Is it just me, or are people becoming more prudish?
Pornography restrictions being codified into law, adult art being restricted from most Lemmy instances, Tarot readers blotting out the nudity on their cards on Reddit.
I'm watching the Magicians, on Amazon, and I use subtitles. All the curse words are purposefully filled in with random letters, so as not to offend the reader.
What's up with all the prudishness? Can people knock it off, please?
People have vaginas. And titties. And dicks. And asses. They swear. They drink. They fuck. Why is this generation afraid of that? Acknowledging these things isn't going to increase your chances of being sexually violated. So, what's the deal?
Esta entrada fue editada (miércoles, 30 de septiembre de 2026, 19:43)
Carlos Solís
in reply to ki4jgt • •Asklemmy reshared this.
ki4jgt
in reply to Carlos Solís • • •Algospeak - Wikipedia
Contributors to Wikimedia projects (Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.)like this
Carlos Solís likes this.
tracyspcy
in reply to ki4jgt • • •tracyspcy
in reply to tracyspcy • • •Pornhub most popular search stats by countries etc is discussing routinely over internet each year .
Idk is it prudishness to you?
ki4jgt
in reply to tracyspcy • • •tracyspcy
in reply to ki4jgt • • •&f*¥tau/lukmly013 💾 (lemmy.sdf.org)
in reply to ki4jgt • • •That one is probably a liability issue. Especially a problem with real-life porn, but even with drawn material, you'll often get characters which don't look like adults. So then the mods would have to review each post, which is too much work, and they'd also likely see shit they'd rather not.
Considering this platform is mostly volunteers, if not fully, it's just not worth it.
like this
Carlos Solís likes this.
Scrubbles
in reply to u/lukmly013 💾 (lemmy.sdf.org) • • •As an admin, spot on. People don't realize that as an admin I and liable for what goes on on my instance. Both financially and criminally. They can kick down my door for things posted, so of course I ban any NSFW, and I have still seen things I wish I could unsee that people have posted.
I always welcome others to spin up their own instance though. They are more than welcome to host it themselves, under their name.
like this
Carlos Solís likes this.
grue
in reply to Scrubbles • • •It's all part of the authoritarian backsliding the world is suffering right now. Big centralized services can shield themselves with laws like Section 230, while wielding the threat of prosecution like a cudgel against small operators that aren't "legitimate" in the way that big companies get treated and can't afford the effort it takes to guarantee compliance.
So instead, most would-be operators cave to the chilling effects and users are driven back into the thrall of the big tech propaganda and control platforms.
Asklemmy reshared this.
HerbGrower
in reply to grue • • •teawrecks
in reply to HerbGrower • • •To be clear, OP didn't say "porn" on Lemmy, they said "adult art". There are contexts in which nudity is not pornographic, but I assume it's easier to just ban it all and not take any risks, than to judge the artistic merit of each upload before deciding whether it's too over the top.
The inverse problem exists for creators on yt who make animations that are not kid friendly. Google's bots love to tag them as for children, and thus demonitize them.
HerbGrower
in reply to teawrecks • • •Plenty of instances do allow nsfw content as well though. The important thing is its up to the person running it what they want to bother with moderating and the kind of communities to encourage.
I doubt you would see GasGuzzlersRollingCoal to be particularly welcome in slrpnk.net for example.
xtr0n
in reply to u/lukmly013 💾 (lemmy.sdf.org) • • •I wonder if it isn’t a reaction to the number of people blocking all NSFW content? Like if most of your users don't want to see porn in literally every other post and just block all NSFW as a quick workaround, then the headaches inherent in moderating adult content become much less worthwhile.
And without either blocking specific instances or blocking all NSFW, sometimes over half of “all” is porn.
I’m not anti porn but I find it hard to wrap my head around a user who is equally enjoying half their feed being hardcore videos, 1/4 memes and 1/4 news, all equally and simultaneously. Like “I’m on the bus reading a news article about the economy then I’ll check out 30 seconds of FP blowjobs and then oh, someone posted about a labor strike”? Who is that?
dil
in reply to xtr0n • • •WalrusDragonOnABike [they/them]
in reply to xtr0n • • •Bipauler
in reply to xtr0n • • •kestrel7_7
in reply to xtr0n • • •This was me on reddit and tumblr for most of the 2010’s and it was totally awesome.
Every time anyone was like “omg why are you looking at porn” I was just like “omg why are you looking at my phone” and they would immediately shut up.
MaxLemminist
in reply to u/lukmly013 💾 (lemmy.sdf.org) • • •Fluke
in reply to MaxLemminist • • •If that "fake artistic character" is a minor, that's CSAM in some jurisdictions, and that leaves the instance admin legally on the hook for a whole range of offenses which are punishable by incarceration, huge fines, and/or life on a sex offenders register, and in some places, chemical castration.
So yeah, not near as fucking innocent as you make it out to be.
