-- snip --
Do we really think somebody specifically restricted a lesbian wedding vow video, or is it more likely that some moron set the perimeters on what counts as 'inappropriate' a little too wide?
I'm not agreeing with videos being restricted, but I'm not seeing any links floating around to any hard evidence of what exactly constitutes as 'inappropriate' under this system, just assumptions, so I'm not 'shooting first' when the highly likely explanation is "somebody ****ed up and it's not working as intended...As per usual.
-- snip --
Because SJW's would be the type of people simply looking for things to be mad and angry about, going out of their way to be offended, often causing issues and arguments where there literally are none simply to attain the nourishment found in a false sense of moral superiority.
People who see something 'wrong' and just say "hey, that's racist/homophobic/misogynist/somethingist and that's not cool, so I won't support it", well, we just call them 'people', because you don't need a special abbreviation to describe somebody who's acting like a normal well adjusted individual.
I started typing something about how complex YouTube and especially google are to run, then deleted when I realised I was getting sidetracked. In defence of my IT partner and his colleagues, however, suffice it to say that the people working at that level are almost universally obscenely talented, skilled, and hardworking. **** ups that end users see are almost always the result of poor management and/or poor business decisions being made elsewhere in the chain.
---
This article I shared here earlier contains specific examples of videos that are accessible and restricted using this setting :
http://gizmodo.com/youtubes-restricted-mode-is-hiding-some-lgbt-content-1793382337
Another YouTuber, NeonFiona, posted side-by-side screenshots showing which videos were restricted. Titles including words like ?gay,? ?lesbian,? and ?bisexual? were hidden: [link to twitter post]
In another tweet, NeonFiona pointed out that her other video, ?An Honest Chat About Being Single,? actually discusses sex, whereas her ?bi videos don?t.?
NeonFiona told Gizmodo that her videos focused on ?normalising LGBT+ stuff and especially bisexuality.? She worries that young people who turn to YouTube for information on LGBT issues will miss out:
Kids who want to know about different orientations and definitions and about the history of LGBT people, etc, they can?t access that when their videos are being restricted. Restricting these videos makes it harder for these kids to find information they need and the community that they?ve been missing.
---
There is a discrepancy between content being restricted because it's *actually* not appropriate for younger children, and content that has a word in the title that some people object to. I've clicked through and watched much of the linked content and it checks out from what I can see.
I try not to leap to conclusions, but I also don't disregard the information to hand.
---
I dunno if I count as an SJW per your definition or not then, since I am a pacifist by nature and certainly do not feel "morally superior" to anyone else. Intellectually, yes, as are most people by definition since intelligence is quantifiable in various ways (and someone always has to be "less" for another to be "more" when ranking people). I don't see how morals can be effectively measured and ranked, not like in the way intelligence can be measured. So I don't really understand how one can be morally superior to someone else.