←back to thread

1444 points feross | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
omegaworks ◴[] No.32641601[source]
Kinda weird that author categorized the incest joke "Howard: I lost my virginity to my cousin Jeanie" under LGBTQ censorship. When she mentioned the justification: "China has encouraged straight couples to marry and raise two to three children." it makes some sense, but incestuous relationships are not considered by themselves "LGBTQIA2S+"
replies(8): >>32641641 #>>32641672 #>>32641718 #>>32641736 #>>32641738 #>>32641858 #>>32641925 #>>32647822 #
lmkg ◴[] No.32641925[source]
While the term "LGBTQ+" is highlighted in blue, every instance of it also includes a parenthetical about "or other atypical heterosexual relationships." The labelling is awkward but this seems to me to be there specifically to avoid applying the LGBTQ+ label to incest jokes.

The author was raised in another culture and I'm trying to give them the benefit of the doubt here. There are plenty of cultures (even in the US!) that would lump together queerness and incest and forms of sexual transgression. The fact that the author included the parenthetical means that they are aware of the distinction. But the perspective of the Chinese censors is probably to consider non-normative sex as a single category.

Perhaps the author intended to highlight the negative effects of censorship by emphasizing the largest and most significant effect of that censorship?

replies(1): >>32642038 #
1. omegaworks ◴[] No.32642038[source]
The labeling is awkward, that's what I intended to highlight. "Non-normative relationships" or "non-procreative relationships" would have been a great alternative.

>There are plenty of cultures (even in the US!) that would lump together queerness and incest and forms of sexual transgression.

And it's a not so great thing to do when the goal is safety and acceptance of the queer community.

>The author was raised in another culture and I'm trying to give them the benefit of the doubt here.

I'm not ascribing any kind of malice or ill intent, just trying to highlight a (to some cultures, important!) distinction that was not made.