MaxLemminist
in reply to Fluke • • •And what idiot country would not just give a warning and say remove the drawing if someone was offended?
I doubt they would use all these draconian punishments as if they didn't see any difference with someone raping a baby and putting it online.
TrackenDaKracken
in reply to ki4jgt • • •Asklemmy reshared this.
u/lukmly013 💾 (lemmy.sdf.org)
in reply to TrackenDaKracken • • •ToiletFlushShowerScream
in reply to TrackenDaKracken • • •ki4jgt
in reply to TrackenDaKracken • • •LouNeko
in reply to ki4jgt • • •I'd say it's the exact opposite. Porn has never been as mainstream as it is now, movies and video games have never been as violent. I remember that in the mid 2000s, GTA and Call of Duty were literally demonized because of the depiction of violence.
Now onlyfans modells openly collaborate with mainstream musicians and Call of Duty has stayed just as violent while appealing directly and openly to children. I am on lemmy.world, if I sort my feed by "Hot" and include all instances, I count about 2 or 3 NSFW post per page on average. And I'm not talking some cosplays, I'm talking hardcore BDSM stuff.
This goes into the realm of conspiracy theories, but it certainly feels like advertisers have some sort of agreement to stay away from controversial topics, keep the viewers minds clean and neutral. So that when it becomes necessary or more important profitable, they're easier to sway one way or the other. Don't think, just enjoy and consume please, and don't forget to hate who we tell you to hate.
Asklemmy reshared this.
baronvonj
in reply to LouNeko • • •less about advertising and more about being cut off from payment processing networks. And that is being driven by anti-porn lobbying group Collective Shout
thepinknews.com/2025/08/04/visa-mastercard-adult-purchases/
Why are Visa and Mastercard banning 'adult' purchases? Here's what you need to know
Amelia Hansford (PinkNews | Latest lesbian, gay, bi and trans news | LGBTQ+ news)ki4jgt
in reply to LouNeko • • •musicalphysics
in reply to ki4jgt • • •ki4jgt
in reply to musicalphysics • • •Simon_Shitewood
in reply to ki4jgt • • •Glowstick
in reply to ki4jgt • • •Asklemmy reshared this.
dil
in reply to LouNeko • • •Gamma
in reply to ki4jgt • • •ki4jgt
in reply to Gamma • • •Since you used the word define. . . We're in modern times (as we always are) and Anthropology says that 20-somethings set current cultural standards. You can do the math from that.
Saying that this generation is lazy is far different than asking why this generation prefers certain things over others.
Gamma
in reply to ki4jgt • • •ki4jgt
in reply to Gamma • • •Research is showing that young people are having less sex, doing fewer drugs, and drinking less alcohol. Soda consumption is down. Restaurants are receiving fewer visitors.
Young people set modern culture shifts. With all due respect, they are to blame. The question I'm asking is, why? Not about all issues. Not negging them about their choices. Just curious why the aversion to swear words and nudity.
Gamma
in reply to ki4jgt • • •architect
in reply to Gamma • • •Gamma
in reply to architect • • •MJKee9
in reply to ki4jgt • • •Dr. Wesker
in reply to ki4jgt • • •Name one.
Zachariah
in reply to Dr. Wesker • • •ancestry.com/last-name-meaning/vigina
or maybe this:
ki4jgt
in reply to Dr. Wesker • • •treadful
in reply to Dr. Wesker • • •auzy1
in reply to ki4jgt • • •It's funny, because I self censored and it triggered someone a few months ago on Lemmy.
It's even more wild people are getting offended by stupid things like this imho. Almost like they need to be acknowledged to be reminded they're normal.
The funny thing is, I probably swear more than anyone I know in real life most the time but I don't feel like I need to make it part of my personality lol
ki4jgt
in reply to auzy1 • • •Cognitive dissonance.
I didn't really question it until all the posts on one of my favorite Tarot subs started blurring out all the nude cards on their readings. Then I remembered seeing adult fan art on Mastodon, and wondered why I wasn't seeing it on Lemmy. Amazon censoring curse words in subtitles was the final straw.
I hear the word fuck 40 times per day from kids (under 18) and adults. And I can't read it in my subtitles?
auzy1
in reply to ki4jgt • • •Oh no. Who gives a sh**
Seems like you're making a big deal about nothing...
I've probably come more people whining about this and pretending like it's about government control or whatever, as people getting offended by swear words
It's just as bad, if not worse because you're trying to control freedom of speech. People can choose to censor if they wish.
You can choose to use an uncensored source
ki4jgt
in reply to auzy1 • • •auzy1
in reply to ki4jgt • • •No, you're telling people how they should communicate, because you're (ironically) getting offended that some people are self-censoring.. Hence the "Can people knock it off, please?"
Just because a lot of us swear, doesn't mean we feel we have to write swear words everywhere where kids might be reading it.
