BATTLEGROUND THREAD: Discussion about nudity & associated language/imagery.

[Nancy Kallitechnis]

Murray posted:

3. Please do not post anything which "crosses the line"- it's a hard line to identify sometimes but think before you post. Admin/mods reserve the right to remove any videos which are not appropriate for this forum.


I haven't been here much since the forum was updated. I don't recall ever seeing nudity in the old days but I see it now. For all of you who have been posting frequently for over a week could you tell me is there any nude content that crosses the line and is considered inappropriate for this forum?

[Horizon]

Murray posted:



I haven't been here much since the forum was updated. I don't recall ever seeing nudity in the old days but I see it now. For all of you who have been posting frequently for over a week could you tell me is there any nude content that crosses the line and is considered inappropriate for this forum?

I'm guessing you are talking about my avatar.Murray said it was fine,it is a cartoon image and NOT pornographic in any way.

[Nancy Kallitechnis]

I'm guessing you are talking about my avatar.Murray said it was fine,it is a cartoon image and NOT pornographic in any way.


I wasn't referring to your avatar specifically, but before deciding how often I want to post here I would like to know what the rules are regarding nudity. Did Murray just okay the nude image for your avatar or did he say what other stuff was allowed?

[Spang]

You can post a nude photograph of a politician once a month. :rolleyes:

[Horizon]

I wasn't referring to your avatar specifically, but before deciding how often I want to post here I would like to know what the rules are regarding nudity. Did Murray just okay the nude image for your avatar or did he say what other stuff was allowed?
He never said anything about other stuff.Just that my image was ok as an avatar.I have started a poll.


You can post a nude photograph of a politician once a month. :rolleyes:

I don't wanna see that!

[foxyladi]

You can post a nude photograph of a politician once a month. :rolleyes:

oh.boy..:eek::eek:

[hejiranyc]

That is one avatar I can get behind. :D

[ZY123]

I think Americans are way too uptight about nudity and sexuality in general. When we become more open about it and view it as a natural aspect of life, I personally think kids will be less apt to be irresponsible about it.

[Horizon]

I think Americans are way too uptight about nudity and sexuality in general. When we become more open about it and view it as a natural aspect of life, I personally think kids will be less apt to be irresponsible about it.

My Grandmother came over from Denmark in the early 1900's.Even then,she was shocked at how prudish American society was.Her parents had 5 children and were never married.This was not and is still not even now,unusual in Danish society.They much more forward thinking than we are and always have been.

[mcgowan.swan]

i'm pretty sure everyone would object to a nude photo of me in an avatar.
just guessing here. lol :);)

[CGP]

I wasn't referring to your avatar specifically, but before deciding how often I want to post here I would like to know what the rules are regarding nudity. Did Murray just okay the nude image for your avatar or did he say what other stuff was allowed?

No nudity.

What has prompted this thread?

Is it Meredith's avatar?

If so, maybe Meredith can change it. I actually have not commented on it yet other than to say (in the poll) I wasn't sure if it was/wasn't ok.

So, to answer your question - no photographic nudity obviously.

[ZY123]

No nudity.

What has prompted this thread?

Is it Meredith's avatar?

If so, maybe Meredith can change it. I actually have not commented on it yet other than to say (in the poll) I wasn't sure if it was/wasn't ok.

So, to answer your question - no photographic nudity obviously.

I disagree with Meredith changing her avatar. Part of common ground is learning to accept that just because one person thinks a cartoon butt (note they show Bart Simpson's butt on that television show all the time - and that is a major television station) is porn doesn't necessarily mean it is. I think we got into the habit here (and I'm also guilty) of finding things offensive rather than discussing them. In other words if we don't like someone or what they have to say we just say "I'm offended" instead of debating the point. Plus if we get too stringent on what is and isn't allowed, opinions and differences are lost. Just my opinion.

Note: I'm not even sure if that avatar prompted this thread or not...so it's just a hypothetical comment above not directed towards anyone specific.

[partypeople]

That's not fair. it's just a butt... I think it's a GREAT icon.
I don't like Obama bashing icons- but i accept them.
It's not pornographic or anything. Let the poster keep their butt icon lol.

[Nancy Kallitechnis]

It's not pornographic or anything.

That's a matter of opinion. A lot of people would consider that icon an erotic illustration.

[ZY123]

That's not fair. it's just a butt... I think it's a GREAT icon.
..............................
It's not pornographic or anything. Let the poster keep their butt icon lol.


And we have found COMMON GROUND! I agree. The avatar should stay.

