I’m surprised how much pearl clutching there is in this thread. This seems like a good thing. It’s all supposed to be clearly labeled, and if people want to watch streams with nudity, what’s wrong with that?
The twitch boob meta always fascinated me. It’s literally trivial to not watch thirst streams if you don’t like thirst streams. But people on the internet get so fucking upset about it, and I assume at least 100% of them consume actual porn.
For me it’s how popular and accessible twitch is for kids.
I’ve never really used twitch for anything except getting drops for games (160p and muted lol) but every time I see titty streamers getting recommended despite never watching any
I am not responsible for ridding the world of maladjusted assholes. I simply do not have the energy.
If there is no other imperative for caring about something beyond “but what about the poorly supervised children?” then that thing is generally going straight to the bottom of my concern list. If the worst thing that poorly supervised children get into is cleavage on twitch, then I’d actually call that a pretty massive win.
How will 14 year olds accidentally seeing a boob on twitch instead of doing what most 14 year olds do by actively searching out porn-esque content going to turn them into a person I dont want to interact with?
It’s not the same, porn you have to search out. They’re already on twitch for other reasons and are far more likely to be suggested/shown more vulgar content like “artistic nudity”.
If they can google search for twitch, they can google search for porn. They already know. I mean, come on, you were 14 once.
If they cant google search for twitch, then they shouldnt be able to change the channel to boobie streams for the same reason they shouldnt be able to change to any other non-kid-friendly stream. Thats part of being responsible as a parent.
I dunno, this doesnt seem like that big of a deal.
i kinda agree, but i seen like youtube kids, where kids that don’t know how to search spend the day there, or not actually, twitch never marked for the same kids that youtube kids has counted for, hmmm, idk
There’s a big, important difference between watching violence in video games/movies and watching a cartel execution or someone being run over on LiveLeak.
There’s also a significant difference between “a bit of nudity”, even contextually appropriate full frontal, and eroticism.
Kids probably shouldn’t be watching ultra violent games, but that doesn’t mean porn being accessible for minors is not a far more dangerous problem. There is no double standard, because these are two different things. Porn is neurologically addictive. This is an established medical fact. Exposing a minor to more and more sexualized subjects is what groomers do. Interacting with strangers sexually over the internet is not something that should be normalized for children.
Personally, as long as kids are getting access to good sex ed I don’t see any issue with them stumbling across sexualized content online. We all did it at some point in our lives, digital or not. It’s a part of growing up. I also don’t think sexualized content should be seen as more problematic than violent content. If anything it should be less problematic (and to be clear I don’t find either to be an issue personally)
Oh, sure, we probably agree. A distressing amount of people have really bad takes on sex, sex education, gender, history, relationships… a lot of things, really. Conservatives especially have egregiously bad views.
I remember when I first saw This Film Is Not Yet Rated, and I talked about it with some coworkers. An older woman and a younger woman who sat next to me in the office. Both of them 100% felt that they’d rather their kid watch a movie where people’s heads got blown off than one where someone got head. I don’t remember their exact argument (this was many years ago), but I’m pretty sure it was such an axiomatic belief for them it was difficult to articulate why.
Yeah, America really got fucked up by the puritans. That prudishness still runs deep. I’m philosophically very sex positive, but I get it, and I’m not immune to that shock factor either sometimes. I try my best to disregard it.
I’m not sure what you mean. Parents are ideally involved in raising their children, but there’s no guarantee they’ll be involved, good at teaching, teaching anything true, alive, or anything. Public education is important.
The women in Twitch use sex and interactive false sexual interest and love to get people to give them money and buy them gifts. In some ways that’s worse for kids than pornhub porn. Do you expect a 15 year old boy to be able to avoid the “stripper really loves me” trap?
Then it sounds like your actual problem is with a certain pattern of behavior rather than nudity/sexuality itself. So maybe you address your actual concern rather than something tangentially related.
If my child is on twitch, I can reasonably assume it’s for game streaming. If my child is on pornhub, I can assume they are watching pornography. I dont like having that line blurred.
