The NSFW (18+ Only!!!) Thread-Nudity, Porn and ALL

Started by Jay, December 06, 2010, 11:03:46 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Jay

#30
But another thought....Why not even allow full direct display of any NSFW images within a thread as I originally did....if the thread is clearly labeled NSFW.  Why cant some nip be shown if the thread is clearly labeled NSFW.  If you clicked into this thread before the edits, and were shocked to see male and female genitalia directly linked in here, whose fault is it?  I do believe you were fully warned...

If you see a thread titled NSFW....you should expect to get NSFW content.  So in other words, I think threads clearly labeled NSFW should be free to have NSFW(nipple and genitalia) content directly posted.  So I change my stance in my suggestions on that, but I will leave my edits as they stand for now to allow for some proper discussion.

explicit is a different thing altogether.....I think that is best hyperlinked.

Again...just my  ||2cents||

ETA: And I am not saying I want this place to turn into a porn factory...If I want porn, it is easy to find.  But just saying...NSFW content should be hyperlinked or whatever without any definition as to what is NSFW content is kinda flaky imo.  I am done for the night.....

I am me, if you dont like it, tough luck!

JadedPulse

Courage doesn't always roar. Sometimes courage is that quiet voice at the end of the day saying I will try again tomorrow.

JudoChop

I agree, while I wouldn't want to see a full blown porn thread as I think it could alienate some people (that wouldn't want to be associated with a forum that has such content) if a thread is clearly labelled then it is up to the user to decide. Basicly nips and minge  ||thumbs||  ||beerchug||
Abdullah: You got me wrong, I'm not the Eel, I'm the one trying to prove to you that Eels are not Atheists.

Jay

Yes....And lets really look at the three pics I posted here that I claimed are NSFW in my opinion.  Were they offensive and disgusting???  I dont think so.  And if anyone thinks they were I think they need to re-examine themselves.  I posted a pic of naked woman's body  and a pic of a naked man and a naked woman standing next to each other...that Amy Whinehouse pic could be deemed offensive but that has nothing to do with the nipple, she can be offensive fully clothed :P

Were they pornography?  I dont even think so.  Again, they were nude pictures.  Representations of the most beautiful thing on earth....the human form.  And can anyone here really say they have never seen a nudity pic? (well...maybe Mooby, but he is gonna be a doctor...I kid Mooby, I kid...heehee)

If a picture of a naked human form is offensive and not appropriate to be posted directly in a thread on this forum that is CLEARLY marked NSFW...than maybe the picture of the Hand of God should be deemed nsfw...and that would be a crime.  It is an art form.  Just like Pictures of a human body naked is an art form.  The only difference is the medium of the art.  I may choose to re-examine this in more detail later...but I ask....Are these pictures NSFW?







I am me, if you dont like it, tough luck!

Jay

#34
From an evolutionary perspecitve...

QuoteHumans are probably most closely related to two chimpanzee species: Common Chimpanzee and Bonobo
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human

From the same article

QuoteA reconstruction of Australopithecus afarensis, a human ancestor that had developed bipedalism, but which lacked the large brain of modern humans
see below.



Does this creature require clothing to be allowed to be posted directly under this thread???

Or how about pictures of bonobos??








Are we really going to require little figleafs placed on these pictures?  How about little figleafs on the works of art I posted.

If you didnt know, it has been tried before!!!


QuoteFrom about 1530, the developing reaction to Renaissance freedoms and excesses that led to the Council of Trent also led to a number of artworks, especially in churches or public places, being altered to reduce the amount of nudity on display.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fig_leaf


The Expulsion from the Garden of Eden, by Masaccio, before and after restoration. It was painted in 1425, covered up in 1680, and restored in 1980.

And I have one word for what the so called 'fig leaf campaign' was......CENSORSHIP!!!!!
I am me, if you dont like it, tough luck!

FGOH

I'm not signing anything without consulting my lawyer.

Jay

I am me, if you dont like it, tough luck!