And, what annoys me, is that, if you weren't the one who told me off long ago about this, then there is more than 1 person here who are basically trying belittle people who don't communicate in a way that they approve..
In another one of your posts, you're also attacking younger people who follow rules...
Cypress
in reply to ki4jgt • • •like this
Maeve likes this.
dylanmorgan
in reply to Cypress • • •Cypress
in reply to dylanmorgan • • •Hmmmm yeah! Yeah, agreed
And also,
Even the fascists that allegedly aren't pedophiles or other forms of rapist are all, every single one of them, enablers of rape in general and pedophilia specifically.
thisisbutaname
in reply to ki4jgt • • •I see two forces working in that direction.
One is advertisements. If you run a social media platform or website or anything similar, and hope to display ads, you better not show anything they don't want associated with their brand.
The second is the rise of political movements (you know which ones) that have nothing better to offer than "modesty" and "traditional values" (whatever that means) as ways to fix the issues society faces.
like this
Maeve likes this.
davel
in reply to ki4jgt • • •1. Removed
1. Removed
1. Removed
1. Removed
1. Removed
1. Removed
1. Tits
Seven dirty words - Wikipedia
Contributors to Wikimedia projects (Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.)like this
Maeve likes this.
DarkCloud
in reply to ki4jgt • • •Beware of complaining about "this generation" - it definitely means you might be over the hill.
Different cohorts are exposed to and brought up with different experiences and media. People brought up in a media landscape that's personally produced for social media, and subject to scrutiny globally... Are more concerned with what's socially acceptable. Is that really surprising?
This concept has been called "profilicty", but was foreshadowed in the 70s/80s by the philosopher Guy Debord when he said:
If you're raised on videos of people who have hired luxury cars, and mansions to appear like they've made it, whilst others are torn down with a barrage of comments for saying the wrong thing.... You too might worry about appearances (and your status).
But most young people are fine, they're good in fact. They're still new. Don't worry about them. They're just young people... And don't believe the media.
like this
Maeve likes this.
Asklemmy reshared this.
ki4jgt
in reply to DarkCloud • • •Oh no! What can I do about that?
I didn't say anything bad about them.
Maeve
in reply to DarkCloud • • •Damn. Almost a century later and a century worse.
musicalphysics
in reply to ki4jgt • • •ki4jgt
in reply to musicalphysics • • •grue
in reply to musicalphysics • • •Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 - Wikipedia
Contributors to Wikimedia projects (Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.)Asklemmy reshared this.
musicalphysics
in reply to grue • • •iByteABit
in reply to ki4jgt • • •Maybe this is you generalizing people judging only from controlled social networks, like Instagram that censors out absolutely everything except hate speech.
As far as I see where I live kids nowadays are very much the opposite of prudish, maybe too much at that. 13 year olds barely knowing anything about life and trying their best to brag about how many people they're fucking while swearing like they're characters from a GTA script.
like this
Maeve likes this.
𝔄 𝔰𝔢𝔫𝔱𝔦𝔢𝔫𝔱 𝔭𝔦𝔢𝔠𝔢 𝔬𝔣 𝔠𝔥𝔢𝔢𝔰𝔢
in reply to ki4jgt • • •Hey.
We have sex scenes - tiddies out - in the middle of the day on regular TV in Germany.
faythofdragons
in reply to ki4jgt • • •MaxLemminist
in reply to ki4jgt • • •But I'm going to say: "They drink. They fuck." not so much anymore.
The generations are becoming more sterile and cold.
And what bothers me the most is how boring (in general) the youth is.
Mainstream obedient consumers and worker drones.
Diva (she/her)
in reply to ki4jgt • • •i don't think i'm particularly prudish. i'll routinely go out to clubs and do demos with like nothing on, but that's in a setting where it's expected. i also appreciate not having sex shoehorned into everything i watch or read.
like yeah it's a facet of existence, but it's not everything. i'd rather have it be meaningful and intentional instead of everywhere.
like this
Maeve likes this.
Maeve
in reply to Diva (she/her) • • •And swearing. I swear, but not gratuitously.
kindnesskills
in reply to ki4jgt • • •like this
dcpDarkMatter y Maeve like this.
architect
in reply to kindnesskills • • •kindnesskills
in reply to architect • • •RonnyZittledong
in reply to ki4jgt • • •☂️-
in reply to ki4jgt • • •like this
Maeve likes this.
rossman
in reply to ki4jgt • • •like this
Maeve likes this.
dan1101
in reply to ki4jgt • • •Asklemmy reshared this.
rf_
in reply to ki4jgt • • •UltraGiGaGigantic
in reply to rf_ • • •like this
Maeve likes this.
Maeve
in reply to rf_ • • •yermaw
in reply to ki4jgt • • •The problems you're talking about in the OP are purely monetary. Advertisers don't want it so media/content can't do it and survive.
