Feminist parody of Robin Thicke’s ‘Blurred Lines’ re-emerges on YouTube after bannig

[kpete]

#t=91

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/09/04/defined-lines-feminist-parody-of-robin-thickes-blurred-lines-re-emerges-on-youtube-after-banning/

[seabeyond]

1. this is the BEST addressing this issue. it is our young women speaking out. YT shut it down,

though they were willing to keep up the misogynist original that was all about blurring the lines to rape, using women as proprs.

[MADem]

2. Youtube was smart to reconsider and put it back up.

The number of views has almost doubled since the video was pulled from the website on Monday for “sexually inappropriate content”, then allowed back up less than 24 hours later after YouTube admitted it had made a mistake.

It is satire, and it makes a few entirely valid points.

[jakeXT]

3. It's a youtube issue, if you have something that millions click, some flag it as inappropriate

Betty Dodson for example has just a couple of thousand views, but her Biography "Her Life of Sex & Art" shows full nudity, female masturbation without even age restriction.

http://www.youtube.com/user/carlincherrybomb/videos

[AtheistCrusader]

4. We live by algorithm now.

YT doesn't hire enough people to manage all that content. FB either. None of them do.

You can knock something off just like google-bombing something to the top of the search results.

[leftyohiolib]

5. nhy

[WCLinolVir]

6. Problem solved.

[joeglow3]

7. funny

[AtheistCrusader]

8. I'm not really sure what my takeaway is here.

Ok, the 'don't grab me' thing is clear enough, but I don't touch people without their consent anyway, so that's background noise to me, and probably meant for another audience.

But the rest of it.. I'm confused. What if I find this video just as attractive as the current social norm media content in which females are routinely objectified? Normally a role reversal illustrates a principle, because the scenario fails, spectacularly, when the roles are reversed. In this case, it just looks like fair play to me. The men are engaged and dancing, and making eye contact, seem to be 'into it'. Maybe it's more shocking to people who are upset at the sight of guys in underwear or something?

This seems more like leveling the playing field, rather than NOT engaging in objectifying people. (Maybe that's ok/fine?)

[seabeyond]

9. i do not see that it was meant, nor has a "shock" value. not all things need shock to be

a lesson and something to think about.

maybe it is merely saying something that others ought to think about.

[AtheistCrusader]

10. Fair enough.

It was very well done. Fun too. Hope it gets momentum so it's seen by the intended audience.

[seabeyond]

11. "very well done. Fun too." i thought so, too. catchy tune. nt

[AtheistCrusader]

14. I'm going to be humming it all day.

[onehandle]

12. Google (The NSA's best friend) loves to control what we see and do on the Internet. nt

[MattBaggins]

17. Someone miffed that Steve Jobs

never made an internet just for the cool and hip?

[lillypaddle]

13. This is GREAT!

Loved it.

[grahamhgreen]

15. Do they wear makeup, high heels and dress sexy to attract men or women?

[seabeyond]

16. wht does that have to do with degrading women? if a woman dresses attractively, that warrants

degradation? really? she has earned the squirt of semen on the face?

[blackspade]

18. Great parody.

I'm not sure why it would have been banned.
I checked out Thicke's original for comparison.
All I can say is the the hashtag should be #asshole.