Shirrako got banned on YouTube for a RDR2 gameplay video
- Thread starter Lord Protector
- 246 comments
- 15,485 views
- Status
- 2,620
- Lincoln, NE
- huskeR_32
If there is some differentiating characteristic of one video compared to another, and the two videos get treated differently because of that characteristic, that is the exact opposite of a slippery slope.
- 28,470
- Windsor, Ontario, Canada
- Johnnypenso
I've seen that photo a couple of times but I had no idea it was Bey. I always thought it was photoshopped.If you try to censor something off the internet and it actually backfires, making it spread faster that what initially was, streisand effect happens
Like when Beyoncé tried to get this pic off the internet
- 28,470
- Windsor, Ontario, Canada
- Johnnypenso
Not sure if you're being deliberately obtuse or not but I'll take a final stab at this. Again, I'm guessing at what the original poster meant by slippery slope but to me it would mean, paraphrasing, two videos get treated differently because of immaterial differences which are magnified in importance beyond that justified by objective analysis.
- 11,639
- Intercourse, PA
- Carbonox
"If and why". Nope, still seeing a conclusion.
To quote you once more, "Wondering why it’s allowing it to be promoted." I know I may come across as pedantic, but that statement likewise has an implication that you too think the promotion is being done with the admins' blessings, without hearing any of them out.
- 14,436
- Los Angeles, CA
- Lma_robot
- lImaRobotl
No, it really doesn't as that "statement" was a correction to what the user said, not my point a view. That was just stating what the user he quoted meant, as he got it completely wrong.
Maybe you didn't read the whole post and decided to latch on to one thing while ignoring the part that said "He didn't say Jordan is promoting it, but more so wondering why" - you know, the whole first half of that sentence? He being the poster you're responding to. Assuming the poster is actually a He, which I probably shouldn't have done in the first place, but that's besides the point.
- 390
- United States
It makes it passive aggressive is what it does
It’s literally the passive aggressive form of this below
>”lol ur from another country and you have different political opinions from me you’re too dumb to understand english XD”
Also, you didn’t deny it wasn’t ad hominem or try to defend that in any way.
Has anyone who is condemning this category of humor and the things its supporters say in the comments considered that these attitudes were not developed in a vacuum? Or taken care to remember that teenagers are naturally inclined to be edgy and many older members would be lying if they said they never acted edgy as a teenager?
In case it needs to be said, the fact that the (overtly) implied messages of these videos are reprehensible is the point. That's the joke. Maybe not every single person in the comments is joking, but you'll never parse that out without talking to them. Although the ones who are joking are liable to keep leading you on anyway, at least if you approach them over the internet.
Then, understand that this is catharsis for those who tire of the rhetoric disseminated today by or on the behalf of the identity groups being targeted. That's really what it's about. This isn't spontaneous, nor is it a reaction to women's rights, Mexicans, or Chinese people all by themselves.
The audience for this content revels in it because it flies in the face of the dominant narrative across all forms of media, regardless of the audience's actual honest beliefs or the noble intentions of that dominant narrative. They applaud it simply for existing, and the more pushback it gets, the less funny it has to actually be to attract viewers and praise.
I mean, there's really nothing funny about the video of punching the Chinese man, not because I think it's offensive, but because it's a very mundane clip for a Rockstar game. If not for the fact that it is guaranteed to be declared offensive, there is no joke. Outrage is its oxygen.
In case it needs to be said, the fact that the (overtly) implied messages of these videos are reprehensible is the point. That's the joke. Maybe not every single person in the comments is joking, but you'll never parse that out without talking to them. Although the ones who are joking are liable to keep leading you on anyway, at least if you approach them over the internet.
Then, understand that this is catharsis for those who tire of the rhetoric disseminated today by or on the behalf of the identity groups being targeted. That's really what it's about. This isn't spontaneous, nor is it a reaction to women's rights, Mexicans, or Chinese people all by themselves.
The audience for this content revels in it because it flies in the face of the dominant narrative across all forms of media, regardless of the audience's actual honest beliefs or the noble intentions of that dominant narrative. They applaud it simply for existing, and the more pushback it gets, the less funny it has to actually be to attract viewers and praise.
