The WTF NSFW thread

[xoxoxoBruce]

Serial killers? People being exploited?
I feel your mistake is assuming everyone that doesn't have the same reaction as you do, damn well should. That, my dear, is censorship.

[lumberjim]

I'm sure you've all seen this in your email at some point, but i wanted to put it up because it makes me happy


the lead in is that these two planned this touching scene where they would each release a white dove on the steps of the church to symbolize their love for each other.....the best laid plans...

[Shawnee123]

My sensibilities don't match yours, that much is clear.

Censorship is also squelching my opinion about such matters. I can't believe I'm sitting here feeling guilty.

Did the dead woman, or the baby, have any say in the posting of those pictures? Do you think the mentally handicapped individuals thought about all the pros and cons of doing such a photo shoot, and made a clear, informed decision to go for it? Perhaps they were trying to make society aware that handicapped people, just like you and me, have active sex lives? Pleeeeeeeeeez. That, my dear, is exploitation.

Yeah, I don't advocate child pron either.

[lumberjim]

but.....


ACCIDENTAL TITS!

just a couple posts ago!

[glatt]

Now that's interesting, because I like the wedding picture, but it's just about as exploitative as the other ones. I doubt that the bride wanted it to be on the web like that.

I guess it all boils down to the subject matter. One picture is attractive and the other two are disgusting. All are exploiting someone.

[xoxoxoBruce]

Originally Posted by Shawnee123

My sensibilities don't match yours, that much is clear.

No, that's not clear. You're making assumptions.

Censorship is also squelching my opinion about such matters.

Censorship and self censorship are two different animals.

I can't believe I'm sitting here feeling guilty.

You absolutely should not be. You have every right to express your opinion and I'll defend that right to the dea.. well, till it hurts a little.

Did the dead woman, or the baby, have any say in the posting of those pictures?

What determines exploitive, is the intent at the time the photographs were taken. After that, exploitive is in the eye of the beholder... their reaction to seeing them. I would guess, considering the site they were posted on, they were being exploitively used, there.

Do you think the mentally handicapped individuals thought about all the pros and cons of doing such a photo shoot, and made a clear, informed decision to go for it? Perhaps they were trying to make society aware that handicapped people, just like you and me, have active sex lives?

I can't answer that. But neither can you, you're making assumptions based on your reaction.

Pleeeeeeeeeez. That, my dear, is exploitation.

Opinion, not fact.

Yeah, I don't advocate child pron either.

It's your right to be in the majority, but that's a strawman.

[Shawnee123]

The bride chose the dress. :shrug:


The argument that imposes a "don't kill the cute animals, just the ugly ones" to my position on THIS subject is pretty weak in this context.

[toranokaze]

<off topic>
Where do you guys host all these images, since direct linking is bad. And all the hosting sites I know have a strict ban on nudity( including artful).
I just wanted to know where you host this stuff, so I may contribute fully.
</off topic>
As for the disturbing couple the real matter of exploitation is all about context.

What are there mental conditions and are they able to make higher level choices?
Did they know what they were doing?
Did they know what the pics were for?
Did they intend for them to get out on to the internet?
Is someone, other than themselves, making a profit off their images?

And despite where or not it is exploitation is a different matter than where or not they should be on the board, for I'm sure somewhere on this board there is a nsfw pic that the original subject was not fully consensual for the pic to go on to the internet.

They do fit the subject matter of the board, however, the mods have the power to censor the board anyway they feel without necessarily our consent. Although personally I feel that it was for the good of this thread and the board as a whole.

[glatt]

Originally Posted by toranokaze

<off topic>
Where do you guys host all these images, since direct linking is bad. And all the hosting sites I know have a strict ban on nudity( including artful).
I just wanted to know where you host this stuff, so I may contribute fully.
</off topic>

You upload them to this site as an attachment when you post your message. See the "manage attachments" option down at the bottom of the screen when you are drafting a post.

[toranokaze]

Thank you(pic unrelated).

[Pico and ME]

Shawnee, I was wondering when the censor discussion would pop up over this. Bruce and any others who agree with him have the right to feel the way they do...BUT SO DO YOU. I applaud you for braving the backlash by speaking up about those posts. Limiting them to a link was a wonderful way to handle it.

[Undertoad]

It was just luck, if that's the case. It's not a specified rule here, but hotlinking images from other sites that don't want you to hotlink is generally frowned upon on the net. We were using jj.am's precious bandwidth, forcing them to buy even more porn advertising than they would have bought previously.

[lumberjim]

the net can frown upon theeeese....

:: points to his balls ::::

[Undertoad]

It does.

[lumberjim]

so mote it beeeeee