Thread: Sexually degrading (WARNING - Contains nude photo's)

Found them funny & not in the least bit offensive BUT agree that female members/lurkers may, so on balance would prefer to not have them on the BB.(the posts that is!)

Christopha, don't let this cramp your style, enjoy your funny posts to the forum.

BTW, what ocean? What boat?.................cheers...........Sean

everyone knows whos stirring, whos serious and whos easily offended, stoppers is just winding people up - which I applaud Not offensive to me but I see no replies from the ladies on the forum as yet, perhaps this poll should only be open to them and they can have the final say.

However - from a corporate perspective they are offensive - I hazard a guess that with the exception of photo 3 the other photographers intention was at the time of taking the photo to titillate and add a comment to juxtapose the obviousness of the anatomy in question. lets face it a ladies crotch is generally not the centrepeice of a photo unless it IS and a breast isnt either unless its a modigliani nude (in which case its clearly "art" and not "tittilation" (No pun intended).

there are pleny of web sites devoted to or racy humour (eg priceless.com etc) - if you want that sort of action it should be there you log onto. What I do find offensive is that no one has commented on my posted photos of mediocrity (especially the lockbox and the DC!!!) - now thats offensive!!!

Originally Posted by Rocker

It seems to me that at least some of these pictures break the forum rule that prohibits . Allowing them to be posted is liable to discourage the female members of the forum from participating in it. I think it would be a pity if they were to leave because of this. So I think the rule on should be strictly enforced. There are plenty of websites where can be found, if people want it. This forum is for woodworking; let's keep it that way.

Rocker

I agree with Rocker. The internet already runs slow because of the huge amounts of and spam getting crammed through it...why add to the problem.

If we enforce the no rule then Zed will have to take down the chimp pic on his avatar..........the monkey isnt wearing any clothes.

I'd like to make a couple of points:

1. This particular section of the forum doesn't have to be woodwork-related
2. There was an explicit warning in the subject line of the thread
3. I've seen worse (better, depending how you look at it) on TV
4. Too much censorship is not in the spirit of the Internet

I agree we have to have guidelines. Apart from anything else, if we started posting real pornographic images here, UBeaut could run foul of the government's Internet censorship legislation. However, I think that most reasonable people know where the line is, even if they ocassionally cross it.

To say that we have to censor ourselves because we might drive members away opens a can of worms. Women are not the only 'minority' group out there. A lot of what is posted here could be found offensive to all sorts of people. A couple of countries in the Northern Hemisphere attract a lot of ribbing from the Australian members. Every time you do this, you are perpetuating a stereotype and someone could be offended. Let's not even start on religion. Most of us would be branded heathens.

I posted a very similiar joke here some time ago, except in mine the woman was wearing a shirt. Was that one any less 'degrading' because it contained no nudity? Some would say yes, some would say no. What do we mean by degrading? That it reinforces sexual stereotypes, perpetuating the 'woman as sex object' idea? Who posed for the photo? Did she feel degraded and, if so, why did she do it?

Have a look at the magazines on the shelves of your newsagent. Apart from the mags and the bikie mags, most magazines that men would be interested in are more likely to have a car or a boat or a fish on the front cover. The womens' mags all have photos of beautiful, sometimes scantily clad women, not just on the front cover, but all the way through. So who is perpetuating what?

At the end of the day, it's the forum moderators' call. Unfortunately for them, they are the ones who have to decide what is acceptable and what is not.

To clarify -
I don't find the pics degrading to me.
I don't belive they are
I don't believe it is relevent what is on the web or mags elsewhere, we are talking about this BB and how we want it look and feel.


However to play devils advocate ...
Consider a female that has struggled since her teen years to be accepted and respected as something other than a life support system for sex organs. Do you think the pic encourages the view that relegates the rest of her body and mind to being not worthy of notice or consideration, not only does it encourage it, it relys on it for its humour.

Don't knock people because you don't understand the way they feel, you will never know what shaped their view, and it is the height of arrogance to assume you know better.
Say how you feel, state your case, and leave it at that.


Christopha - you posted it very discreatly, good job. (but a link would have been better than the thumbnail )

Putting aside all the deep and meaningful stuff I believe,

1. Its not .
2. It is entertaining.
3. Its not distasteful ( to me at least).
4. I am not offended.
5. It has no place on this BB, if I want at look at this sort of thing there are thousands of other places to go.

Originally Posted by Dave

I don't believe it is relevent what is on the web or mags elsewhere

It goes to the question of whether or not they are degrading. Whether they belong on this BB is a different question. The former is a matter of opinion, the latter is a matter of policy.

I don't think the issue is whether or not they are degrading to us, it's whether or not they are degrading to women in general. I think to say that they are is a generalisation. Some women do this for a living, so by making a big deal about it, aren't we degrading them? What about the fashion industry? Are models employed because of their minds? Some women will be offended by the pictures, the majority probably don't give a toss. That's speculation based on my experience, limited as it is.

I'll get the missus to do a straw poll at the golf club tomorrow.

Originally Posted by silentC

It goes to the question of whether or not they are degrading.

I disagree (respectfully ) Whether or not a picture is degrading is purely an individual reaction to the picture. If there is worse about, or you've seen it a million times, you still find it degrading.

What I'm saying is that finding something degrading (or beautiful or any subjective emotion) is personal, we can answer for ourselves and no one else. To assume you can answer for someone else or another group, or indeed contend with their view is arogant.

PS this is not a personal go at anyone specificly, I just like getting to the philisophical side of these argumants

Some comments and a question.

Hardly . My 13 year old daughter responded by saying "Oh Dad!" and prodding me in the ribs, as did my wife. However they do not look for the evil in everything they see either.

Thumbnail or link? Go with the moderator here. No need to be in your face.

Suitable for this BB? Why do we have a "Jokes" and "Not related to WW"
section, if we are to slavishly stick only to WW? Why not ban anything without sawdust outright?

Why are all the complainers blokes? Surely if the girls were mortally offended we should have had a flood of abuse from them? I haven't seen anything from jackiew or gemmi, and they are not shy of a controversy. I think we are drowning in a flood of SNAG political correctness. I would be interested to hear whether the off-thread complaint was male or female. In addition, women who subscribe to a bloke oriented BB are likely to have a reasonably broad-minded attitude.

Finally with Christopha: It was a JOKE fer chrissakes. Let's have a laugh and move on, (but link it to keep the Mother Grundies happy.

Rant mode OFF!

Finally. Why does the total of "Yes" and "No" for the poll question not add up to 100%??

Alastair

To assume you can answer for someone else or another group, or indeed contend with their view is arogant

Agreed but this is exactly what censorship does.

I just like getting to the philisophical side of these argumants

Me too.

Originally Posted by silentC

Agreed but this is exactly what censorship does.

We were asked if we think they are degrading, not if we think someone else will find them so.
We were asked if we personaly think they belong, I assume with the objective of guiding the censors, if we all tell them how we feel they can draw their own conclusions, with out us muddying the waters with what we think others will feel.


We definately need to drink together and discuss some of the weighty issues of the world .

What about what we think others will think others will feel?

Is it beer o'clock yet?



I know, get back to work....

I suppose we should let the others have a say, seeing how we can't answer for them