be, we need to change society to allow for that act.

    • ___@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I was simply pointing out that my comment had nothing to do with sexual assault. The abuse I speak of is professional prostitutes now being given access to young children who don’t yet necessarily have the capacity for adult reasoning. There are lonely kids at home with free time whose parents have to work more than they should have to. Lonely people, never mind children, seek out comfort in both healthy and unhealthy ways. It depends on what’s available to them.

      The child psychiatrist in my family portrays the current state of adolescent research very succinctly: The only effective way we’ve found to curb “unwanted” behavior in children is to limit exposure. Past a certain point, a routine forms and they are no longer predisposed to observed behaviors. In effect, people make their own choices. If you put good choices in front of them, they take them. If you put a mix, they take the good with the bad.

      You put breasts on twitch, you’re going to have more people searching for breasts. Forcing a change isn’t going to fix the underlying societal structure that formed around nudity. You’re just going to mess up a lot of kids with your misdirected efforts.

      • Signtist@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        Jesus, dude - my whole point is that exposed breasts shouldn’t be equated to porn, and the fact that they are is only a stronger reason to allow them to be free right now, to undo that association as soon as possible. A woman choosing to go out to get her mail without a top on shouldn’t be equated to a peep show. A woman choosing to play video games on twitch without a bra shouldn’t be equated to a strip show. Yes, the current generation of kids will view it as porn, because they haven’t seen it outside of porn, which they have already seen, no doubt. It was so easily accessible on the internet that I’d seen my fair share of it before I was out of elementary school in 2002, and it’s only gotten even more prevalent. It’s an issue, sure, but to let it be the reason not to allow something that shouldn’t be equated to porn in the first place is ridiculous.

        If breasts are allowed freely in public spaces, it won’t be very long before they stop attracting horny boys any more than well-fitting clothing already does. Again, the effect that breasts currently have on boys is already too much - they shouldn’t be making men salivate by simply being exposed - they’re just breasts, and those in other cultures that have breasts exposed on a regular basis don’t have that issue.

        • ___@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          I’m all about changing opinions, if you have any data that supports breasts not being viewed sexually at puberty due to societal structure, I’m all ears.

          It’s dangerous to let these massive corporations play scientist with society if you ask me. A better method is to reinforce it via parenting. You’re fighting an uphill battle when all of the policies enacted simply get parental controlled away.

          On another note, humans are the only mammals with enlarged breast before any egg has been fertilized. We’ve evolved to show them off for some reason, and that points to deeper biological underpinnings than purely society. It is entirely possible that you won’t be able to free breast without unavoidable consequences that won’t improve.

          • Signtist@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            It’s possible, sure, but nobody’s playing scientist. There are plenty of people around the world that allow exposed breasts and still function. There is no epidemic of sexual deviancy from exposed breasts in any of those societies. France can have nude beaches where woman are free to walk around topless and there aren’t scores of men hiding in the bushes. You’re acting like this is all hypothetical, but we already know what society looks like without a meaningless ban on exposed breasts - it just doesn’t fit your narrative.

            • ___@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              And another personal attack on “my narrative”. This statement reveals more about you than me.

              • Signtist@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                You’re saying we don’t know what such a change will cause - that’s called a narrative. Not a good or a bad thing - just the opinion you’ve chosen to defend. The bad thing is when the arguments you use to defend it don’t hold up to scrutiny.

                • ___@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  I’m not really arguing one way or the other yet. I’m leaning towards status quo with a safe transition as we learn the effects. I really don’t have a dog in this fight, I just don’t think rushing in is advised without more micro examples and observation.

                  • Signtist@lemm.ee
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    I don’t have a dog in the fight either, but what difference does that make? I’m a human with compassion for other humans - I care as much about their issues as I care about my own, and I don’t want them to be tied down by prohibitions that don’t make sense. A change can always be undone if found to be problematic; the apathy toward change is what really needs to be overcome.

                    Every generation looks at the next one and thinks it’s weird and inferior - humans as a whole tend to believe their own experiences are the best, most logical way of doing things, which is something we need to keep in mind; the status quo is almost certainly not currently optimal, and we should be looking for ways to change it even as our own preferences nag at us to keep it the same.