I mean, there's really nothing funny about the video of punching the Chinese man, not because I think it's offensive, but because it's a very mundane clip for a Rockstar game. If not for the fact that it is guaranteed to be declared offensive, there is no joke. Outrage is its oxygen.
- 40,855
I don't think this is anything beyond a hypothetical at this point, though. If someone did make a video that was just shooting white cops in GTA and titled it and made it part of a series of creative ways to kill white cops and drew attention to it being about killing white cops, I'd assume YouTube would pull them too because overreacting to controversial things due to a handful of complaints from singularly humorless people is how YouTube handles everything; which is also their right to do even if they were hypocritical about it.
As such I'm not really seeing where the slippery slope comes into play, even if the pearl clutching responses the videos are getting are grating in and of themselves.
- 29,982
- a baby, candy, it's like taking.
- TexRex72
I'd imagine @Jordan isn't likely to explicitly state an opinion on the matter, but having the option to take action and thus far not being compelled to do so is itself indicative of an opinion. And, you know, more power to him.
To your mind, rather than the individual for whom you've chosen to speak, just where does this supposed slippery slope come into play with regards to an entity that cannot be compelled to justify any action it chooses to take?
- 2,620
- Lincoln, NE
- huskeR_32
"Slippery slopes" happen when one action or policy ends up having wider or larger consequences than intended, nuance gets thrown out the window, and things that are different end up getting treated the same. One favorite example is, of course, that allowing gay marriage will lead to people marrying their pets. Or in this case, that a ban on videos portraying violence against feminist video game characters will lead to a ban on all violent video game videos, regardless of any differentiating context.
But both the OP and you are clearly stating the opposite - that two videos will be treated differently because one lacks a characteristic the other has.
It seems to me that what you and the OP are actually bothered by is a sense that it's hypocritical to ban this video, but not other similarly violent videos*, and you're responding by throwing out a term that's often used by anti-PC types. It just doesn't apply here, though. Slippery slopes don't exist on well-defined surfaces.
*And as @Tornado just pointed out, this hypocrisy is hypothetical, and likely would turn out to not exist in practice
- 2,188
- Northwest Passage
But the surface is not well-defined, it's slippery.
Like I said before, they masked taking down a video behind violence, rather than just coming out and saying what everybody's already thinking, that it's politics. And they leave up other, more violent videos. Ok, if that's not a slippery slope, then, sorry. But that doesn't take away from my point.
- 922
- Naples
- MarchingSaint
There's literal porn hidden in youtube and people complain about this.
BTW the reaction from medias and those behind it reveal a sudden change in culture and counter culture whereas counter culture being the "edgy joke" against a "feminist activist". I think this whole situation says a lot about modern videogames and their cultural impact, something that deeply changed since gamergate.
- 2,620
- Lincoln, NE
- huskeR_32
I didn't say anything about it being a fallacy at all. I said it doesn't make any sense to apply to a situation while also saying this:
If you change the characteristic in question (remove the feminist NPC), and the action taken changes (it "won't get taken down"), then it's not at all a slippery slope.
--
See above for a quote from you yourself defining it quite clearly.
- 28,470
- Windsor, Ontario, Canada
- Johnnypenso
This started when someone else mentioned a slippery slope. My take on it is just fleshing out what a slippery slope might mean in this context. I don't follow the political drama around social media censorship closely enough to know whether one exists or not although nothing would surprise me. For me, an example of a slippery slope would be banning a video that's entitled "Killing NPC Feminists in a Videogame" and not banning one entitled, "Killing NPC Black Men in a video game" or "Killing NPC Americans in a videogame" or "Killing any NPC subgroup identifiable by immutable characteristics in a videogame". If isolating a feminist subgroup and killing them is bad, isolating any and all subgroups and killing them is bad, in this context. Unless one believe that certain subgroups deserve more protection than another, which would be the slippery slope earlier referred to.
Last edited:
- 2,188
- Northwest Passage
- Status