Yup, I’m not letting my kids on Twitch because of that.
I hate kiddie accounts, so if I don’t trust my kid to browse a service safely, I ban it. As they gain my trust, I open up the services I allow. For example, I used to have a “no YouTube” rule, now I let my oldest (10yo) to browse on his own, provided he tells me what he wants to watch. If I catch him watching something he knows I don’t approve of, he’ll lose that privilege until he regains that trust.
The problem, at least to me, is the wildly inconsistent application of the rules. Plenty of streamers have gotten bans for inappropriate content for far, far less than this, and been told to shove it when they tried to appeal. I can guarantee you nobody would be up in arms over this if twitch just treated it as a free for all, and didn’t care if people streamed tits. The problem is that it isn’t, and lots of people get banned, while the big thirst streamers get given a free pass on everything
Also, If this goes through, the “banned games” list is going to need some real pruning.
My only problem with it is that it’s always on the homepage under recommended, despite the fact I’ve never watched any streams like that. Even if I tell the site “not interested” it still shows the content. I only get on twitch to watch content for one game and from a small number of creators.
The thing is, teens with accounts set to 18+ do access twitch. And they are going to be diverted there more and more which can draw viewers away from genuine streamers who are just gaming.
Nothing wrong with streaming nudity, but Twitch is specifically marketed to children for the purpose of watching people play video games. Blending porn in that with an algorithm that throws new videos in your face is a recipe for disaster.
Your “supposed to be clearly labeled” argument is really doing a lot of the heavy lifting here and ignores the reality of people gaming the system or finding loopholes and we all know there aren’t going to be any real people moderating the site just like every other social media/video streaming site.
They really should have split it up into two different sites because I see this blowing up in their face spectacularly.
I’ve never once seen these girls on my twitch feed. Also, adult channels would obviously be excluded from children’s feed if they’re set up with parental settings.
Also, anyone who has access to the internet has access to porn if they seek it out.
“Think of the children” is such a boring argument. Grumpy old conservatives said the same thing about music videos in the 80s. Now we’ve got incels raging over naked people on the internet.
Yes, anyone with access to the internet is able to seek out porn which is why it seems unnecessary to risk pushing it in the faces of kids on a site marketed to children.
I find the incel comment hilarious considering you’re the one pushing for more women getting naked in game streaming videos like some thirsty dude.
If a parent doesn’t want their kid seeing something adult on the internet, they shouldn’t let their kid use the internet or only under supervision. Besides, booba isn’t going to affect kids any worse than Twitch chat already does.
To be honest, you’re making a lot more wild assumptions in this comment than anything I said.
If you’re right, then maybe the system will need some improvements. But it’s all just speculation your part, so I don’t see any reason to worry about it for something so inconsequential to begin with.
It destroys the brand. The more nudity makes it on the site the more it changes the user base, advertisers change, the whole thing just takes a turn into something completely different
That’s not all; certain dances, such as “twerking, grinding, and pole dancing” are now allowed to stream on Twitch without a label, and broadcasts that are labeled with “Drugs, Intoxication, or Excessive Tobacco Use; Violent and Graphic Depictions; Gambling; and/or Sexual Themes” will no longer be allowed on Twitch’s home page.
This is what got me: Now you can have tits out and twerking, but no longer smoking?
Edit: I personally don’t use Twitch nor mind it when nudity becomes more normalised, but as I said in my other comment it’s mostly about weed or just smoking a cigarette while doing something else.
Makes sense. Normalizing smoking isn’t cool. It’s one thing if it’s in a movie or TV show, but Twitch has the pretense of being real people who can have parasocial relationships with their fans and influence their behavior. Kids don’t need to see or be influenced on that level. At least the nudity or sexuality will be properly labelled.
Personally I was thinking about weed; there’s a large community surrounding it and ever since parts of the US started legalising a lot of discussion around it has been popping up.
For example a stream discussing and reviewing different strains could definitely work.