The upcoming generation are behaving less unruly these days I think for 2 reasons :
-Regular rebellion against the previous generation. We had eminem, limp bizkit, rage against the machine, Bart Simpson, an entire barrage of "fuck authority" as a culture. Only real way to rebel against that is "fuck yeah, authority".
like this
dcpDarkMatter y Maeve like this.
Majestic
in reply to ki4jgt • • •There are several issues here.
The lemmy instance thing is because people don't like being spammed by onlyfans ads, torrents of AI generated porn spam, deluges of random penises men are happy to post assuming lots of people want to see it, and in some cases operators have ethical objections to porn production itself, or don't want to deal with the possibility of rehosting and being responsible for content containing minors being hosted on their services and the legal headaches that entails.
The last one about legal problems has arisen due to increased awareness yes but also increased pressure. The amount of hosting companies out there who look the other way for violations are fewer and fewer by year out of their own fears from payment companies, technical partners, etc. Even accidentally hosting that stuff besides the risk of getting you raided by cops at 2am and having your whole life gone through (while automatic weapons are being pointed at your face) could lead to your hosting being terminated and having to pay more and more each time that happens as you move up fr
... Mostrar másThere are several issues here.
The lemmy instance thing is because people don't like being spammed by onlyfans ads, torrents of AI generated porn spam, deluges of random penises men are happy to post assuming lots of people want to see it, and in some cases operators have ethical objections to porn production itself, or don't want to deal with the possibility of rehosting and being responsible for content containing minors being hosted on their services and the legal headaches that entails.
The last one about legal problems has arisen due to increased awareness yes but also increased pressure. The amount of hosting companies out there who look the other way for violations are fewer and fewer by year out of their own fears from payment companies, technical partners, etc. Even accidentally hosting that stuff besides the risk of getting you raided by cops at 2am and having your whole life gone through (while automatic weapons are being pointed at your face) could lead to your hosting being terminated and having to pay more and more each time that happens as you move up from the cheapest hosts to the ones left. It's also a hassle to move.
Censoring tarot cards, swear words in memes and on TV that's an example of corporate prudishness. That's an example of fear of upsetting advertisers, of people self-censoring to go viral, to avoid Zuckerbook removing their post and actioning their account because Zuckerbook has this weird notion of being family friendly and appealing to advertisers. So much of that lays at the feet of advertisers and Christian pressure groups who exist to beat the drums of fear of losing advertisers and pressuring those same advertisers to pressure the tech companies.
It's about risk compliance for those tech companies as well. Your bank would rather close all your accounts and refuse to do business with you ever again if you have less than several million dollars with them if you bring too many automated red flags. They won't care you have half a million with them, they won't care you protest your innocence, even the chance the system is right in flagging you a risk and getting hit by authorities leads them to a behavior similar to self-censoring where they self-police overly aggressively out of fear because you're just not worth the trouble and risk.
In the same way these companies don't care about artistic expression, they don't care about freedom of speech, they care about maximizing profits and that means minimizing compliance risks, minimizing risks of being legally actioned because there's even a chance what you shared could turn out to lead to legal liability, and minimizing risks of upsetting overly sensitive prudish customers and advertisers.
So at it's core its driven by a capitalist drive to avoid government scrutiny, fines, interventions, and by that same desire to offend the least amount of people and not upset advertisers by placing their ad for a new burger next to erotica art or bared human body parts or naughty words.
like this
dcpDarkMatter y Maeve like this.
UltraGiGaGigantic
in reply to ki4jgt • • •like this
Maeve likes this.
Malica
in reply to ki4jgt • • •timeghost
in reply to Malica • • •Professorozone
in reply to ki4jgt • • •Fluffy Kitty Cat
in reply to ki4jgt • • •geneva_convenience
in reply to ki4jgt • • •It all just feels incredibly forced. Reddit posts are still 30% women in skimpy outfits just for the coomers. You're not entitled to see a womens tits all day. Stop objectifying them already.
And swearing in every sentence makes swear words lose value. Swearing is supposed to be a very fucking impactful use of language instead of a generic fucking filler word which is inserted into every fucking sentence at a random fucking places and could just as well be left out.
In short: both things you mention add nothing to discourse or ideas. It's just filler stuff. I'm glad Lemmy is more mature about this.
MonkderVierte
in reply to ki4jgt • • •RichardNixos
in reply to ki4jgt • • •IANAL, but in my opinion this violates the "functionally equivalent services" test of the Americans with Disabilities Act Title IV, and in a just world they would get hit with a massive lawsuit.
BeMoreCareful
in reply to RichardNixos • • •Asklemmy reshared this.
Evotech
in reply to BeMoreCareful • • •Asklemmy reshared this.
captainlezbian
in reply to RichardNixos • • •Both someone hard of hearing and a fan of that show (which incidentally was some of the best deaf rep I've seen) it's such an offensive thing to do. We deserve word for word captions at a minimum (and none of that "speaking Spanish" bs), we should also have access to captions that include speakers, non verbal sounds, tone indicators, etc.
