Naked Yoga videos don’t violate Community Guidelines says YouTube
sausageroll.com.au
sausageroll.com.au
There's a story that one of the early London strip clubs run by Paul Raymond was told that static nude "modelling" was OK, but "dancing" wasn't. So he had the models on small trolleys wheeled about the stage.
That's not true. This is something censors say, because they don't want objectively specific criteria for censoring things, they want the power to arbitrarily apply censorship to anything they feel like and that is in the nature of censorship, all that "power always pursues more power" thing we know from political science. Which also implies if you make the criteria very specific, the power to censor things will be very limited and nothing to test the boundaries of or to hunt for loopholes.
Step back and it's just a classification system, which we've got LOTS of stats and math and experience to approach it with. Any classification system has false positives and false negatives. That's just the starting point: whatever system is built will need some process for handling (or not) the bad classifications.
Furthermore, in this specific area, the 'true' boundary depends on the cultural position of the specific viewer. What you call porn, I might call an instructional breast feeding video (to cite a specific example that caused a lot of headaches for facebook, some years ago). So there is no single 'correct' classification, meaning that the boundary must be porous. Wherever you set the boundary is going to piss off some people; eventually you're left just trying to find something that works OK for most of your stakeholders. It is, by necessity, a compromise.
Finally, abuse is basically unavoidable on large-enough platforms. People ABSOLUTELY search for the loopholes and push the boundaries, constantly, anywhere they can. So not only do you have a hard classification problem with a subjective boundary, you have a hard /adversarial/ classification problem. (Engineers build bridges to withstand occasional earthquakes. Software engineers have to build bridges to withstand constant terrorist attacks.)
So, it's a fundamentally hard problem, with no single optimal solution. It's easy to get in a huff, and much harder to do the actual work. This, to me, looks like an educational carveout getting abused, and nothing more. The loophole will likely get closed as it gets attention, which is kinda just how these things work. Abusers find new ways to get around the existing systems (because it is fundamentally impossible to predict every edge case), and the people building+running the systems eventually notice and react.
But let's step back and consider your alternative explanation... Somehow allowing nude yoga videos is a power trip on the part of the moderators, which will help them obtain one more step on the stairway to world domination? Come on.
"...made possible by convincing Lord Cromer, then Lord Chamberlain, in his position as the censor for all theatrical performances in London, that the display of nudity in theatres was not obscene: since the authorities could not credibly hold nude statues to be morally objectionable..."
There's a fun biopic about it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mrs_Henderson_Presents
Previously could get around it using the /embed/ url or third party sites like youtuberepeater. Seems like these methods have been closed.
> It's using technology to identify age-restrictive content so that when viewers discover age-restricted videos embedded on most third-party websites, they will now be required to log in to watch those videos in order to verify their age.
https://www.axios.com/youtube-age-restrictions-children-91db...
You can also enqueue them, if you want to play more back to back. I normally use it in conjunction with the RSS feed of channels.
The thumbnails are more Rated-X than I anticipated, and I wouldn't want to link to any of those videos either.
Activists, however, may have more leeway. Documentaries on animal cruelty and slideshows from anti-porn activists (to name two examples I'm familiar with) are much less hesitant - their goal is to rouse emotions and face-value judgements, so long as the viewer is primed to interpret the materials in the desired way.
> Depiction of genitals, breasts, or buttocks (clothed or unclothed) for the purpose of sexual gratification
Btw does YouTube have recommendation filters where you can filter out certain content type or some kind of preferences option?
it's weird how this ends up being any expression that diverges from some dogmatic sense of moral righteousness
if they could, they'd happily banish thoughts from peoples' minds
also...where's the ban on all forms of liberal speculation?
what miserable person bans rumors? I get the sense this must have been like the USSR where an abusive state takes the role of insufferable chastising school teacher.
Society needs to move forward. We do not need to accommodate the cranks.
They can talk to each other, no one is stopping them.
And what a hyperbolic reply from you. USSR? Get a grip. No one is throwing anyone in the gulag, they are just saying, "Hey, this is my platform that I own, play nice or get the fuck off."
Do you understand the difference? Please don't minimize what actual authoritarian censorship looks like.
> also...where's the ban on all forms of liberal speculation?
Why don't you show me the dangerous conspiracies coming out of liberals?
Currently the president of the united states is claiming widespread systematic election fraud (without evidence) and undermining not only our system of government, but the peaceful transition of power that is the hallmark of democracy. In response, many of his supporters are calling for civil war or other violent unrest.