Doug the pepper man? Because thats one streamer I wouldnt watch get high, his content is too thought heavy and directed and getting intoxicated would derail the hell out of that
Getting Doug With High is a podcast by Doug Benson where he invites other celebrities to hangout and get high with him. It’s pretty entertaining most of the time.
The first Eric Andre one is really good imo. Eric said he doesn’t usually smoke because he had a bad experience when he was younger, but in the episode he gets super baked and asks a random person in the studio for a hoodie, and then he just spends the rest of the time all cozied up in someone’s sweater. It’s pretty great.
I don’t think that’s what it’s saying given that “sexual themes” is on this list as well. Seems more like they’re saying “we’re allowing more sexual content if it’s properly labeled, but we’re going to start keeping those labels off the home page, and while we’re at it we’ll take off a bunch of other objectionable content”
People in this thread really pretending they have kids in order to get upset about implied nudity. It does not get more american does it? Some chick showing lots of boobie sure seems to be the same like a girl getting banged by big dick to many here.
Also if you actually think that some nudity will wreck your kid but watching gta does not i am not sure why anyone bothers arguing with you.
It’s hilarious to me seeing comments like this because in your head there’s no room for doubt, you know exactly what these streams will be like and can firmly declare that in public - it doesn’t even come into you mind at all to consider they’re popular things which mean a lot of people will have done something you haven’t and actually watched them.
I know of families who walk naked around the house. No kids under 10 were harmed by this. Nudity is natural. Reacting to it in an unhealthy manner is not.
Nudity is not strictly porn, but not all nudity is strictly harmless. Platforms like these are for clickbait and attention whoring, and there’s no better way to get attention on the internet than sexual content (especially on a website mainly used by kids/teens).
And it’s basically universally accepted that porn is harmful to children. We all watched some of it when we were young, but most people had circumstances that limited their exposure or access to it. A modern mainstream addiction machine like Twitch serving softcore porn to children under the guise of “artistic nudity” is going to fuck people up. That’s not even mentioning the “cam whore” aspect to it, which does frequently fuck up the lives of fully grown adults.
What sites are parents supposed to allow their kids to access if rules like this start slipping in? Short of invasive AI scanning, it’s not possible to monitor every single thing your child watches on a site at all times.
I am always so interested by these types of comments. Lots of words, no substance. HOW will this cause harm? Is it the nudity? Is it the platform specifically? Is Twitch now more harmfully addicting due to there now being nudity? Was access to Twitch not harmful, or was harmful, before? In excess? In moderation?
Give us something if you’re going to be throwing verbal hands. I neither agree nor disagree with this decision by Twitch, mostly because I honestly dgaf and strongly feel parents have a responsibility to learn how to limit access if it is needed. Having worked with parents a LOT, many of them are happy to shove responsibility for their children onto others, while simultaneously making outrageous demands and incredible accusations. I don’t see why this situation should be any different.
I’m struggling to understand how the claim ‘pornography causes sexual deviance’ is different from ‘violent films and video games cause violent tendencies’
Well, I have a headache now. I had forgotten how poorly written some of these published papers tend to be. Anyway, sorta long summary after skimming a few of the studies and that meta-analysis:
The meta-analysis worked through data obtained in a range from 1967 to 1995. It found that the consumption of “explicit pornographic material” appears to create a mostly consistent change in the behavior of adolescents and measured in four categories. I’m on mobile so I won’t go back and grab those categories, though the participants are mostly balanced between them. It should be noted that this analysis is trying to push a hard need for practical findings in our modern day despite only taking information from the range provided. Moreover, there is an air of bias regarding the findings.
Other studies have concluded, in general, that while we believe there is an increased risk of early sexual development and even deviance, it has been difficult to replicate these consistently.
Most studies conclude that modern consumption of media by teenagers may or may not increase the risk of deviancy many of us would consider stereotypical risks that teenagers take.
Basically, science is struggling a bit to show a positive correlation. They think there might be something there, though looking at research into other types of media you’ll find similar findings.