But also that show uses sexual content and profanity as crucial artistic elements. The long term trauma of rape is a major theme of early seasons. Multiple characters use sex as a means of distracting themselves from their life and thoughts, some use it as the only vulnerable connection they can have.
Asklemmy reshared this.
Sheldan
in reply to RichardNixos • • •Banned for profanity
Asklemmy reshared this.
bedwyr
in reply to ki4jgt • • •
in reply to ki4jgt • • •architect
in reply to ki4jgt • • •NahMarcas
in reply to ki4jgt • • •We're doom!
::: spoiler porn
___
:::
Muffi
in reply to ki4jgt • • •Very much so.
I am Danish. A lot of our culture and humor used to revolve around the naked body and sex. This has totally changed within the last 20 years.
My personal theory is that social media censorship of anything sexual is the reason. America exported their prudish culture and it is erasing our culture.
baddu
in reply to Muffi • • •Thesilverpig
in reply to baddu • • •baddu
in reply to Thesilverpig • • •FistingEnthusiast
in reply to baddu • • •FistingEnthusiast
in reply to baddu • • •Martti
in reply to baddu • • •Evotech
in reply to Muffi • • •Asklemmy reshared this.
HobbitFoot
in reply to ki4jgt • • •So I've been having to remove pictures of people posting anime style upskirt images of people in child expressing bodies with the text effectively "I will not be responding to comments because everyone is mean". Most of the time, I only find out because other people reported it as CP or CP adjacent.
With my own choices of art that I used to post, I tried pieces which can generally be viewed in public given I'm on an instance where people can expect to view the content anywhere. I don't care enough to go through the discussions to get buy in to show legitimate art, let alone what looks like AI CP.
Am I drawing a line further than what an art museum would show? Yeah. But an art museum is going to be more enclosed with walls, a greeter, and an expectation that most children won't enter it unaccompanied to make it a point of discussion in the community. I'm also not willing to go through the effort for others who do not wish to be a part of the community other than posting.
If someone wants to create something more, all the tools to create their own instance are available.
∃∀λ
in reply to ki4jgt • • •Much could be said about this.
Some people are prudish. Some people are not. Media could have two different versions: the sanitized version made for the first group of people, and mature version for the second group. Sometimes this is not possible in which case it's better to just have the first version so that it's suitable to the largest audience.
There's also been (I think justifiable) backlash against adult stuff because kids now are big users of the internet thanks to the addictiveness of social media and the tiny supercomputer they carry with them everywhere that is now necessary to participate in society. Sanitizing everything for everyone is one solution to this problem. The other is keep the mature stuff but require age verification to view it.
Also, people often browse social media in public and are aware someone might look over their shoulder and see something that might be misinterpreted as porn. Nobody wants that.
There's a great article in The Atlantic about the disappearance of communal showers without curtains or dividers in the US.
... Mostrar másMuch could be said about this.
Some people are prudish. Some people are not. Media could have two different versions: the sanitized version made for the first group of people, and mature version for the second group. Sometimes this is not possible in which case it's better to just have the first version so that it's suitable to the largest audience.
There's also been (I think justifiable) backlash against adult stuff because kids now are big users of the internet thanks to the addictiveness of social media and the tiny supercomputer they carry with them everywhere that is now necessary to participate in society. Sanitizing everything for everyone is one solution to this problem. The other is keep the mature stuff but require age verification to view it.
Also, people often browse social media in public and are aware someone might look over their shoulder and see something that might be misinterpreted as porn. Nobody wants that.
There's a great article in The Atlantic about the disappearance of communal showers without curtains or dividers in the US. Nude beaches and nudist colonies are apparently disappearing as well.
theatlantic.com/family/2025/11/naked-locker-room-end/684907/
Summarizing in my own words,
Progressive era reformers had communal baths built before municipal plumbing systems existed so that the poor who could not afford their own private bath could keep clean. Bathing suits at the time would fall apart and clog filters, so boys and men were required to bathe naked (apparently women had to be clothed). People naturally also showered naked without dividers or curtains. By cultural momentum, this practice stuck around long after bathing suits had advanced.
Fast forward to today and people are realizing that separating showers by gender isn't enough to prevent any discomfort or sexualization of naked bodies because there's awareness of different sexual orientations. Additionally, the internet exists and cell phones with cameras are ubiquitous. Nobody wants to have an image of their nude form spread to half the world over social media where it previously would only be seen by a few people for a few minutes. Add to this the fact that easy access to a vast amount of internet pornography has massively sexualized nudity. Communal showers are disappearing because a large number of people (including me) hate them.
