[WikiEN-l] Images of sex organs

Sat Jan 10 17:43:37 UTC 2004

On Saturday 10 January 2004 10:05 am, Robert wrote:
> > This is not the case for genitalia -- I think pictures
> > of genitalia are only offensive to a relatively small
> > segment of the population
>
> I disagree. A very large number of Americans will refuse to
> use Wikipedia if it contains color photographs of penises,
> vaginas, anal sphincters, etc.  If we do not have at least
> some level of protection, then we will become one of
> America's most-blocked site on home and school Internet
> filters.

We should not stoop to the level of the American puritans. Pictures of human 
anatomy are patently unoffensive - or are these same puritans offended by 
themselves when they go for a shower? And even if they are irrationally 
offended, what the censors do not understand is that they do not have a right 
to not be offended. 

I agree that there is an argument to be made for having as broad an acceptance 
as possible, but we should not accept the lowest common denominator of 
offensiveness. Some religious people are offended by pictoral representations 
of deities, which does not mean wikipedia should go out of its way to not 
display pictures of deities. Personally, I would be inclined to tell those 
people to 'sod off', and get their "sanitised" version of reality elsewhere. 
Recognising that this is unlikely to be adopted as the policy of wikipedia 
(unfortunately), I agree with Erik that we should try to limit ourselves to 
things that are almost universally considered offensive.

Best,
Sascha Noyes
-- 
Please encrypt all email. Public key available from 
www.pantropy.net/snoyes.asc