• Awoo [she/her]
    ·
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    It's a law that's supposed to stop live streams of women in underwear but it has knock-on effects like this where a law preventing women from wearing underwear on live broadcasts affects tele-shopping like this.

    The tweet is intentionally being misleading by presenting the law as intentionally targeting "modelling underwear on shopping livestreams" when it's just an unplanned side-effect.

    • zifnab25 [he/him, any]
      ·
      2 years ago

      My mom likes to mention how, back in the 70s, the FCC wouldn't let women appear on television while showing too much skin. So in order to advertise underwear, women would wear flesh-colored body suits and model the underwear over the top of it.

      These rules were eventually either rolled back or struck down, not sure which. But in retrospect, she often laughs at how silly these ads would look to someone familiar with a modern-day Victoria Secret commercial or even a romantic scene from your average soap opera.

      • Awoo [she/her]
        ·
        edit-2
        2 years ago

        I think the ultimate target of this is softcore sex work livestreams that interact with the audience via premium phonecalls/donations, like you see on some late night tv channels.

        Not really complaining about the side-effect being this. The guys are cute.

        • zifnab25 [he/him, any]
          ·
          2 years ago

          Oh sure. Just thought of another instance of unforeseen consequences making things a bit silly.