DudleyMason
in reply to ∃∀λ • • •Anyone seeking to ban a vice for adults under the guise of protecting children is a fascist. They have no interest whatsoever in protecting kids, they want to control adults. Fuck that "think of the children" bullshit. The backlash isn't justifiable, it's a justification.
TwistedTurtle
in reply to ki4jgt • • •I find the wanton sexualization of the 80s and 90s almost wholesome compared to whatever the fuck is going on these days. Sex is too important to be relegated to porn - but that seems to be the mission now.
We're allowed to have heaps of gratuitous violence, action, and misery in our art - but for some reason sex/nudity has this unique obligation to directly progress the plot (if it can't be removed altogether). Sex apparently can't just be part of character development, themes, world building, or just gratuitous fun, anymore without giving these fucking prudes the ick.
Corkyskog
in reply to TwistedTurtle • • •L0rdMathias
in reply to ki4jgt • • •No. These things come in waves. We're certainly on the prudish side of the cycle right now, but the modern prudes are a far cry from the prudes of yesteryear.
The world propensity for prudeness is trending down on a macro scale, but we are also at a point where the existing prudes have consolidated and are the strongest they've been in the short term.
sunbeam60
in reply to ki4jgt • • •Porn has also become a lot harder and the exploitative nature of the business has become more apparent. It’s not just people’s opinions that have become more prudish (though sure, they have) it’s also that porn is now, broadly, much much harder.
People were shocked about deep throating in the 70s, for goodness sake. Today that’s light fayre.
crimsonpoodle
in reply to ki4jgt • • •Different people have different reasons.
Small group of real prudes: either actually feel this way, or hold various levels of opinions, or are generally ambivalent to sexual content but have decided to construe sexualization with sexual misconduct. It works; no sex, no sexual misconduct.
Then the advertisers cater to those people because they don’t want to get bad press and want the broadest appeal: non sexual things appeal to prudes and non prudes alike: so make everything non sexual. Avoid offense and maximize eye balls.
Then platforms want to attract advertisers, so they make rules and filters that over reach. Afterall if nothing is remotely close to sexual then we don’t chance there being an Ad next to something sexually offensive.
Then the content creators, whos livelihood depends on the unequal relationship with the platforms self censor to attempt to avoid the broad stroke of platform censorship.
The middle ground then becomes vacant. The sexual but not sexually offensive content gets thinned out. So there is less and less of a reas
... Mostrar másDifferent people have different reasons.
Small group of real prudes: either actually feel this way, or hold various levels of opinions, or are generally ambivalent to sexual content but have decided to construe sexualization with sexual misconduct. It works; no sex, no sexual misconduct.
Then the advertisers cater to those people because they don’t want to get bad press and want the broadest appeal: non sexual things appeal to prudes and non prudes alike: so make everything non sexual. Avoid offense and maximize eye balls.
Then platforms want to attract advertisers, so they make rules and filters that over reach. Afterall if nothing is remotely close to sexual then we don’t chance there being an Ad next to something sexually offensive.
Then the content creators, whos livelihood depends on the unequal relationship with the platforms self censor to attempt to avoid the broad stroke of platform censorship.
The middle ground then becomes vacant. The sexual but not sexually offensive content gets thinned out. So there is less and less of a reason for platforms, or advertisers, or creators to allow, endorse, or create that content.
This is why vocal opinions of small groups hold so much sway today. The cycle feeds into itself as people whos only interaction with sexual content is hardcore porn generally fall into that second “ambivolent but lets avoid it just to be safe”. This pipline then has a complicated but similar relationship on the political side of things.
metermatic26
in reply to ki4jgt • • •I think at least part of it is a backlash against the proliferation of pornography (its shocking just how prolific and how degrading porn actually is compared to the ‘good ‘ol days’). A lot of youngsters were first confronted with porn as children through their smartphones.
But a lot of it also has to do with changing attitudes towards woman and sexuality. We’ve had corporations marketing woman and teen girls as sex objects for decades now, but we now also have an increase of violence against woman and we have the manosphere and far-right extremists campaigning against basic woman’s rights like abortion, equal pay and whatnot.
So I guess the real question is, are more people taking offense of nudity because of their conservative beliefs? Or are more people viewing nudity in popular media as a means of sexualizing (and thus degrading) women?
DudleyMason
in reply to metermatic26 • • •That core attitude is a big part why I can't respect this new secular Mormonism. There's nothing degrading about sexualization. The very idea of it is tied to the idea that a woman's worth is tied up in her virginity, which is a concept born from the patriarchal ownership of women. Sexualization is only degrading to property because it reduces the value of the property. Anyone who claims they don't see women as property but that sexualization does degrade women is incredibly confused.
metermatic26
in reply to DudleyMason • • •The point I’m trying to make isn’t about sexualization of women in and off itself. Woman have the right to celebrate their sexuality and there’s plenty of nutjobs that still haven’t come to terms with the sexual revolution.