Not to mention that the metric of ‘sexual deviance’ is ill-defined and multi-variate. If sexual deviance is of a sexual health and safety orientation, then the obvious confounding factor is the historical use of abstinence-only education in this cohort (from 67-95). If the definition is speaking towards sexual violence and improper consent, then I think the conversation should include how healthy and consenting behaviors are being properly depicted outside of pornography as well as within, because simply not ever being exposed to sexual depictions doesn’t address the origins of anti-social attitudes toward the opposite gender and sexual frustrations of involuntarily celibate men. Domestic violence exists even outside a sexual context.
Not addressing those issues is how you end up with senile men like Dennis Prager who believe rape is morally permissible inside a heterosexual marriage.
i think the problem a lot of people (myself included) have specifically with nudity on twitch is with the streamers whose streams are basically just porn. now there’s nothing inherently wrong with porn, nudity, or sex work on the internet or in real life, but the issue comes in when you put people who are essentially sex workers on the same video game streaming site many young people visit for non-sexual content. now porn is available and popular on their favorite game streaming site, and it is being forcibly recommended to users who have never browsed that category of content on twitch before.
pretty much all i watch on twitch is super mario 64 speedruns, but 9/10 times when i log in my first recommended channel is a streamer with their tits out doing jumping jacks in a hot tub or something. i can only imagine this is happening to a large percentage of other users as well, including younger users who could be easily manipulated by an attractive and interactive woman online heavily incentivizing them to donate money.
it basically boils down to: i don’t care that porn is on the site, but it should not be recommended to people who are not already browsing that content as that is not what i’m there to see.
edit - re-reading the changes, i’m hoping that the stream visibility and content label changes would fix this issue.
The changes over the years allowing non-gaming content have allowed some really cool stuff to be showcased, but it also opened the floodgates for a lot of low effort softcore camgirls. I’m cool with sex workers making a living, but it would be nice to filter them out. Twitch has done a lot of work on discovery over the past year or two that’s been positive at least even if the site is awful when not logged in.
I think the impact of these changes will really depend on the how Twitch chooses to allow monetization. Given the changes to aggressive ad-focused monetization recently I think that will be the big decider for what this means.
Thanks for the measured response! I can agree with this. There is inherently nothing wrong with nudity or sex in general. In fact a healthy relationship with nudity and sex likely supports good development. I don’t need to go much further to support this argument than to point out the myriads of people damaged from strict religious upbringings. That said, it does need to be filtered and enforced properly. Buried even where it had to be actually found, or specific settings activated that are otherwise automatically turned off.
I think if these and/or similar steps were done many of us wouldn’t be bothered.
However, pornography use was associated with increases in both self-esteem and symptoms of depression and anxiety, albeit only among adolescent women in one of the two panels. In addition, low subjective well-being was associated with a subsequent increase in pornography use, but only in female adolescents in one panel. This study’s results are not consistent with concerns about pornography use negatively contributing to male adolescents’ psychological well-being, but suggest potential antagonistic links between pornography use and specific facets of mental well-being in adolescent women. Such links should be considered tentative until verified with further research.
Seems that your own study you posted acknowledges that porn with adolescents, mainly with adolescent males, is generally accepted and understood with their negative links.
Yes, I tried to link a reasonably balanced view of the issue. It’d be nice if you didn’t cherry pick statements. The point being, different studies have shown different results, and there’s no concrete conclusion to date. Hence your statement about ‘universal acceptance’ is extremely debatable.
So you accuse someone of cherrypicking while admitting you cherrypicked yourself (which I should discard because your opinion of balanced is right and his of general consensus is wrong, obviously…)? Personally, I see a big difference between proper sexual education and children beginning to explore puberty with parental guidance and streamers drawing porn for money and exposure to sexuality becoming a circlejerk to personality cults.
Balanced in the sense that I acknowledged there’s an ongoing debate and linked a source that covered both sides, unlike a certain someone who claimed ‘universal acceptance’ of their worldview. Hopefully you can see a difference there.
