zlacker

[parent] [thread] 32 comments
1. Santos+(OP)[view] [source] 2021-10-16 13:48:09
Meanwhile we have hundreds of videos of a man being brutally chopped off his hand, hung upside down while he bleeds, then legs chopped off and finally dies gasping all over Twitter and Facebook, for anyone to see, even kids who stumble upon it. Apparently such content doesn't harm users as much as some Renaissance nudes.
replies(6): >>Nikola+U >>jacque+f4 >>zpeti+j5 >>jliptz+v9 >>hairof+Wf >>astura+AJ
2. Nikola+U[view] [source] 2021-10-16 13:57:04
>>Santos+(OP)
Links
replies(3): >>Santos+l3 >>jacque+44 >>323+u4
◧◩
3. Santos+l3[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-10-16 14:22:14
>>Nikola+U
https://twitter.com/goyalsanjeev/status/1448953085770960899 https://twitter.com/along_live/status/1448896904520077320 https://twitter.com/adolitics/status/1448906467558387713 https://twitter.com/ColVKChauhan/status/1448894875118624769

There are hundreds of them (just search by hashtags in the posts above). Of course same set of videos/pics repeated over & over, but my point is that such stuff is present all over Twitter & FB and anyone accessing those platforms can stumble upon them. Twitter doesn't even seem to put them behind a "Violent/NSFW" click-through.

I don't see how nudity can be more damaging or pernicious than such content.

replies(2): >>wbl+a7 >>ChoGGi+Xh
◧◩
4. jacque+44[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-10-16 14:27:38
>>Nikola+U
Just go watch the latest batch of Hollywood movies.

I'd suggest starting with 'Law abiding citizen' and 'John Wick'. Note that an 'R' rating means that children under 17 are not allowed to watch these without a parent or a guardian present. But that's different from 'adult-only', after all, technically it is still allowed. The proper marker would be 'X' if it was to be compared to 'adult only'.

5. jacque+f4[view] [source] 2021-10-16 14:29:32
>>Santos+(OP)
Twitter and Facebook are full of this stuff, but what Hollywood puts out isn't any less gruesome, though probably more realistic in the sense that they tend to make sure that all the gory stuff is in good close-up instead of just overview shots.
replies(2): >>Santos+g5 >>watwut+hj
◧◩
6. 323+u4[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-10-16 14:31:41
>>Nikola+U
Source is probably Mexican narco torture videos.

Warning, extremely disturbing content:

https://elblogdelnarco.com

◧◩
7. Santos+g5[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-10-16 14:41:13
>>jacque+f4
Yeah, although at least with films you know it is make-believe. The real stuff is also pervasive on social media and that can be terribly damaging for a young person to stumble upon. In my opinion, more so than stumbling upon even hardcore porn. Arbitrary censorship is worse than either totally locking down everything or being completely open. With the latter two you (as a user/consumer) know what to expect and can be prepared.
replies(1): >>ashton+A6
8. zpeti+j5[view] [source] 2021-10-16 14:41:55
>>Santos+(OP)
America was founded by Protestants and it shows. Nudity and sexuality is basically the most cardinal sin, above any type of violence even.

As someone outside the Anglo Saxon world I’m amazed how Puritan it is. Like seeing a nipple or kids seeing a nipple really isn’t the end of the world. But Americans can’t even get over public breastfeeding.

replies(2): >>captai+N5 >>watwut+Oi
◧◩
9. captai+N5[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-10-16 14:46:29
>>zpeti+j5
> But Americans can’t even get over public breastfeeding.

Highly regional / generational.

replies(1): >>ashton+V6
◧◩◪
10. ashton+A6[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-10-16 14:54:50
>>Santos+g5
You know it’s make believe, but part of the point of movies is to suspend your disbelief and for a short time believe that it’s real. That distinction is even harder for children, which is why the violence of movies for your kids is problematic.
◧◩◪
11. ashton+V6[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-10-16 14:57:20
>>captai+N5
Also, I’m not sure how much of the hullabaloo about breast feeding in public is about the breast, and how much is about the idea that women with children should be at home, under the guise of it being about the breast. It could be more sexism than Puritanism.
replies(2): >>8note+N81 >>captai+nP4
◧◩◪
12. wbl+a7[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-10-16 14:59:06
>>Santos+l3
And the papers printed a nude nine year old girl getting burned alive by napalm. Some events are worth depicting even if they are shocking or horrifying and political murder is one of them.
replies(1): >>riffra+z9
13. jliptz+v9[view] [source] 2021-10-16 15:17:25
>>Santos+(OP)
Yea I never understood why there's such a crusade to go after people with pictures of nude children on their phones/computers but no one seems to give a shit about someone who collects footage of people (children included!) being brutally tortured and murdered...if we're assembling lists of people we don't like I feel like that should also make the list.
replies(1): >>watwut+Tj
◧◩◪◨
14. riffra+z9[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-10-16 15:18:03
>>wbl+a7
There's probably a potential difference in intent, in the sense that a kid will not buy the new York times but they might be exposed to random things on Twitter.