But what I’m referring to is the hypersexualization of women present in things like adverts, music or film. Prior to the MeToo movement you couldn’t walk a block without spotting an highly revealing or highly suggestive advert of a woman.
Back in the sixtees, the sexualization of women served to promote ideas about the sexual revolution, bodily autonomy and reproductive rights. But decades of commercialization have reduced these ideas simply to “sex sells”.
The thing that makes the hypersexualization of women degrading imo is that it reduces women to a subject of lust, while deflecting any criticism under the pretends that women should be free to express their sexuality.
Asklemmy reshared this.
DudleyMason
in reply to metermatic26 • • •waterwasamistake
in reply to DudleyMason • • •The sexualization is not a problem on its own the objectification that often comes along with it is as well as the "unspoken" rule that only allows conventionally attractive people to be viewed in a sexual context.
People don't lose their personhood by being, acting or shown in a sexual context but many do absolutely not view it that way.
The problem i see is that since this mostly happens in visual media without context all meaning it could have is more often than not lost. If sexual content was created with a positive attitude we would see much more diversity. It is very obvious that it caters to people objectifying the protagonists and therefore its not that easy to blatantly approve of it.
This should off course not translate to shaming people in general but it should trigger nuanced debate and action.
DudleyMason
in reply to waterwasamistake • • •Then you shame the prudes for their prudery and exclude them from society. You don't cave to them and stop showing sex as being a part of normal life.
That's only a problem for you if you're still clinging to those Bronze Age goat herders and their fucked up view of sex created to make it easier to justify treating women as property. Literally every idea about sex that treats it as some special area of human activity that is magical and different from everything else is descended from that one line of bullshit.
in reply to ki4jgt • • •I don't like prudes either, and I do think it comes in part from certain kinds of morally compartmentalized people who are wound so tight from societal/religious/cultural pressures and envy of those who don't feel as bound to such things that they need it to keep being some taboo thing for their own weird peace of mind.
Not sure if anyone said this yet but I do wonder sometimes if (widely available/freely accessible porn) is also about control/atomization. Having a socially disconnected populace that can only satisfy their innate sexual urges by some sort of supernormal stimuli viewed on a screen that the system can control is just another data point that can be exploited/behavior controlled.
The less real connections someone can make with real people who don't conform to their supernormal standards, the less they might be able to form communities that can be self-sufficient (to a degree) or fight to change things in the real world. Being physically intimate with someone isnt just a way of sharing pleasure or expressing affection, it's also one of several high
... Mostrar másI don't like prudes either, and I do think it comes in part from certain kinds of morally compartmentalized people who are wound so tight from societal/religious/cultural pressures and envy of those who don't feel as bound to such things that they need it to keep being some taboo thing for their own weird peace of mind.
Not sure if anyone said this yet but I do wonder sometimes if (widely available/freely accessible porn) is also about control/atomization. Having a socially disconnected populace that can only satisfy their innate sexual urges by some sort of supernormal stimuli viewed on a screen that the system can control is just another data point that can be exploited/behavior controlled.
The less real connections someone can make with real people who don't conform to their supernormal standards, the less they might be able to form communities that can be self-sufficient (to a degree) or fight to change things in the real world. Being physically intimate with someone isnt just a way of sharing pleasure or expressing affection, it's also one of several highly motivating factors for people to touch grass, which is where 99% of everything that matters actually happens.
Beyond the scope of the topic here, I suppose. Porn is just one avenue. I'm not against it, but there are plenty of reasons to revile the abusive industries that churn it out, and the proliferation of hollow AI porn bots that give people psychosis.
I also blame marketing research and of course, capitalism, for degrading everything they touch to soulless data points to be collated and directed by the whims of those with the power to do it.
myyass
in reply to ki4jgt • • •i_love_FFT
in reply to myyass • • •wizbiz
in reply to i_love_FFT • • •myyass
in reply to wizbiz • • •wizbiz
in reply to myyass • • •myyass
in reply to wizbiz • • •DudleyMason
in reply to ki4jgt • • •It's really all our faults. The first time someone used the phrase "horny jail" unironically and wasn't slapped into the following week, we invited this. The first time someone complained about a sex scene in a movie and wasn't shunned from their entire social circle and relegated to hanging out with the Boomer ladies at the local church, we began building the world we're trapped in.
And the people in here defending this new secular Puritan paradigm all sound fucking insufferable. It doesn't matter if you're an upright prude because your gullible enough to think sex makes God angry or if you're an upright prude because you think it's a feminist position. Either way you're still a jackass who's clinging to a sexual morality invented by bronze age goat herders to maximize the prices they could get for selling their teenage daughters to their middle aged friends.
MonkeMischief
in reply to DudleyMason • • •Maybe I'm incorrect but I always thought this came about because people went so ridiculously in the other direction where their dopamine-receptors were completely captured by pornhub, that it was a polite way to bop them on the nose for being a gross gooner in completely non-sexual contexts.