You are asking me whether I assume universal and general are used interchangeably most of the time or whether I assume that when people say universal consensus they do so literally and without any degree of dissension, something which rarely occurs. At this point we might as well be talking about which dictionary definition of a word is the “real” definition. His wording could have been better to avoid criticism, sure.
The last sentence of your quote literally says that there is no actual conclusive data from this, and any links need further study to be considered real and actionable.
Despite common public concerns that surround adolescent use of sexual media [66], the results of this first longitudinal assessment of the relationship between pornography use and adolescents’ subjective well-being provide no evidence that pornography use contributes to decreased subjective well-being in adolescent men. We found, however, limited evidence of the contradictory contribution of pornography use to female adolescents’ dysregulated mood and self-evaluation. Future research in this area should use large-scale prospective designs, which would include different developmental stages, to clarify possible effects in adolescent women. Given the public concern surrounding pornography use among adolescents, the veracity of these findings will likely be challenged. Thus, replication of our findings with diverse adolescent samples from other cultural settings is highly warranted.
This repeats the exact same point I pointed out. That they found nothing conclusive, only mildly suggestive data, and will need repeated deeper study to confirm if the data pointed towards an actual conclusion or if it was a flaw in the study.
I really wish they taught scientific reading in non-college school, you posted my own evidence for me as if it was a rebuttal
E: also? This study used regular porn, while twitch would have typically woman-led self-led content, which completely shifts the research. So even if this said what you think it says, thats still not conclusive for all porn. Just stereotypical male focused and male directed video porn.
Peas to apples, that study only involves adolescents, and it doesn’t clearly illustrate or partition according to the age groups. It also seems to merely itself to the self-assessment of those polled and particular concerns about body image and inadequacy.
However, pornography use was associated with increases in both self-esteem and symptoms of depression and anxiety, albeit only among adolescent women in one of the two panels. In addition, low subjective well-being was associated with a subsequent increase in pornography use, but only in female adolescents in one panel. This study’s results are not consistent with concerns about pornography use negatively contributing to male adolescents’ psychological well-being, but suggest potential antagonistic links between pornography use and specific facets of mental well-being in adolescent women. Such links should be considered tentative until verified with further research.
Yes, I tried to link a reasonably balanced view of the issue. It’d be nice if you didn’t cherry pick statements. The point being, different studies have shown different results, and there’s no concrete conclusion to date. Hence your statement about ‘universal acceptance’ is extremely debatable.
That’s why I don’t monitor it. If I don’t trust my kids on a site, I ban it so they get no access to it whatsoever. If I trust them, I don’t have any restrictions on the content they can access on it.
For example, I trust Netflix’s kids mode, but my kids can easily switch to my profile and see stuff they shouldn’t. I trust them to only watch on their profile, and if they violate that, they lose access to Netflix entirely. Adult content doesn’t appear on their home page, and it doesn’t even appear on my home page (as in, the trailers usually don’t have the intense parts).
I feel like if I restrict it, they’ll be more curious about what they’re missing, whereas teaching them to avoid stuff in their own teaches discipline and builds trust
It’s funny to be when the moral compass types let their misogyny show so clearly. Like you’re not going to even try to hide that while trying to claim the moral high ground?
Yes there are bad sexy streamers there are also good sexy streamers, but you can’t even imagine that a sexy girl could also be intelligent, funny, and entertaining. Compared to the dudebro react streamers and souless gameplay streams you normally have to wade through they’re a much higher class of entertainment, at least they’re making their own content and showing some personality.
You might as well tell people they are not good parents if they allow their children the moral ambiguity of playing cowboys and indians and watching pirate of the Caribbeans with that sort of level of logic. Sometimes the biggest caricatures are those accusing other people of being it. Sorry for offending your sensibilities for thinking there should be enough distinction as to keep children away from prostitution. Is clicking on a different url for the same thing really that hard for you?
It’s funny how much your interests align with those of pedos, just because you can’t click on another f-ing link for content and stream hosts that already exist for porn.
You, meanwhile, will be forever completely immune to it, it seems. Thank fucking christ there were people with fucking brains and who are actually virtuous instead of just virtue signalling to get the decision pulled back.