I'm not sure of the "kids will suffer because of violent images" idea tho, we were shown a crap ton of terrible imagery from WWI/WWII/Holocaust/Vietnam when I was in middle school, and if anything I thought it was a good thing.

replies(1): >>watwut+pk
15. hairof+Wf[view] [source] 2021-10-16 16:09:38
>>Santos+(OP)
I agree with the sentiment. My theory is that while the stuff you name is indeed horrifying, the issue with sexuality is that it acts like a drug (it changes your behavior chemically, can be addictive, etc.) and it’s a combination of (a) kids haven’t learned how to “handle their liquor” in that department yet, and (b) many adults have also not learned how to do that and so find it difficult to engage in that topic conversationally, and so avoid the topic in the guise of protecting the children. The violence you describe above is less complicated: it’s bad. Not a lot of nuance there.

I’ve seen people make the argument that an image of an exposed breast is harmful to young children (even when those same kids are still breastfeeding).

replies(2): >>Santos+bi >>samus+Q01
◧◩◪
16. ChoGGi+Xh[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-10-16 16:28:13
>>Santos+l3
> Twitter doesn't even seem to put them behind a "Violent/NSFW" click-through.

For the first link I see this: "The following media includes potentially sensitive content. Change settings"

I don't have an account, so you may have changed your settings

◧◩
17. Santos+bi[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-10-16 16:29:27
>>hairof+Wf
Violence can be addictive too. It frequently is, judging by the amount of gore (simulated or real) sites and rape-fantasy/BDSM porn out there. The addiction to violence actually (IMO) works a more vicious evil in your brain than plain sex/porn addiction, though that is damaging in its own way too.
replies(1): >>hairof+Zk
◧◩
18. watwut+Oi[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-10-16 16:33:06
>>zpeti+j5
That is gross oversimplification of both American history and present. Can we not?
◧◩
19. watwut+hj[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-10-16 16:35:26
>>jacque+f4
Hollywood movies go out of the way to make violence look and feel unrealistic. It is effectively cartoon violence that makes you chill, but never makes you feel bad.

Hollywood in particular is not even interested in gruesome or realistic or effective depiction of violence.

◧◩
20. watwut+Tj[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-10-16 16:38:58
>>jliptz+v9
First, in order to produce child porn you have to abuse real child. At least that is what I think you talk about.

Second, who exactly is cool with collection of child torture videos? Or collection of murders? Because when I came across discussion about such finding, the consensus was that people were horrified, scared, seen it as red flag and seeked to classify kid ones as child port (and hence call authoritirs). It was on reddit.

replies(1): >>samus+4X
◧◩◪◨⬒
21. watwut+pk[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-10-16 16:42:42
>>riffra+z9
Gentle reminder that you was shown carefully selected footage. You was not show random pictures nor worst emotions causing pictures.
◧◩◪
22. hairof+Zk[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-10-16 16:47:08
>>Santos+bi
I agree! However, I think when violence becomes addictive its because it gets linked to sexuality. Mostly I’m just saying I agree.

I read an interesting essay years ago from a psych-educated person (leaving that intentionally vague because I don’t remember) who was urging moviemakers not to reduce the amount of sex or violence in movies, but to separate those scenes in movies by some amount of time like 5 minutes: ok to have a sex scene, ok to have a murder scene, but please no sexy murder scenes.

23. astura+AJ[view] [source] 2021-10-16 19:27:41
>>Santos+(OP)
Twitter allows hardcore porn though.
◧◩◪
24. samus+4X[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-10-16 21:06:38
>>watwut+Tj
I think we all agree that media involving children always forces strong reactions, no matter if it is violence or porn. But I'd guess it would create less of a ruckus if a video showing an adult being beheaded is discovered on a child's phone than an adult porn video. People would get upset about the former and the child's environment would be investigated, but it won't necessarily lead to a scandal with news coverage, criminal investigations and resignation of the school principal.
replies(1): >>leppr+N61
◧◩
25. samus+Q01[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-10-16 21:30:48
>>hairof+Wf
(b) is entirely a deficit of the parents, or of a prudish culture that makes conversations about sexuality taboo. It is not intrinsic to sexuality.

