Topic: Boobs...

[amysrevenge]

Nudity it seems, is a big one though and the only rule related to it is regarding porn and obscenity.  Am I really being an ass to ask for a more thorough explanation?

Kind of an ass, yes, but in the nicest possible way to interpret ass - as in stubbornly refusing to understand, not as in asshole.

Everywhere on the internet, outside breastfeeding advocacy sites and some types of art or medicine sites, female breasts fall under the purview of obscene/pornography.

We can argue that it's stupid (it is), and we can argue whether here and now is a place to make a stand and do something about it (debatable, I'm not convinced either way), but we can't argue that moving tits to Explicit is something from out of left field.

[Eternally Learning]

Honestly, whatever is decided in this (unless it's something uncharacteristically crazy) I'll be ok with; I just wanted to discuss it beyond just being told "it's just the way it is."  You've done that so thank you.  Now then, if the decision is simply that it's in the spirit of the other rules to not allow nudity outside of explicit then I'm fine with that, but if it is that universal of a decision then why not adjust the rules to reflect that spirit?

Also, if the rule-of-thumb for material being relegated to explicit is that a quick glance could get someone fired, why is my suggested solution of making a clearer NSFW part in the title and spoilering the video with an additional warning not sufficient?  It would take more effort to do that than go into explicit.

[Beleth]

ob·scene
Definition of OBSCENE

1. Whatever Beleth thinks the SGU Panel would find obscene.

Unique Situations
No set of rules can be all-inclusive. Situations may arise that are not covered by these rules but that may require administrative action. Although we prefer to act only on situations covered by the written rules, the administrators reserve the right to act as needed to deal with situations that are clearly disruptive of forum use.

[uolj]

Kind of an ass, yes, but in the nicest possible way to interpret ass - as in stubbornly refusing to understand, not as in asshole.

To be fair, the question isn't really being answered completely, so it's not so much stubbornly refusing to understand as it is stubbornly requesting a more complete answer.

[Eternally Learning]

Nudity it seems, is a big one though and the only rule related to it is regarding porn and obscenity.  Am I really being an ass to ask for a more thorough explanation?

Kind of an ass, yes, but in the nicest possible way to interpret ass - as in stubbornly refusing to understand, not as in asshole.
Everywhere on the internet, outside breastfeeding advocacy sites and some types of art or medicine sites, female breasts fall under the purview of obscene/pornography.

We can argue that it's stupid (it is), and we can argue whether here and now is a place to make a stand and do something about it (debatable, I'm not convinced either way), but we can't argue that moving tits to Explicit is something from out of left field.

I'll admit that after re-reading my posts in a different mind-set even I'm cringing at how I'm coming off tonally so sorry for that, but I disagree that the summation of what I said was "moving tits to Explicit is something from out of left field."  A better summation is "if you're going to move non-erotic tits to Explicit can you tell me why and can we discuss the reasoning behind it?"

[Beleth]

Would "inappropriate" be a more copacetic word to use?

I simply don't think that video is appropriate for this forum outside of Explicit.

[341gerbig]

I think it is sad that the OP couldn't have a candid, mature conversation about breasts and their role in society without it being reduced to being considered pornography. The video simply added to the discussion without crossing the line into pornography.

It implies that women's bodies are not good enough for rational conversation, it implies that the only context that women's bodies can exist in in a purely sexual one.

On a board with so many strong feminists, i cant believe this many people outright disagree with the OP.



OP, I agree with you totally.

[Eternally Learning]

Would "inappropriate" be a more copacetic word to use?

I simply don't think that video is appropriate for this forum outside of Explicit.

As long as you're open to talking about why it's inappropriate outside of explicit, I have no problem with that possibly being used to describe the video in question.

[Beleth]

Because it shows boobs!
And boobs are inappropriate outside of Explicit!

What more needs to be said?

[Eternally Learning]

I think it is sad that the OP couldn't have a candid, mature conversation about breasts and their role in society without it being reduced to being considered pornography. The video simply added to the discussion without crossing the line into pornography.

It implies that women's bodies are not good enough for rational conversation, it implies that the only context that women's bodies can exist in in a purely sexual one.

On a board with so many strong feminists, i cant believe this many people outright disagree with the OP.



OP, I agree with you totally.

I really appreciate you backing me up, but in the interest of fairness this particular thread is only tangentially about how we as a board view the breasts depicted in the video.  The thread that was moved to explicit tackles it head on and I think the views there are more in line with what you'd expect from this forum.

This thread is more about the decision to move the thread there, what the implications of that decision may be, and what (if anything) should be changed either in the thread or in the rules.  I don't believe that Beleth, Karyn, TLV, or really anyone in this thread believes the video was pornographic or obscene, but the rules only specifically disallow those things and so I drew them together.

[Eternally Learning]

Because it shows boobs!
And boobs are inappropriate outside of Explicit!

What more needs to be said?

Surely you can see how that's circular reasoning can't you?  Look at what I said to TLV:

Also, if the rule-of-thumb for material being relegated to explicit is that a quick glance could get someone fired, why is my suggested solution of making a clearer NSFW part in the title and spoilering the video with an additional warning not sufficient?  It would take more effort to do that than go into explicit.

I want to know what it is about a nude set of non-eroticised breasts behind more barriers to accidental access than are provided for in explicit that is inappropriate

[341gerbig]

Because it shows boobs!
And boobs are inappropriate outside of Explicit!

What more needs to be said?

The bible tells me that the bible is true

What more needs to be said?

[uolj]

Because it shows boobs!
And boobs are inappropriate outside of Explicit!

What more needs to be said?

Surely you can see how that's circular reasoning can't you?  Look at what I said to TLV:

Also, if the rule-of-thumb for material being relegated to explicit is that a quick glance could get someone fired, why is my suggested solution of making a clearer NSFW part in the title and spoilering the video with an additional warning not sufficient?  It would take more effort to do that than go into explicit.

I want to know what it is about a nude set of non-eroticised breasts behind more barriers to accidental access than are provided for in explicit that is inappropriate

The argument for why boobs are inappropriate outside of Explicit has been made pretty well, I think. That's not circular reasoning, it just relies on reasoning given elsewhere.

I don't think the second question has been answered, though.

[Eternally Learning]

The argument for why boobs are inappropriate outside of Explicit has been made pretty well, I think. That's not circular reasoning, it just relies on reasoning given elsewhere.

I don't think the second question has been answered, though.

Well, not answering the second part is why the circular reasoning isn't helping me any and is precisely "what more needs to be said."

[uolj]

The argument for why boobs are inappropriate outside of Explicit has been made pretty well, I think. That's not circular reasoning, it just relies on reasoning given elsewhere.

I don't think the second question has been answered, though.

Well, not answering the second part is why the circular reasoning isn't helping me any and is precisely "what more needs to be said."

Yeah, I get that. I was just trying to clarify a bit more because I can see somebody reading the first part and thinking that you ignored all the talk about making the forum safe for people to browse at work and in other similar environments.