[Foundation-l] Principle and pragmatism with nudity and sexual content

Tue Apr 21 14:47:37 UTC 2009

On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 12:27 AM, Nathan <nawrich at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 10:22 AM, Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen at gmail.com
>> wrote:
>
>> Hoi,
>> When you make illustration not visible you effectively remove them. It is a
>> cop out to continue and say that it is *others *that can decide that they
>> do
>> not want to be informed, that they are willing that other people are at
>> risk
>> because essential images are not readily available. It is a cop out because
>> this risk is ignored. Ignored because it is convenient
>>
>> As to BLP, the images that I am talking about do not identify people. They
>> show what is essentially a detail and a penis or a vagina may be part of
>> this.
>>
>> When the issue is about people using images in places where they are not
>> appropriate, then deal with that issue. Do not confuse this with the
>> legitimate use of essential but problematic images.
>> Thanks,
>>      GerardM
>>
>>
>>
> Honestly, this tangent has very little if anything to do with the issue that
> we ought to be discussing. No one has proposed removing or hiding images
> depicting medical conditions. If you want to argue against something that no
> one is arguing for, you should start a new thread.

There are many separate issues here.  Samuel Klein listed three in an
earlier email.

--
John Vandenberg