Tish

It's worthwhile noting that although you can label your thread as NSFW so people can choose not to proceed, if someone is reviewing a posting history, pics will be shown without any warning.  Same for linking to a NSFW thread from another thread.

Any ideas on what changes could be made to the guidelines?   ||grin||
"Whatever words we utter should be chosen with care for people will hear them and be influenced by them for good or ill."
Buddha

Jay

Quote from: Tish on December 08, 2010, 06:39:30 PM
It's worthwhile noting that although you can label your thread as NSFW so people can choose not to proceed, if someone is reviewing a posting history, pics will be shown without any warning.  Same for linking to a NSFW thread from another thread.

Any ideas on what the guidelines changes could be made to the guidelines?   ||grin||

Does the Thread title not show up in the search...I just did a test, and the thread title showed up for me!  Isnt a clear label of NSFW on the title of the thread not denote NSFW!

I have just cross posted several posts from here.  I clearly(I think I did) stated it was from my NSFW thread.  If you link to a NSFW thread....then yes, you should state that the link is to a NSFW thread.  If I didnt, let me know and I will recitfy it.

Additionally, it should also be noted that I even removed the direct posting of the picture in the threads I posted parts of this thread into other threads...most specifically the QM corner thread.  and stated what the hyperlinks are.

This shouldnt be rocket science......If a thread is labeled NSFW, NSFW content should be allowed to be posted into it....directly.

If you link it somewhere else...state that it is NSFW.

If you are doing a search, the thread title displays within the search....as it already does!!!!!!!
I am me, if you dont like it, tough luck!

Yog

So end result of the thread is as it was before? If you want to post c**k & p***y pics make sure to link them away and label them NSFW, ya?

JustMyron

While we work on NSFW guidelines, I'd like to address the NSFW/PNSFW distinction.

As I understand it, the point of the NSFW rule is to prevent people from getting in trouble. Not censorship, as we're fine with people viewing NSFW images if they choose to do so - it's a courtesy measure to other members who may either not wish to view those sorts of images (for example, I have had some religious friends who considered masturbation a sin, and ogling women in bikinis basically the same (and also rather problematic if they were both masturbation-free and spouse-free, and so have no outlet for their sex drive), and I'm quite sure they wouldn't come to anyplace where they would happen upon such images, unless they could be reasonably sure they'd get a warning and be able to avoid looking at them.

Do I think people like my friends would come here? Nah, too many pics of scantily clad women, they'd feel all uncomfortable. But I think that if possible, people should be given the choice to avoid looking at pics and videos of a sexual nature on IGI, and avoid the situation where their boss or their grandmother or someone looks over their shoulder and they're embarrassed. NSFW is a courtesy, and I think if you're debating whether to label something NSFW or PNSFW or not at all, call it NSFW.

As for sexually suggestive commercials or prime-time tv, I wouldn't view those at work either, because while I think they're OK, some of my co-workers probably wouldn't. Similarly, standards concerning how much skin is acceptable vary widely among members of this forum. One way we can resolve the problems this causes is to argue about what's appropriate until whoever doesn't agree with the majority gets fed up or disgusted and leaves. Another way is for those whose comfort level with hot pics is fairly high to understand that this is not the case for everyone, and label/link as necessary so that those who wish to avoid all PNSFW content can do so.

Basically, aside from protecting people from nosey co-workers, NSFW lets people with differing sensibilities and standards coexist peacefully. Far from censorship, I think this just allows people to choose whether to view various things they might find objectionable. Maybe like a fig leaf you can take off if you want to, or leave on, as you prefer. And I see nothing wrong with giving people that option.

Jay

Quote from: Yog on December 09, 2010, 04:24:46 AM
So end result of the thread is as it was before? If you want to post c**k & p***y pics make sure to link them away and label them NSFW, ya?

That is not what I said at all.  I simply pulled down my posts that were directly linked to allow discussion on the subject without those that do not wish to view them to be able to participate in the discussion...like JM below...I feel this discussion needs to be had, since obviously there are soooooo many differing opinions on the subject.