Show me the liberal equivalent.
The only thing you have is false equivalencies, and you know what? Most of us are sick of it.
Your partisan deflection aside, we don't care to accommodate violent cranks any longer.
Yes it does. We need to fight against the anti-democratic and anti-free speech people rotting this country from the inside.
> We have career health officials getting credible death threats due to wild conspiracies about Coronavirus or even 5G
Oh god this nonsense. Morons of all stripes threaten public officials from watching CNN to youtube. If death threats are the grounds for censorship, then are you okay shutting down your favorite propaganda outlets?
> They can talk to each other, no one is stopping them.
Apparently youtube is. But you support that. But I'm betting you are the type of controlling people that wants to stop people communicating altogether about things you don't like.
> And what a hyperbolic reply from you. USSR?
Hyperbolic indeed.
> Your partisan deflection aside
Lots of partisan deflection on both sides.
> we don't care to accommodate violent cranks any longer.
Who's the "we" in that statement?
It's the same silly talking points over and over again. By both sides.
Youtube stops them from talking to each other?? You aren't worth my reply.
Yes. Youtube is used by people to communicate with each other.
> You aren't worth my reply.
You obviously aren't worth much either.
Are you dense? They can still talk to each other. Youtube isn't the only way to communicate.
Look at us now, communicating outside youtube.
Some societies are simply more civilized.
Because those laws by their own terms usually apply to people being nude in public places, not to images (whether in public or on publicly accessible websites), which are governed by different laws.
“Digital public nudity” isn't an actual legal thing.
> There is no rationalization you can use for indecent exposure.
Point to an indecent exposure law which covers this.
> Wait until these links go on BiTly and get posted all around the internet anonymously!
And...what catastrophe am I supposed to be anticipating?
> I mean heck, why can't we just live in a society where everyone walks around naked?
We can, if we choose (see, “naturism”), but I don't see what that has to do with pictures (moving or not) on the internet.
Yet
> And...what catastrophe am I supposed to be anticipating?
The digital form of public flashing
> We can, if we choose (see, “naturism”), but I don't see what that has to do with pictures (moving or not) on the internet.
I was being facetious. But seriously, can you set the example starting tomorrow since you clearly don't have an issue with this?
There is no way to "censor" it the way you would a platform you control. The function of email is to deliver messages and there isn't a good way to prevent abuse, hence spam filters, which in some cases acts identically to censorship.
Really?
Are bare pubes necessary to illustrate the movements and poses being taught?
People get to downvote anonymously and don't even have to provide reasons.
Bare pubes may not be necessary, but even minimal clothing on arms, torso, legs often hides many details that make learning the poses easier, and the lack of clothing on many typical, normal bodies helps normalize what a typical, normal body looks like doing yoga and so helps encourage those of us with typical, normal bodies to keep on practicing.
Perhaps the alternative is minimal underwear for pubes, but why bother, yoga via video is either 99.99% not erotic or 100% a porn movie and it's easy to determine which is which.
Yoga itself is exercise and education. Naked yoga too.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naked_yoga
Naked yoga (Sanskrit nagna yoga or vivastra yoga) is the practice of yoga without clothes. It has existed since ancient times as a spiritual practice, and is mentioned in the 7th-10th century Bhagavata Purana and by the Ancient Greek geographer Strabo.
Early advocates of naked yoga in modern times include the gymnosophists such as Blanche de Vries, and the author Marguerite Agniel.
In the 21st century, the practice is gaining popularity, notably in western societies that have more familiarity with social nudity.
Yoga has been practiced naked since ancient times. In the Bhagavata Purana (written c. 800–1000 AD) it says:
”A person in the renounced order of life may try to avoid even a dress to cover himself. If he wears anything at all, it should be only a loincloth, and when there is no necessity, a sannyāsī should not even accept a daṇḍa. A sannyāsī should avoid carrying anything but a daṇḍa and kamaṇḍalu.” [1] Alexander the Great reached India in the 4th century BC. Along with his army, he took Greek academics with him who later wrote memoirs about geography, people and customs they saw. One of Alexander's companion was Onesicritus, quoted in Book 15, Sections 63-65 by Strabo, who describes yogins of India.[2] Onesicritus claims those Indian yogins (Mandanis ) practiced aloofness and "different postures – standing or sitting or lying naked – and motionless".[3]
...
Practice is one thing, instruction is another, and I don't see why city-dwellinig practitioners should be mixed up with mendicants and ascetics.