Meanwhile, mainstream culture doesn't bother to similarly "protect" children from alcohol, cigarettes, caffeine, and other vices. It would look weird if parents allowed and encouraged consumption before a certain age (which exactly depends on culture), but we don't bother to hide from them that we consume, and pretty much accept that they will routinely consume at some point too.

We can discuss at length how damaging each of these is, but I find it hard to argue that addictions created by alcohol, cigarettes, and sugar are any less damaging than issues caused by exposure to porn. All of these vices carry danger, but their acceptance in society varies. Because of this, issues with the more taboo ones are more difficult to prevent, to diagnose and to treat.

replies(1): >>hairof+nd1
◧◩◪◨
26. leppr+N61[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-10-16 22:24:28
>>samus+4X
I don't live in the US but I doubt that's true in most places given that adult porn is way easier to access than gore. "Pornhub" is a household name, on the other hand, assuming they're not particularly interested in gore, chances are most people can't cite the name of a site specializing in distributing real gore.
replies(1): >>Clumsy+ss1
◧◩◪◨
27. 8note+N81[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-10-16 22:44:25
>>ashton+V6
I don't think the sexism is separable from the Puritanism. The sexism built in to the religion and in the practitioners of it are reinforcing each other
◧◩◪
28. hairof+nd1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-10-16 23:30:12
>>samus+Q01
> (b) is entirely a deficit of the parents, or of a prudish culture that makes conversations about sexuality taboo. It is not intrinsic to sexuality.

That's... my point? It's like you're agreeing with me but in a tone that says you're disagreeing with me.

> I find it hard to argue that addictions created by alcohol, cigarettes, and sugar are any less damaging than issues caused by exposure to porn

I didn't say anything at all about porn, alcohol (except for the 'holding their liquor' metaphor, not meaning children should drink alcohol), cigarettes, or sugar? If not for the fact that you mention my point (b) I would have thought you were replying to the wrong comment. I don't know who is arguing that alcoholism is less damaging than porn, but it isn't me!

replies(1): >>samus+5F1
◧◩◪◨⬒
29. Clumsy+ss1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-10-17 02:34:23
>>leppr+N61
"at adult porn is way easier to access than gore"

Erm, what planet is that on? You can show people getting shot and killed on primetime TV, but you can't show a video of a nudist beach, let alone porn.

replies(1): >>watwut+2L1
◧◩◪◨
30. samus+5F1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-10-17 05:40:24
>>hairof+nd1
Yeah, I went off-topic a bit here. My point was that the dangers of violence and porn and other poorly expressed forms of sexuality are not that different from each other. Your presentation read like (b) would be specific to sexuality for other reasons than culture treating it as taboo. The nuance you describe is not a given.
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
31. watwut+2L1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-10-17 07:24:13
>>Clumsy+ss1
The violence in primetime TV is not a gore. Seriously, it is just not and trying to frame it as such amounts to a lie.
replies(1): >>Clumsy+Fe2
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔
32. Clumsy+Fe2[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-10-17 13:55:36
>>watwut+2L1
Does nothing in Deadpool 2 qualify as gore to you? It's among several movies which depict man falling into a woodchipper. Does cutting zombies with a chainsaw not count as gore? Do videos of abatteur, butchers and surgeries count as gore?

Gore is subjective obviously, but if the above is not 'gore enough' for you, then you are comparing some extreme gore, of the kind that most people will (hopefully) never encounter in their life, with pedestrian portrayals of sex, something most people do encounter.

Jokes aside, let's flip your argument on it's head -> would you be concerned if someone you know recommended you a website where various kinds of gore are uploaded by the thousands every day, they are tagged and categorised for easy search? Are you concerned about pornhub to the same degree? I would probably refer to them to a mental health helpline immediately.

It's not actually hard to find Gore, it does surface on 4Chan and other places occasionally, it's just that mentally healthy people don't search it regularly the way they do porn.

◧◩◪◨
33. captai+nP4[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-10-18 15:27:36
>>ashton+V6
...outside of extremely remote areas I don't think anyone in modern US culture would express distaste about a mom being out with children. You see women with infants in wine bars, etc.
[go to top]