Quote from: JustMyron on December 09, 2010, 04:43:23 AM
While we work on NSFW guidelines, I'd like to address the NSFW/PNSFW distinction.
I am glad a discussion is going on....and I will freely share my opinions as I think I have done so several times, in this thread and in others.

QuoteAs I understand it, the point of the NSFW rule is to prevent people from getting in trouble. Not censorship, as we're fine with people viewing NSFW images if they choose to do so - it's a courtesy measure to other members who may either not wish to view those sorts of images (for example, I have had some religious friends who considered masturbation a sin, and ogling women in bikinis basically the same (and also rather problematic if they were both masturbation-free and spouse-free, and so have no outlet for their sex drive), and I'm quite sure they wouldn't come to anyplace where they would happen upon such images, unless they could be reasonably sure they'd get a warning and be able to avoid looking at them.
I have no problem with labeling a thread NSFW.  I think this thread was CLEARLY labeled  and anyone who choose to do clink into here was amply warned.  I question the motives of anyone who came in here and did NOT expect to see nudity.  If you clicked in here at work, at home with kids around, in an internet cafe with people sitting around you, or in a library....I ask one question....why?????

Quote
Do I think people like my friends would come here? Nah, too many pics of scantily clad women, they'd feel all uncomfortable. But I think that if possible, people should be given the choice to avoid looking at pics and videos of a sexual nature on IGI, and avoid the situation where their boss or their grandmother or someone looks over their shoulder and they're embarrassed. NSFW is a courtesy, and I think if you're debating whether to label something NSFW or PNSFW or not at all, call it NSFW.

Again, I have no problem with labeling a thread NSFW.  I think that provides ample warning.  And as far as scantily clad pictures being in other threads...well, we are a community.  If I was repeatedly posting pictures of a scantily clad nature in a thread about beliefs in God...I would expect to hear it from the community...as a whole.  I would expect to hear that my repeated posts in a thread where they did not belong were not appreciated...However I do not think they are technically NSFW.  Again, I have no problem with the labeling of threads as NSFW which maybe borderline...but to state that a woman in a bikini is NSFW content to me is over-reaching, especially on a site such as this that discusses adult content in nearly every post in every sub section...

Quote
As for sexually suggestive commercials or prime-time tv, I wouldn't view those at work either, because while I think they're OK, some of my co-workers probably wouldn't. Similarly, standards concerning how much skin is acceptable vary widely among members of this forum. One way we can resolve the problems this causes is to argue about what's appropriate until whoever doesn't agree with the majority gets fed up or disgusted and leaves. Another way is for those whose comfort level with hot pics is fairly high to understand that this is not the case for everyone, and label/link as necessary so that those who wish to avoid all PNSFW content can do so.
Again....see my response just above this.  I think it is basically answered there.

Quote

Basically, aside from protecting people from nosey co-workers, NSFW lets people with differing sensibilities and standards coexist peacefully. Far from censorship, I think this just allows people to choose whether to view various things they might find objectionable. Maybe like a fig leaf you can take off if you want to, or leave on, as you prefer. And I see nothing wrong with giving people that option.
If the fig leaf is a label on the thread title, I have no problem with that.  However, asking for another level of restriction...such as hyperlinking a picture in a thread already labled NSFW IMO is silly and overly restrictive...and is censorship.  Again, if you click on a link that is labeled NSFW...expect NSFW content.  If you cant handle the possibility that you may see a picture of a nipple slip, or an artistic representation of the naked human form...why are you clicking on the thread to begin with...

Just my  ||2cents||
I am me, if you dont like it, tough luck!

Jay

Quote from: jay799 on December 11, 2010, 02:20:16 AM
Quote from: JustMyron on December 11, 2010, 02:09:39 AM
Jay, you think people who don't want to see nudity are exhibiting an attitude towards the human form that is disgusting and sad.
I did not say that. I was referring to that specific image!!!  One image!!!!! Did you look at it?  It is a woman pregnant and a man holding her belly....covering all the *naughty* bits.

