Sex and violence (was Re: [WikiEN-l] Re: troubled.)

Tue May 11 16:23:06 UTC 2004

I am baffled as to why a clitoris would be considered
comparable in any way to torture. I guess I am baffled
as to why 'sex and violence' so frequently appear in
the same sentence.
Mark

--- Anthere <anthere9 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> I hope everyone will agree that the pictures on the
> following articles 
> are potentially offensive for some readers
> 
> * penis on penis article
> * clitoris on clitoris article
> * Torture and humiliation pictures on the prison
> article
> 
> Among the three cited above, penis pictures, torture
> and humiliation are 
> said informative enough, so that we display the
> pictures directly.
> However, a clitoris is not something informative
> enough, so, it should 
> be hidden.
> 
> I would like that we stop applying double standards
> on the encyclopedia.
> 
> If a picture is informative, we keep it. If not, we
> trash it.
> 
> If a picture is extremely offensive, we trash it.
> If a picture is generally considered offensive, we
> apply similar 
> standard to all pictures generally considered
> offensive.
> If a picture is not offensive, we show it.
> 
> All offensive pictures should be treated the same
> way and displayed the 
> same way. Either we decide we do not care about
> hurting some 
> sensibilities, we display them, and we do this for
> ALL offensive 
> pictures. Or we decide we could care a bit, and we
> put a link to it, 
> instead of full display in the page.
> 
> The argument that the clitoris image is not
> informative enough, as an 
> argument for it to be hidden is a NON-ARGUMENT.
> Either it is informative 
> and we apply it the same standard than to all
> offensive pictures. Or it 
> is not informative, and we trash it.
> 
> Now, if a clitoris picture is something not
> interesting, I also would 
> like that same standards are applied to all human
> genitals. If we remove 
> the clitoris, we remove the penises as well.
> 
> 
> 
> Fred Bauder a écrit:
> > Pictures of the clitoris are not displayed to
> avoid pandering to purient
> > interests which apparently (I have not followed
> this debate) outweighs the
> > information value.
> > 
> > While there may be a few readers who might enjoy
> pictures of torture and
> > putting many of them on Wikipedia would be wrong
> there is such a strong
> > history of people lying about torture that we
> would not want to part of
> > suppression of evidence. Thus there is a very high
> information value. (We
> > finally caught a few of these sonsabitches). There
> is a point of view
> > problem as 99.9% of torture is not photographed
> thus displaying pictures of
> > American torture only (as pictures of Saudi
> Arabian or Israeli or Turkish or
> > Tibetan or [put in your own despotic regime]
> torture are not available)
> > gives a somewhat false impression. It takes a
> pretty dumb criminal to take
> > pictures (or let others take pictures) of
> themselves while they are
> > committing a crime.
> > 
> > Fred
> > 
> > 
> >>From: Anthere <anthere9 at yahoo.com>
> >>Reply-To: anthere9 at yahoo.com, English Wikipedia
> <wikien-l-g2DCOkC13y2GglJvpFV4uA at public.gmane.org>
> >>Date: Tue, 11 May 2004 02:51:44 +0200
> >>To: wikien-l at wikipedia.org
> >>Subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: troubled.
> >>
> >>We censor pictures of clitoris on the english
> wikipedia.
> >>We censor clitoris pictures, while billion of
> humans on Earth have a
> >>clitoris, and that is something perfectly normal
> to have.
> >>
> >>We censor clitoris for the motive that people
> could be shocked.
> >>
> >>However, we do not censor pictures of torture and
> humiliation. Forgive
> >>me, but I am troubled.
> >>
> >>No, I do not think everything should be shown,
> especially soon after
> >>they happen. Just as some criminal trials of WWII
> horors were recorded,
> >>but the records preserved for several years before
> being shown publicly.
> >>This in memory of the deads. Even though we know
> what happened.
> >>
> >>So, explain to me why we show shocking images of
> human humiliation,
> >>while we cant display clitoris, because chaste
> eyes would be shocked ?
> >>
> >>
> >>Fred Bauder a écrit:
> >>
> >>>They belong. If they allowed picture taking at
> the Colorado State
> >>>Penitentiary or in a prison in France they would
> belong too. Their
> >>>importance is that most torture in prisons
> happens without pictures being
> >>>taken. These pictures have to stand in place of
> the hundreds or even
> >>>thousands of similar situations that don't get
> recorded. Or is that too
> >>>creative?
> >>>
> >>>Fred
> >>
> >>
> >>_______________________________________________
> >>WikiEN-l mailing list
> >>WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> >>http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-
> > 
> > l
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Win a $20,000 Career Makeover at Yahoo! HotJobs  
http://hotjobs.sweepstakes.yahoo.com/careermakeover 