[Livia]

Originally Posted by ukturtle

I wouldn't say I enjoy watching stuff like this, but it does interest me a lot. Nature and the animal kingdom always has, and unfortunately it doesn't all come with a happy ending. The one that somebody posted with the fetus was too much (hence it being deleted). But comparing animals killing each other (to eat, survive and feed their offspring) to rape is ridiculous.

I'm sure that not everyone who watches this stuff does so for anything other reason than the gratuitous, twisted thrill of watching something tear something else apart. Rape happens... we're animals... I don't see the difference really. You see, I'm wondering where we draw the line when it comes to watching stuff online. I mean, wolverines kill for fun, I'm sure I could find some footage of them doing something dispicable to another animal for reasons other than survival... so should that be available for random members of the public with a computer, or not?

[Livia]

Originally Posted by ukturtle

...............If , say, some of these videos were instead in a BBC/Nature documentary, like I'm sure some have been, would the same be said of them then?

I'd like to think that the BBC has some responsibility, and that the stuff they show is relevant and in context, and not just pain and suffering so some people can get their thrill on.

[Z]

I've not watched the video. I also thought that YouTube previewed all video clips before they were publicly available? At least, I'm pretty sure they used to, because there was such a time delay after you'd uploaded one before it became public...

I think that nature videos of a graphic nature are still important to watch. Part of the appeal of watching shark documentaries is seeing their predatory instincts kick in. That's just one example but there are lots of other animals that hold the same appeal. I would have thought that plenty of science based professions have a vested interest in this kind of video - in terms of observation and understanding of animal behaviour. Having read the posts about this video, it's not one that I want to watch, but I do occasionally watch wildlife videos that contain violent fights. There's that one of the crocodile, bison and lion that has millions of views on YouTube that I find really interesting, for example.

[Benjamin]

Originally Posted by Livia

I'm sure that not everyone who watches this stuff does so for anything other reason than the gratuitous, twisted thrill of watching something tear something else apart. Rape happens... we're animals... I don't see the difference really. You see, I'm sondering where we draw the line when it comes to watching stuff online. I mean, wolverines kill for fun, I'm sure I could find some footage of them doing something dispicable to another animal for reasons other than survival... so should that be available for random members of the public with a computer, or not?

I see your point, but I class humans very separately from animals. But to your point about animals killing each other just for the fun, what about when TV documentaries show those clips? Would you classify that as the same, where millions of viewers in one hit are shown it, or is that different from online? I don't get a kick out seeing animals in pain, I have so much respect and fascination with the lives they lead, and yes some people probably do watch this for the fun (I don't disagree with you that is a little distrurbing) but still comparing it to rape just doesn't work for me.

[Benjamin]

Originally Posted by Zee

I've not watched the video. I also thought that YouTube previewed all video clips before they were publicly available? At least, I'm pretty sure they used to, because there was such a time delay after you'd uploaded one before it became public...
.

I always thought that too. But then again with a years worth of footage being uploaded onto Youtube everyday, it's very hard to monitor I suppose.

[Livia]

Originally Posted by ukturtle

I see your point, but I class humans very separately from animals. But to your point about animals killing each other just for the fun, what about when TV documentaries show those clips? Would you classify that as the same, where millions of viewers in one hit are shown it, or is that different from online? I don't get a kick out seeing animals in pain, I have so much respect and fascination with the lives they lead, and yes some people probably do watch this for the fun (I don't disagree with you that is a little distrurbing) but still comparing it to rape just doesn't work for me.

I wasn't implying that you personally get a kick out of it, but I think there are a lot of people who do or this stuff wouldn't be so widely viewed. And yes, Humans are very different to animals. Animals generally don't harm each other for kicks, rape, murder, abuse, ******* each other over for a percentage... I've never known an animal fire a gun or build a bomb, but I realise I'm going off at a tangent there. By comparing it to rape, I was trying to make the point that there is some stuff that is just too disturbing to watch.

I think the difference between watching this stuff on TV as part of a documentary, and watching it online is context. On Youtube I can view just the cruelty, the pain, the terror... on TV I watch it as part of a bigger picture.

[MTVN]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

Yes, I will never forget that video that stayed up for ages of that guy who jumped off a cliff or something and split his face wide open but was still alive

It might even still be there. It was my own fault for watching it though as I knew beforehand what it was just didnt expect it to be so graphic. I dont remember if that had a disclaimer.

