Except advertisers can’t make a choice to advertise on her channel through YouTube so this comparison misses the point.

It seems to me Youtube could solve the problem by providing advertisers fine-grained controls.

I remember an earlier discussion on HN about Youtube demonetizing other content - videos about guns, I think. My thought then and now is that there are many advertisers on Youtube who would like their ad to run on "ForgottenWeapons shoots a pre-WWII anti-tank rifle" and many (probably not with a lot of overlap) who would like to advertise on "SexyCyborg builds a sexy mannequin". Large, conservative brands probably wouldn't, but Youtube is leaving money on the table if it caters exclusively to those.

>Ok, thats fine if she wants to do sexual content.

You are sexually attracted to dressmakers dummies made out of 4mm cardboard?

A lot of people think that looking at flickering colorful lights on a planar surface can be sexually arousing. There are so many fetishes... ;)

However I do think that western culture is a bit on the prude side and has a strange double standard regarding nude or partially nude bodies depending on gender or its features. Sexualizing one type, while normalizing another.

Not Western culture. Anglophone culture. Vast swathes of European cultures are quite happy with nudity; I remember nude sunbathing in Amsterdam in the summer being very common and not at all sexual. Denmark recently found fame for Dillermand, literally translating as "willy man", an animated children's show about a man with a prehensile stripey penis (1). He gets into trouble using it inappropriately -- for example by putting petrol on a barbecue with it. Owch.

I'd much rather children grow up knowing what the other gender looks like naked with that knowledge being delivered in some environment other than PornHub. It's insane -- I literally only knew about the female form from reading medical textbooks as a child and had never seen a naked woman until I was 19. Many women have no idea what their own anatomy is, because cultures have such a taboo about it. Yet on American cultural exports, love, breasts or bodies get an 18+ rating and explosions, shooting and murder get a prime-time action TV slot. I don't get it.

Everyone's naked under their clothes.

(1): https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jan/06/john-dillerman...

The point here, is what the advertisers want to spend their money on.

Use whatever euphemism or descriptive word you want. The point here, is that advertisers do not want to be associated with whatever it is you want you call it.

Yes, and for this, the content need to be triaged. Here the content is rated as containing depiction/drawings of nudity, and this is just a fact, advertisers are then free to buy or not.

Seems like he is not the only one: https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/in-excess/201311/lov...

You'll have to ask the advertisers what they think on that.

Call it whatever you want, or use whatever euphemism. But at the end of the day, whatever word you use, the advertisers likely don't want to be associated with it.

Depends on what is painted on the cardboard.