It is a thing of beauty...and IMO should be able to be a billboard on a highway!!!!!

I will think on the rest of what you said before posting further.

For those wondering...the pic I am referring to is this one.

 
which I hyperlinked in the other discussion we were having, however I link it here directly under the NSFW title....Where it can be shown in all its glory!!!

And JM, I ask you to find anywhere where I stated what you said I think!  I don't put words in your mouth, I would appreciate it if you didn't put words in mine!  And I will kindly ask for a retraction, or at least make it clear that it is YOUR opinion of what I think!

So I ask...is the picture I posted worse than the following BILLBOARDS which are fully on display to anyone that happens to walk by them!!!!















I am me, if you dont like it, tough luck!

JustMyron

Quote from: jay799 on December 11, 2010, 02:20:16 AM
Quote from: JustMyron on December 11, 2010, 02:09:39 AM
Jay, you think people who don't want to see nudity are exhibiting an attitude towards the human form that is disgusting and sad.
I did not say that. I was referring to that specific image!!!  One image!!!!! Did you look at it?  It is a woman pregnant and a man holding her belly....covering all the *naughty* bits.

It is a thing of beauty...and IMO should be able to be a billboard on a highway!!!!!

I will think on the rest of what you said before posting further.

OOPS. I glanced at it. Saw man + woman with man holding roundish shape that looked like giant breast. My bad, saw what I expected to see, not what was there. I retract, as I'd change the tone of what I said in light of this.

JadedPulse

Courage doesn't always roar. Sometimes courage is that quiet voice at the end of the day saying I will try again tomorrow.

JustMyron


Jezzebelle

im disappointed in the lack of marky mark in your smexy billboards
It's so damn easy to say that life's so hard

Jay

Quote from: JustMyron on December 11, 2010, 03:44:30 AM
Quote from: jay799 on December 11, 2010, 02:20:16 AM
Quote from: JustMyron on December 11, 2010, 02:09:39 AM
Jay, you think people who don't want to see nudity are exhibiting an attitude towards the human form that is disgusting and sad.
I did not say that. I was referring to that specific image!!!  One image!!!!! Did you look at it?  It is a woman pregnant and a man holding her belly....covering all the *naughty* bits.

It is a thing of beauty...and IMO should be able to be a billboard on a highway!!!!!

I will think on the rest of what you said before posting further.

OOPS. I glanced at it. Saw man + woman with man holding roundish shape that looked like giant breast. My bad, saw what I expected to see, not what was there. I retract, as I'd change the tone of what I said in light of this.
Thank you.  I appreciate that. You may not see the picture as beautiful as I do(I dont know if you do or not), however I don't see how anyone could rationally see that image as immoral or disgusting.  Yes....I wouldn't post it in a thread about if Jesus was a real man, but if there was a discussion on child birth here, I would not see it as inappropriate for me to post that image in the thread....directly.

And my point on the billboards stands....these billboards can be found almost anywhere.  On the side of 50 foot buildings.  On the side of highways.  In downtown cities.  In plenty of SFW magazines as advertisements.  If I had a copy of IDK...details magazine sitting in my office open to one of these pictures as an advertisement...would I be fired....no.  Now if I was sitting there leering at it all day and not getting my job done, well yes I would expect to be pulled into HR. I wouldn't even be fired for bringing in a copy of say Maxim magazine into the office.  Now again, if I was leering at them...or pulling my co-workers over and making suggestive comments about the pictures...well, something would be said in either of those cases.  But if I was sitting in our lunch room looking at Maxim magazine, I would not be fired.  If I was sitting on an airplane looking at a Maxim magazine the flight attendant would not ask me to close the magazine.

However, again, I have no problem labeling a thread as NSFW out of courtesy to other members...but none of those advertisements is technically NSFW.  maybe not appropriate for work.  You probably wouldn't want them taped to your office wall like you live in a dorm room.  And you probably wouldn't want to be sitting at your computer staring at them all day instead of working...but NSFW??? in my opinion as someone who does this for a living....I say no.  Now, the sfw porn posted in this thread...imo...I say NSFW.  HR would have to make the final call, but I think they would see it my way.  There is an implied act.  You know what you are supposed to be seeing, whether you can 'physically' see it or not.