[CGP]

That's a matter of opinion. A lot of people would consider that icon an erotic illustration.

And I think there differences between an "erotic illustration" and a "pornographic image".

[flannie]

I didn't think a whole lot about the avatar when I saw it, one way or the other.

I post on several boards, and the ones that have posters with children usually prefer that nudity not be included in avatars or other images.

In other words, what might be appropriate for any of us adults would not necessarily be appropriate for little ones hanging on our arms or passing by. Parents are not necessarily being prudish for wanting to control this type of content. My kids are grown and gone and it's just me and the cat, so it's not a problem for me. Also, a lot of people access from work.

Other boards solved the problem by making avatar rules, and by linking to pictures and including a general disclaimer when content wasn't child or work friendly.

[Nancy Kallitechnis]

No nudity.

What has prompted this thread?

Is it Meredith's avatar?

I read another poster say that there was a pornography thread at HCF. Then when I posted today the first response I got was from Meredith which had a buttocks image. I started wondering whether that was standard practice now.

[pnevai]

Here is an example of what is completely inappropriate.

http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b26/mylilponyranaway/hamster-porn-P1010050.jpg

[Meg]

Here is an example of what is completely inappropriate.

http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b26/mylilponyranaway/hamster-porn-P1010050.jpg


http://smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/36/36_11_6.gif (http://www.smileycentral.com/?partner=ZSzeb001_ZNxpt024YYUS)http://smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/4/4_1_219.gif (http://www.smileycentral.com/?partner=ZSzeb001_ZNxpt024YYUS)

[Spang]

Nothing quite wakes a person up in the morning like the sounds of hamsters having sex.

[ZY123]

I think the source of information is a key factor in determining its relevancy.

[CGP]

I read another poster say that there was a pornography thread at HCF. Then when I posted today the first response I got was from Meredith which had a buttocks image. I started wondering whether that was standard practice now.

It's called SPAM.

All forums at one point or another will be subjected to SPAM.

It was promptly deleted.

A good lesson - believe something when you know it to be true, not because you heard it from someone else.

I started wondering whether that was standard practice now.

Cmon, what kind of comment is this? Sorry, it's ridiculous.

[partypeople]

That's a matter of opinion. A lot of people would consider that icon an erotic illustration.

That is an opinion. A lot of people wouldn't.
Furthermore, an "erotic illustration" and a "pornographic image" are a bit different.

Have you ever seen a beautiful painting of a naked woman or man? Is that "pornographic" as well?

Like this:
http://www.wfu.edu/~shepeb5/images/imagesgiving%20life.jpg


woo, those porn images!

[Nancy Kallitechnis]

And I think there differences between an "erotic illustration" and a "pornographic image".


Yes, people have made that distinction. Pornography has a negative connotation whereas erotica is more upper class and/or dealing with love more than the physical. Also, a lot of feminists define erotica as sexual content that is not sexist. Nevertheless, both terms refer to explicit sexual content.

[CGP]

I think the source of information is a key factor in determining its relevancy.

Yes. Very true.

And truth is often distorted when passed on from one person to the next, so much so that the last recipient of the info may be getting something very different from what the first receipient got.

[ZY123]

Here is an example of what is completely inappropriate.

http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b26/mylilponyranaway/hamster-porn-P1010050.jpg

That is hillarious!

Here's another potentially inappropriate image:

http://www.jysira.com/forum/images/smilies/balls.gif

[ZY123]

Yes. Very true.

And truth is often distorted when passed on from one person to the next, so much so that the last recipient of the info may be getting something very different from what the first receipient got.

It's like the game of telephone!

[CGP]

It's like the game of telephone!

And people will repeat fictitious statements as though they are hardcore facts, so much so that they actually begin to believe them.

Some of the anti-Hillary propaganda falls into this category.

As does some of the anti-Obama propaganda.

It's pretty amazing how much human opinion can be shaped by untrue/false/flawed information.

[ZY123]

And people will repeat fictitious statements as though they are hardcore facts, so much so that they actually begin to believe them.

Some of the anti-Hillary propaganda falls into this category.

As does some of the anti-Obama propaganda.

It's pretty amazing how much human opinion can be shaped by untrue/false/flawed information.

Isn't there a name for that phenomenon? I can't think of it but I think there's a word for it.

Off topic bit semi related: Did anyone see that movie where a the director of an art museum was persecuted for displaying art some members of the town thought to be pornographic? He had to risk his freedom and career to defend freedom of expression.