I think overly vicious animal vids should have a disclaimer. But its a bit hard to figure when to draw the line. For example a vid of a snake eating a mouse, I dont think thats bad, but other people will. But yes, the wildebeast one posted in here yesterday was bad and should have had one (again my own fault, looked at it after I knew what it was AND it had been deleted )

I do think youtube could add censors though, from what I remember you have to wait about an hour or so for your video to become public after you upload it? I thought they were checking that the content was suitable during that time?

Oh God I saw that video too, I remember hearing about it and the curiosity got the better off me, made me a lot more cautious of those sort of videos since

Originally Posted by Munchkins

Before a video is uploaded the user has to set an age rating?
if the do not follow these guidlines/lie about the rating they could be banned from youtube idk

Yeah I suppose they could do that, I think users can choose to set their videos so that you have to sign in and confirm you're over 18 to see them but then you just have to trust they'll do it, I bet a lot don't because they think they'll miss out on views and stuff

And also like Vicky said it's hard to know really where to draw the line, I guess it can be pretty subjective about how much is too much

[Nedusa]

Originally Posted by Livia

I wasn't implying that you personally get a kick out of it, but I think there are a lot of people who do or this stuff wouldn't be so widely viewed. And yes, Humans are very different to animals. Animals generally don't harm each other for kicks, rape, murder, abuse, ******* each other over for a percentage... I've never known an animal fire a gun or build a bomb, but I realise I'm going off at a tangent there. By comparing it to rape, I was trying to make the point that there is some stuff that is just too disturbing to watch.

I think the difference between watching this stuff on TV as part of a documentary, and watching it online is context. On Youtube I can view just the cruelty, the pain, the terror... on TV I watch it as part of a bigger picture.

Yes , this is a good point ,clips of animal violence on other animals happens everyday it's part of life , we eat animals so we have to kill them as we'll ( albeit humanely in an abbatoir). The distressing scenes in some of the earlier posts in this thread showed just the violence and so this was taken out of context with a longer more detailed programme. So to watch only the violence part suggests this is actually what the YT viewer is seeking.

I think this is where YT reaches it limitations as it shows short video clips of just about anything so it's hard to appreciate the wider context. Bottom line , most normal people do not want to watch these short clips showing just the blood and gore, but I guess there are people out there who do get off on this sort of thing...!!!

[Livia]

Originally Posted by Nedusa

Yes , this is a good point ,clips of animal violence on other animals happens everyday it's part of life , we eat animals so we have to kill them as we'll ( albeit humanely in an abbatoir). The distressing scenes in some of the earlier posts in this thread showed just the violence and so this was taken out of context with a longer more detailed programme. So to watch only the violence part suggests this is actually what the YT viewer is seeking.

I think this is where YT reaches it limitations as it shows short video clips of just about anything so it's hard to appreciate the wider context. Bottom line , most normal people do not want to watch these short clips showing just the blood and gore, but I guess there are people out there who do get off on this sort of thing...!!!

I agree.

I've said this before but I'm going to labour the point... The Internet is like the Wild West: new, in its infancy and lawless. People are suddenly demanding freedoms that just didn't exist even ten years ago. How many parents have no idea what their children (I'm including everyone under the age of majority while their parents are still responsible for their moral wellbeing) are looking at. Every perversion you can think of is catered for on the Internet. There is virtually nothing you can't watch, and if anyone suggests some stuff should be blocked, you're immediately met with an argument about freedom of speech and access of information. We are not "entitled" to watch what we like. You can't go to a cockfight in this country, but you could watch one on the Internet. You can't watch bear-baiting in this country - but you can watch it on the Internet. People are struggling against censorship, but in many cases, censorship is there for a reason.

[lostalex]

There should be no censorpship when it comes to nature video's.

I was talking to my friend about this the other day, about how rape is so common in the animal world, and how zoo's even encourage rape by trying to put a horny male in a small space with a female HOPING that the male will rape the female.

This is the animal kingdom, it's not pretty. But rape and murder is natural. In fact most animal rights group even encourage rape.

[Livia]

Originally Posted by lostalex

There should be no censorpship when it comes to nature video's.

I was talking to my friend about this the other day, about how rape is so common in the animal world, and how zoo's even encourage rape by trying to put a horny male in a small space with a female HOPING that the male will rape the female.

This is the animal kingdom, it's not pretty. But rape and murder is natural. In fact most animal rights group even encourage rape.

There should be no censorship when it comes to nature videos. But in the same way, you should not be able to view just the cruel, terrifying, brutal bits out of context with the rest of the video. To want to view just the harrowing stuff seems pretty abnormal to me.