Nip nips

by **mrswdk** on Sat Jun 13, 2015 6:12 am

A while ago I posted a thread about a Japanese charity breast fondling event, and it got removed because one or two of the photos contained glimpses of nipple.

I request that I be able to repost the aforementioned thread and that the moderation team reconsider the sexist double standards that led to the thread being censored in the first place (unless they have already.

by **mrswdk** on Sat Jun 13, 2015 8:25 am

Who voted no and why?

by **Dukasaur** on Sat Jun 13, 2015 10:15 am

mrswdk wrote:Who voted no and why?

I did, for one.

I enjoy a pretty nipple as much as the next guy, but I don't want CC to go down that path. Unfortunately, some people have no self-restraint, and as the old adage goes, "Give them an inch and they'll take a mile." Allow some gentle soft porn, and some people will make it their business to keep pushing the envelope farther and farther, until at some point we'll be assailed by pictures of golden showers and AoG having sex with a pig.

It's best to just keep the door closed and leave Pandora's Box to her gynecologist and our imaginations.

by **mrswdk** on Sat Jun 13, 2015 10:20 am

So should pictures containing male nipples also be banned for that same reason?

by **Metsfanmax** on Sat Jun 13, 2015 10:21 am

mrswdk wrote:So should pictures containing male nipples also be banned for that same reason?

A simple reading of the rules should clarify this point.

Community Guidelines wrote:
Any images of pornographic activity or nudity - nipples, areola, genitals, anuses etc - whether intended as artistic, erotic, pornographic or otherwise are not allowed.
This includes content posted here and links to other sites. Posting NSFW - "Not Suitable For Work" - does not make it ok for posting.
If it is ambiguous, we'll ask you to remove it anyway, so "It's a guy's nipple" isn't going to fly. You're just trying to be annoying at that point.

by **mrswdk** on Sat Jun 13, 2015 10:24 am

I've seen photos of topless men in OT before.

by **Dukasaur** on Sat Jun 13, 2015 10:28 am

mrswdk wrote:So should pictures containing male nipples also be banned for that same reason?

I would, but most people disagree with me on that one.

by **waauw** on Sat Jun 13, 2015 10:44 am

What if it's a picture of 2000 year old statue or a 500 year old painting where someones nipples are shown?

by **mrswdk** on Sat Jun 13, 2015 11:06 am

waauw wrote:What if it's a picture of 2000 year old statue or a 500 year old painting where someones nipples are shown?

FILTH

by **Dukasaur** on Sat Jun 13, 2015 11:13 am

mrswdk wrote:
waauw wrote:What if it's a picture of 2000 year old statue or a 500 year old painting where someones nipples are shown?

FILTH

Again, it's not that there is anything wrong with those images, but that people with no self-restraint will use them as an excuse for their own attempts to go further, into territory that is objectionable.

It's the same reason we have to have zero-tolerance policies for violence in the schools. It's not so much that being hit with a snowball is going to hurt anyone, but one kid hits another with a snowball and then some other kid hits somebody with a rock and his argument is "how come a snowball is okay and a rock isn't? They're both naturally-occuring crystalline solids, aren't they?"

We leave some doors closed not because there's something objectionable in the room they lead to, but because three doors down there's a big stinking fish.

by **mrswdk** on Sat Jun 13, 2015 11:24 am

Dukasaur wrote:It's the same reason we have to have zero-tolerance policies for violence in the schools. It's not so much that being hit with a snowball is going to hurt anyone, but one kid hits another with a snowball and then some other kid hits somebody with a rock and his argument is "how come a snowball is okay and a rock isn't? They're both naturally-occuring crystalline solids, aren't they?"

lol. Would a Canadian teacher really struggle to argue a difference between throwing a snowball at someone and throwing a rock at them?

Similarly, I'm sure an eloquent man of letters such as yourself would be capable of explaining to the forum pornographers why graphic photos of anal sex are forbidden and yet a photo containing a topless sunbather is not.

by **Dukasaur** on Sat Jun 13, 2015 11:28 am

mrswdk wrote:
Dukasaur wrote:It's the same reason we have to have zero-tolerance policies for violence in the schools. It's not so much that being hit with a snowball is going to hurt anyone, but one kid hits another with a snowball and then some other kid hits somebody with a rock and his argument is "how come a snowball is okay and a rock isn't? They're both naturally-occuring crystalline solids, aren't they?"

lol. If my child's teacher couldn't successfully argue that there is a difference between throwing a rock and throwing a snowball then I would be taking my child out of that school immediately.

Similarly, I'm sure an eloquent man of letters such as yourself would be capable of explaining why graphic photos of anal sex are banned and yet a photo containing a topless sunbather is not.

Yes, I am, but given that I'm an unpaid volunteer I don't feel it's a worthwhile use of my time.

And that's the crux of it: the rules have to be enforces by a small number of volunteers with very little time or enthusiasm for the task, so they need to be kept simple. The teacher is paid staff, but he/she also has finite time and a large number of students, so keeping the rules very straightforward and not needing to get into nuanced debates is important.

by **mrswdk** on Sat Jun 13, 2015 11:40 am

So just have a rule saying 'no pornography' and then remove any porn that people post.

In the snowball example, the kid with the rock would be well aware of why he is getting punished while his friend who threw a snowball is not. There's really no need to spend half an hour spelling it out to him while he plays silly word games.

by **Metsfanmax** on Sat Jun 13, 2015 12:28 pm

mrswdk wrote:So just have a rule saying 'no pornography' and then remove any porn that people post.

We do have a rule saying 'no pornography'. Perhaps once in a while the mods do not enforce it properly, but that doesn't mean the rule isn't written down.

by **mrswdk** on Sat Jun 13, 2015 12:38 pm

The full rule which you quoted is:

Any images of pornographic activity or nudity - nipples, areola, genitals, anuses etc - whether intended as artistic, erotic, pornographic or otherwise are not allowed.
This includes content posted here and links to other sites. Posting NSFW - "Not Suitable For Work" - does not make it ok for posting.
If it is ambiguous, we'll ask you to remove it anyway, so "It's a guy's nipple" isn't going to fly. You're just trying to be annoying at that point.'

.

What I'm saying is that you can leave in the bit about pornography and remove the rest. There's no need for the blanket ban on any and all bodies.