These comments are wild and mostly sexist as fuck.
If you have kids and you give them complete unfettered access to the web I’m sure they have seen more than a boob. If that bothers you perhaps try being a parent. Maybe getting involved with your child’s online activity. Maybe don’t use the Internet as a fucking babysitter.
Hell if you want to use the internet as a babysitter all you have to do is install one of the many commercially available parental control blockers. Obviously it would be better to actually be engaged in a child’s life, but if that’s not an option for you then there is software that can help.
I have absolutely no idea how effective it is of course but I’m sure there are reviews online.
I absolutely agree. I’m a parent and I’ll never install a content filter. Ever.
I prefer to operate on trust. My kids tell me what they want to look at, I agree to it, then I unlock the computer to they can access it. If they access anything else, they lose that privilege until I’m confident they’ve learned their lesson and we try again. Rinse and repeat.
Trust is earned, and I hope by the time they’re old enough to be interested in boobs, they’ll value that trust. That worked reasonably well for me.
With a content filter, you’re immediately telling the child you don’t trust them, so they’re going to circumvent it, or just use their friend’s computer. I’d much rather they look at porn on my computer than their friend’s, because I can find out about it if it’s on my computer, whereas I can’t if it’s at a friend’s house. And if they’re interested in porn, that probably means they’re interested in sex, which means we need to discuss it to build that trust before they go out and have unprotected sex. If they’re watching overly violent stuff or whatever, they’re probably talking about that kind of thing with friends and I may need to be careful about who I let them spend time with (or notify the other kids’ parents). And so on.
Content filters hide the problem, I’d much rather confront it head on.
There’s also Internet allow only firewalls specially designed for parents who want to implement some control, which isn’t enough when content on platforms decide to saturate their content with that you don’t want to expose your children to. Then, it just becomes an exponential game of having to keep up and adjust each platform’s individual controls when they could have simply kept their adult content elsewhere and have it be easily accessible to any adult who wants to see it.
That’s a good point, but for any media. The problem is identifying something a child can watch and letting them watch it and because of a spur of the moment oversight find them watching something they shouldn’t be because they are not mature enough yet, and the same but having it devolve to extremes. It’s just not that difficult to set up a different domain/service name for it and making it easier for parents.
No, my point is specifically for twitch and other streaming platforms.
If you let your kid on twitch, and you arent locking them in to a pre vetted list of known safe channels, youre letting them expose themselves to far far worse shit than porn.
In the same way that if you let your kid watch netflix or HBO, you dont open the streaming app, hand them the remote, and walk off. You pick the channels or movies they can choose from.
Other media is typically pre crunched into known safety levels. Twitch is a way to watch things, not a thing you watch.
I consider the risk on those platforms much less, and if they begun hosting hardcore porn I would consider only other platforms. Netflix and HBO implement parental controls and involve fixed runtime content, whereas Twitch involves real-time streams and widely differing types of moderation where streamers may be involved in safe and non-safe content, and it lacks the ease of the parental controls of the services you’ve mentioned.
Why do you consider forcing all that micromanagement to parents easier than just moving porn to another domain or under another brand?
Fortunately for most parents, most governments disagree. They realize it’s a society problem. But I really hope that they eventually catch up with this type of bullshit in the Internet industry. I know that Steam and other services have begun to get flak for it, specially in countries like Germany.
Click. On. Another. Fucking. Link/Brand. It’s not that hard.
If you diss and fail to understand why there is government regulation surrounding it all because you dealing with adult only websites is too difficult for you, it’s less a case of shouldn’t and more of a case of mustn’t for you, bud.
The same sort of legislation that the GDPR applies penalties with for not giving users controls over their ads could be adopted and applied to create a standardized form of parental controls of sites over the Internet, but until that happens, people can benefit from keeping explicit adult porn websites and services separate from the rest of their offering and forcing the rest of their offering to implement easy to implement parental controls if necessary.