[Nancy Kallitechnis]

Originally Posted by Nancy Kallitechnis
I started wondering whether that was standard practice now.

Cmon, what kind of comment is this? Sorry, it's ridiculous.

I may be naive, but I have read a lot about the new forum and was told it had dramatically changed. So with that in mind when I began posting today and immediately saw the sexual image I was wondering whether that was now allowed. One of the main changes is that there are many more Obama supporters now and it was standard practice for people from the Obama camp to use sexual images to harm HRC and Palin. Therefore, knowing that there were many more Obama supporters here, knowing about the porn thread that a lot of people were talking about, and the first person that responded to me showed me a naked butt, I think it's reasonable to assume that the forum had changed to allow sexual content.

[Meg]

Ok to give a little more cartoonish example of inappropriate!

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v291/bagelbite90/doggy.gifhttp://img.photobucket.com/albums/v291/bagelbite90/rasta.gifhttp://img.photobucket.com/albums/v291/bagelbite90/hump.gif

Those are bad!:eek: Don't ask why I have those...:p

[ZY123]

I may be naive, but I have read a lot about the new forum and was told it had dramatically changed. So with that in mind when I began posting today and immediately saw the sexual image I was wondering whether that was now allowed. One of the main changes is that there are many more Obama supporters now and it was standard practice for people from the Obama camp to use sexual images to harm HRC and Palin. Therefore, knowing that there were many more Obama supporters here, knowing about the porn thread that a lot of people were talking about, and the first person that responded to me showed me a naked butt, I think it's reasonable to assume that the forum had changed to allow sexual content.

I think the source of your information is relevant (I have no idea what that source is). In life, unfortunately, people will do whatever it takes to defame and bash other people often just because of a difference in opinion. It's a lot like the news media, they were bias against Hillary as we all know. Similar to that, there are sources of information that are biased against and out to defame this board.

I say stick around a while and give it a chance...it's still developing and you might end up liking it.

[Merrick98]

Its not like its naked ... It has a hat... Porn is to provoke lust. I say let it all out. I dont want her donkey butt. ... Maybe its cuz in gay that it doesnt turn me on then again im know my booties no butts about it. Sorry i had to make that crack... There i go again. Im just making an ass out of my self . Ok im done.

[CGP]

I may be naive, but I have read a lot about the new forum and was told it had dramatically changed. So with that in mind when I began posting today and immediately saw the sexual image I was wondering whether that was now allowed. One of the main changes is that there are many more Obama supporters now and it was standard practice for people from the Obama camp to use sexual images to harm HRC and Palin. Therefore, knowing that there were many more Obama supporters here, knowing about the porn thread that a lot of people were talking about, and the first person that responded to me showed me a naked butt, I think it's reasonable to assume that the forum had changed to allow sexual content.

No, that's called CONFIRMATION BIAS.

You developed an opinion based on what others said, and than you found something which "confirmed" this new opinion. And then you drew broad conclusions which are infact wrong. It's a form of cognitive error.

Yes, the forum is just over-run with Obama supporters! :rolleyes: About 3 in total. :rolleyes:

There is a difference between an ABUSIVE TROLL and an Obama supporter. They are not one and the same thing. Trolls are banned. Obama supporters (who are respectful, or at least not intentionally hostile/abusive) are not.

I think my new avatar expresses how I presently think/feel about everything - I am tired of monoview environments and tired of seeing people attacked soley for expressing a different view.

You will also find that there is virtually no discussion of HV in this forum (apart from a few very isolated references + one referral thread), because I think it's pretty unclassy and offensive to attack another group of people solely because they wish to do something differently. Unfortunately, many of the people frequenting HV are not offering the same respect to HCF.

[ZY123]

Its not like its naked ... It has a hat... Porn is to provoke lust. I say let it all out. I dont want her donkey butt. ... Maybe its cuz in gay that it doesnt turn me on then again im know my booties no butts about it. Sorry i had to make that crack... There i go again. Im just making an ass out of my self . Ok im done.

heheheh....you made me LOL literally.

[Nancy Kallitechnis]

I think the source of your information is relevant (I have no idea what that source is).

I read about the new HCF from people who used to post here before the election.

[Meg]

I read about the new HCF from people who used to post here before the election.

Hmm.... let me take a guess as to who some of those people are. Sorry, but they aren't exacltly the most straight forward people when it comes to HCF. :rolleyes: No offense to you personally.

[CGP]

I read about the new HCF from people who used to post here before the election.