Art?  Well that is where the discussion can get muddled but really shouldn't here...on a forum that discusses other adult material.  What is art to me is not necessarily art to you, however, the nude form has been a major subject in art for millennia.  What has changed over the years???  Simply the medium in which the nude form has been captured, whether that be marble, bronze, oil and canvas, or photography.    However, if I wanted to have an art appreciation thread on this forum, while I may feel it is prudent out of courtesy to label the thread as NSFW, I think that thread should be allowed and the art forms posted should be able to be directly posted within the thread.  Yes, directly posted. You shouldn't have to hide art.  You shouldn't have to relegate it to the back room like it is porn. This discussion has been dragged through the mud enough....but dont drag (and I am saying this to everyone) millennia of art down with it. 
I am me, if you dont like it, tough luck!

Ratman

There's no real relationship between what a person believes and what their religion ostensibly teaches them to believe.

FGOH

Quote from: jay799 on December 11, 2010, 04:28:47 AM


Art?  Well that is where the discussion can get muddled but really shouldn't here...on a forum that discusses other adult material.  What is art to me is not necessarily art to you, however, the nude form has been a major subject in art for millennia.  What has changed over the years???  Simply the medium in which the nude form has been captured, whether that be marble, bronze, oil and canvas, or photography.    However, if I wanted to have an art appreciation thread on this forum, while I may feel it is prudent out of courtesy to label the thread as NSFW, I think that thread should be allowed and the art forms posted should be able to be directly posted within the thread.  Yes, directly posted. You shouldn't have to hide art.  You shouldn't have to relegate it to the back room like it is porn. This discussion has been dragged through the mud enough....but dont drag (and I am saying this to everyone) millennia of art down with it.

Hear hear.
I'm not signing anything without consulting my lawyer.

Mrs Pumpkin

So, can I post a bare boobs gif in this thread or do I have to link to it?

JudoChop

Abdullah: You got me wrong, I'm not the Eel, I'm the one trying to prove to you that Eels are not Atheists.

Mrs Pumpkin

#52
Spoiler
[close]

I was just checking ;)

JudoChop

Abdullah: You got me wrong, I'm not the Eel, I'm the one trying to prove to you that Eels are not Atheists.

kevin

please don't push the envelopes, okay? this will only work if everybody stays away from what almost everybody might consider pornography

you have no idea how long and tedious this discussion has been in the mod box
anytime an atheist says that somebody else is wrong, or has some sort of inferior way of looking at the world, its reasonable to ask on what basis they are making that judgement. if they have no answer, you can disregard what they say -- tom terrific

Mrs Pumpkin

I've put it into spoiler tags now, so no one should see it without clicking on it.

However, if people are that offended by NSFW material, especially ones that clearly in the title say 18+, nudity porn and all, they really should just stay away from such threads.

I don't like a lot of the threads, so instead of getting my knickers in a twist, I just don't look at them.

JudoChop

I agree, it's very difficult to be caught offguard with the thread title. Oh well.
Abdullah: You got me wrong, I'm not the Eel, I'm the one trying to prove to you that Eels are not Atheists.

FGOH

I think one of the reasons behind this brouhaha is that if you do a search for a person's posts (for example) it will bring up the posts including the NSFW ones.

I'm not signing anything without consulting my lawyer.

Captain Luke

Yes indeed. Now we have the spoiler tags we can (hopefully) keep everyone happy!

Mrs Pumpkin

Quote from: FGOH on January 13, 2011, 08:52:53 AM
I think one of the reasons behind this brouhaha is that if you do a search for a person's posts (for example) it will bring up the posts including the NSFW ones.



Ahh... that makes sense then...  I don't post anything of value, other than some silly pics, so hopefully no one need search my posts :p