Like anything amusing on the Internet though, it simultaneously started to mean everything and nothing at all, I guess. Lol
DudleyMason
in reply to MonkeMischief • • •Even if true, I stand by what I said.
Anyone not radically sex-positive has the same effect on society as a whole as the most vehement anti-porn crusader, because puritanism is the cultural default anywhere the spiritual descendants of those bronze age goat fucking child sellers have been able to rule (almost everywhere now).
Weydemeyer
in reply to MonkeMischief • • •DudleyMason
in reply to Weydemeyer • • •Gonna sell your daughter to your neighbor for three goats next?
Your entire argument hinges on the purity culture bullshit idea that someone being horny over a woman is somehow degrading to that woman. It's one step removed from comparing women who aren't virgins to used kleenax.
BlackLaZoR
in reply to ki4jgt • • •architect
in reply to BlackLaZoR • • •BlackLaZoR
in reply to architect • • •FistingEnthusiast
in reply to architect • • •Why do you think it's Australia doing this?
You're wrong, but I'm curious as to where you came up with this crap
DudleyMason
in reply to FistingEnthusiast • • •FistingEnthusiast
in reply to DudleyMason • • •bangupjobasusual
in reply to ki4jgt • • •Hikermick
in reply to ki4jgt • • •Radical_Socialist_t00t
in reply to ki4jgt • • •Hanrahan
in reply to ki4jgt • • •yes they are, US religiosity and prudishness is coming for us all.
It's been a slippery slope, Bush had aid pinned to family first values, Obama had Hillary tie aid to stopping sex trafficking, (not on Epstein's island though apparently) reads well in the news... alas it played out in the streets of Cambodia that women with condoms were jailed because why else you need condom unless you're a hooker ? also gave them a reason to stop and frisk women. My partner and I were living there back then, what a fucking mess.
bradorsomething
in reply to ki4jgt • • •dom
in reply to bradorsomething • • •SoGrumpy
in reply to dom • • •modus
in reply to bradorsomething • • •Chr0nos1
in reply to modus • • •JackbyDev
in reply to ki4jgt • • •captainlezbian
in reply to ki4jgt • • •Yep, and it's a real problem imo. People are becoming afraid of sexual content. As someone who's been involved in free the nipple (a feminist movement aiming for the acceptance of bared breasts outside of sexual contexts), who's done nonsexual full nudity in various forms, and also has engaged in orgies, this prudishness really concerns me. Sexual and body liberation are part of women's liberation and general freedom, including in thoughts, expression, and action.
Sexual frustration, fear, resentment, and immaturity is also a part of fascistic thinking and I believe it's a contributor to the modern far right. Love and pleasure are becoming more stigmatized than hate and pain. Accepting that it's ok if art or someone's actions are more sexual than you'd like so long as it's not targeting you is vital.
Like obviously I appreciate NSFW tags, just because I acknowledge breasts can be nonsexual doesn't mean I want to accidentally have them pop up in my feed at work.
Also lol at censoring the magicians, one of my favorite shows and a prime example of a show that loses
... Mostrar másYep, and it's a real problem imo. People are becoming afraid of sexual content. As someone who's been involved in free the nipple (a feminist movement aiming for the acceptance of bared breasts outside of sexual contexts), who's done nonsexual full nudity in various forms, and also has engaged in orgies, this prudishness really concerns me. Sexual and body liberation are part of women's liberation and general freedom, including in thoughts, expression, and action.
Sexual frustration, fear, resentment, and immaturity is also a part of fascistic thinking and I believe it's a contributor to the modern far right. Love and pleasure are becoming more stigmatized than hate and pain. Accepting that it's ok if art or someone's actions are more sexual than you'd like so long as it's not targeting you is vital.
Like obviously I appreciate NSFW tags, just because I acknowledge breasts can be nonsexual doesn't mean I want to accidentally have them pop up in my feed at work.
Also lol at censoring the magicians, one of my favorite shows and a prime example of a show that loses a ton of characterization and theming by censoring it
Bluedragon012
in reply to ki4jgt • • •Asklemmy reshared this.
solitaire404
in reply to ki4jgt • • •I would not say people are coming more prudish, but rather policies are. Why? I assume because cash is king, and the best way to get cash is in advertising. Advertising has always been prudish since it needs to appeal to the masses.
Policy eventually influences/dictates culture. This is most obvious with the world 'unalive'.
Another idea, is that we are becoming significantly more moral and have increase civil rights. How does this relate? Well, if you grew up in the 90s or 00s you know that being told you were gay was not a joking matter, but a serious claim that could make you a social pariah. Now calling someone 'gay' as an insult is not as socially acceptable, is that because we are more prude or more moral?
I think what a lot of people identify as 'prude' culture is just another perspective of an attempt at being more moral and inclusive.