I did, I just avoided your disingenuous attempt at controlling the narrative by fishing for particular answers and applied it universally. You can answer it yourself from there, big boy.
Pretty sure twitch is supposed to only be for all 16 plus anyway right I’m sure that’s somewhere in their terms of service that you can’t have an account of your underage.
That is what has always boggled my mind about all this softcore stuff, like why are you on twitch with your dick out anyway? If you want to jerk off why not just do it properly lol
People listen to music without dancing, it’s the same thing - it activates pleasurable parts of your brain which trigger various biochemical responces. I normally work with video essays on in the background but when things get complex and stressful I switch to hot people dancing or similar, trying to juggle a dozen variables and get all the code loops right can be mentally taxing so when my brain in churning over my options it can be good to have a nice juicy butt to rest my eyes on, watch sway and pop and grind… It’s not going to interrupt my train of thought but it holds it.
Also something that no one seems to consider possible but there are some really interesting and funny women that enjoy showing off their body, the music is often great and the atmosphere fun and light hearted - the notion that because it’s sexy it can only be low tier, base and worthless is just puritan nonsense, it’s good content.
And no you don’t have to jerk off the second you see a sexy butt, I think that way of thinking might be more puritan baggage. You can just feel good about seeing sexy bodies gyrate.
I think a large part of it is the parasocial aspect. People get to know streamers (or at least, the streamer’s persona) and form attachments to them over time. The same way someone wants to see how their favorite character’s arc plays out in a show, people want to watch streamers because they feel a personal connection to them.
Even though that connection is almost certainly one-sided, (except maybe for smaller streamers who actually interact with all of their viewers on a regular basis,) it doesn’t stop the viewers from forming those emotional connections. And that somehow makes them more “real” than some random piece of ass on pornhub.
I think a lot of it stems from loneliness, and wanting a personal connection. Pornhub is great for porn, but it’s undeniably commercialized porn. Lots of people will likely end up viewing nude twitch streams the same way they’d view nudes from a significant other. Even if the quality isn’t as good as pornhub, it may be considered more desirable simply because the viewers feel like they know the person.
This has never been correct, it isn’t an acronym, it’s a prefix. Metagaming is the art of learning how players typically play a game and has been a concept for a long time. The etymology is simple, the greek “Meta-” meaning beyond and “metagame” referring to the way people play a game developing alongside a game. Look at dota 2, the metagame shifts in large ways when the map does not relatively frequently. When we talk about metagaming in card games, it’s in reference to which cards see the most play regardless of their impact on the game.
I’m troubled by the term “artistic”. Who on earth is deciding what is and isn’t art?
Seems like an ethical quagmire that’s not really worth their time to be wading into, but they seem to be doing so. Perhaps they haven’t thought all the implications through.
I do not understand why they don’t straight up just make a 18 plus tab and be done with it. Why do they seem to have this moral objection to how they make money? After all I am damn sure the shareholders won’t care.
Hmm… I think what determines nudity to be artistic instead of porn is the presence of urns. Yes, if there’s an urn you can immediately tell it’s intended artistically.
Isn’t the main issue not so much what they will show, but what gets monetized or not? There is always going to be a disconnect with this stuff because twitch wants the content that goes viral to be advertiser friendly.
No, retro is for those old school upskirts. You know the ones; where this curly haired blond girl is all “eeek!” on a really small stool and the camera is looking right up the skirt.
Oh the irony, up until now it was basically a bannable offense to be caught topless on stream even if you were a dude, now they’re allowing borderline camwhoring (on a website full of children mind you). Really, the only moral or ethics these companies believe in is money.
I’m fine with that, provided they lock it behind a separate paid tier payable only via credit card. That’s the best age gate imo because you have to be 18+ to get a credit card and parents should be tracking their statements anyway.
What is there to comprehend? Linkerbaan said they want to watch Twitch but without feeling awkward seeing a bunch of titty girls on their living room TV. Dkarma’s solution is to advise them to stop watching Twitch. It’s not my advice, but the A to B logic is sound.
It works fine for me, but I mostly watch one streamer who only streams on Twitch. My ad blocker blocks their stupid ads on stuff I periodically check out that I’m not subbed to (e.g. MP events hosted by someone else), so it’s generally a good experience.
However, the front page is absolute cancer, and it’s why I don’t watch many other streams. I just want my steamer and related content, and a few random favorited streamers from other games I very occasionally watch. I feel a little bad about the ad blocker, but that’s because there’s no in-between AFAIK where I can sub to 1-2 channels and still get no ads on the very rare occasions I’ll watch something else (less than once/month).
He mostly plays Europa Universalis IV and is incredibly creative and entertaining with his runs. He is also the reigning champ for the Paradox tournaments (undefeated), yet he is still very humble about it. I’m in the US, so I mostly watch his VODs, but I’ll occasionally join live if he’s doing a charity event or something.
I’ll occasionally watch BudgetMonk (another EU4 streamer), or watch some MtG or Eternal (haven’t watched either for a couple years). But 99% of the it’s FlorryWorry or a live event w/ him on another channel (Paradox tournaments are on YouTube, so it’s infrequent).
From what I understand, this change will disallow any stream with these tags showing up on the front page. Though, I believe this will still be at the top of the “just chatting” category, so really it’s the same problem.
So basically, dress like a prohibition era stripper and call it art? I’m really not comfortable about so many gaming companies not giving a shit about nudity, and I rate it on the same level as them not giving a shit about fostering and creating gambling addictions.
Steam has been at the forefront of this degradation of divides … Is it really so hard to establish XXX subsidiaries separately for this type of content? I have no problem with services like OnlyFans even though I don’t use them.
If it was a game that encouraged going Columbine shooter, no, I’d rate it even worse. But because they are fictional universes, either they just involve the unequivocal bad guys or they are on an arc that has the undertone of exploring the morality of war, the shooting, stabbing, and tearing apart I can dismiss, because while there is a danger to desensitizing the reaction of the visuals of said violence, it does not desensitize the moral qualms people should have about committing those acts.
Sex is to sell sex, and should be kept in adult only stores just like it is in real life. There’s no problem with those sex stores existing, there is a problem in dismissing that underage exposure to porn and hardcore porn to the point where using ai fakes in school is becoming a problem.
It’s much easier to supervise if you don’t have to limit individually by each site’s implementation of child control mechanics and can make some gross assumptions about worst case exposure and how bad it can get if they accidentally click the wrong link due to momentary inattentiveness. The adult version is all the work that the admins and moderators due to keep lemmy free from gore/sexually explicit/even worse bullshit spam in NSFW, why suddenly ignore it for some categories of porn, and potentially directed at children no less?
We can end this discussion and just accept that Twitch should begin to identify itself as an adult only streaming platform, if you want. I don’t know if that’s fair to streamers who struggle to make family friend NSFW content, but the access to porn they can already find on services that explicitly identify themselves as adult only seems to be important enough for people.
Not really, just someone who reads the news in Europe and reads the headlines about revenge porn, ai fakes in school, and hormonal headbutting, pissing of teachers, and disrespect of the education system and caretakers only there to benefit them at even younger, more immature ages with far more disdain. If you want to go pedo on children, it’s on you, but it’s not hard to establish a distinction for adult only stores beyond a really useless age check and just enjoying it yourself without exposing children to it. Why are you so interested in rushing children into (false notions of) sexual (in)maturity (as is often the case when rushed) when that’s something that takes time for a reason?
That should be up to the parents, not you, and they shouldn’t have to wonder if a platform composed mainly of children has now decided to host adult content and their own specific forms of child controls. Clicking on another link for adult content is not that hard.
Literally having to argue why streamers drawing porn for money and exposure to sexuality becoming a circlejerk to personality cults is bad, incredible…
That ship sailed 30 years ago with the invention of the Internet, but anyways parents are perfectly capable of blocking twitch or supervising their children’s media consumption. The rest of the adult world should not have to cater to entitled and incompetent puritanical parents
Add comment