Exactly. People who are now resentful towards HCF because it is now open to alternative views. Anger/resentment can cloud judgment & lead people to draw conclusions which are often erroneous. Anger/resentment can also lead people to make untrue statements in an effort to cause hurt/harm.

[calmati]

Ok to give a little more cartoonish example of inappropriate!

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v291/bagelbite90/doggy.gifhttp://img.photobucket.com/albums/v291/bagelbite90/rasta.gifhttp://img.photobucket.com/albums/v291/bagelbite90/hump.gif

Those are bad!:eek: Don't ask why I have those...:p

Okay, I don't see anything wrong with the middle one at all. The other two: no comment.

And since all the "cool kids" seem to be doing it... here's my contribution. "Bad Gummies":

http://s430.photobucket.com/albums/qq25/calmati/badgummies.jpg

Don't ban me! It's not porn, it's natural; it's beautiful. Where do you think all the baby gummies come from? I've looked in many packages of gummies and have never seen one single gummy stork. True story.

[Meg]

Okay, I don't see anything wrong with the middle one at all. The other two: no comment.

And since all the "cool kids" seem to be doing it... here's my contribution. "Bad Gummies":

http://s430.photobucket.com/albums/qq25/calmati/badgummies.jpg

Don't ban me! It's not porn, it's natural; it's beautiful. Where do you think all the baby gummies come from? I've looked in many packages of gummies and have never seen the one single gummy stork. True story.


The middle one is bad because it's portraying illegal drug use!:p

As for the gummies... never again will I be able to snack on them.:eek:

[calmati]

The middle one is bad because it's portraying illegal drug use!:p

As for the gummies... never again will I be able to snack on them.:eek:

Ohhhhhhhh! I thought that was a party favor. Okay, I get it now. Point taken.

If the gummy thing is too controversial, I can remove it. I was just having a moment of fun.

[ZY123]

Ohhhhhhhh! I thought that was a party favor. Okay, I get it now. Point taken.

If the gummy thing is too controversial, I can remove it. I was just having a moment of fun.


Leave it up! (that's my vote...it's not controversial to me)

[Meg]

Ohhhhhhhh! I thought that was a party favor. Okay, I get it now. Point taken.

If the gummy thing is too controversial, I can remove it. I was just having a moment of fun.


Oh no... leave the gummies!:D I LOL every time I see them!

[Merrick98]

See no teeth just gums... Im going to get skinny i keep spitting my food out lol

[Horizon]

Along with asshat,I felt the need to put these all together so we can all see the differences at once.
There is NOTHING sexual about my asshat.I for one get no warm fuzzy when I look at and would seriously wonder about someone who did.

Here is an example of what is completely inappropriate.

http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b26/mylilponyranaway/hamster-porn-P1010050.jpg

That is an opinion. A lot of people wouldn't.
Furthermore, an "erotic illustration" and a "pornographic image" are a bit different.

Have you ever seen a beautiful painting of a naked woman or man? Is that "pornographic" as well?

Like this:
http://www.wfu.edu/~shepeb5/images/imagesgiving%20life.jpg


woo, those porn images!

Ok to give a little more cartoonish example of inappropriate!

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v291/bagelbite90/doggy.gifhttp://img.photobucket.com/albums/v291/bagelbite90/rasta.gifhttp://img.photobucket.com/albums/v291/bagelbite90/hump.gif

Those are bad!:eek: Don't ask why I have those...:p

Okay, I don't see anything wrong with the middle one at all. The other two: no comment.

And since all the "cool kids" seem to be doing it... here's my contribution. "Bad Gummies":

http://s430.photobucket.com/albums/qq25/calmati/badgummies.jpg

Don't ban me! It's not porn, it's natural; it's beautiful. Where do you think all the baby gummies come from? I've looked in many packages of gummies and have never seen one single gummy stork. True story.

[Nancy Kallitechnis]

People who are now resentful towards HCF because it is now open to alternative views. Anger/resentment can cloud judgment & lead people to draw conclusions which are often erroneous.

While I agree that anger clouds judgement, nevertheless I don't think all the comments about HCF that I read regarding its content were motivated by anger. A lot of the comments were wistful, sad and wishing that the forum was like it used to be. From observing HCF today I do notice that I heard the truth when I was told that this is a very different forum. I assume you will agree with me on that point.

[Nancy Kallitechnis]

Murray, this forum is full of sexual comments and images. You said [human] nudity is not allowed, but you allow sexual images and animation. I recommend you create guidelines for sexual content.

[CGP]

From observing HCF today I do notice that I heard the truth when I was told that this is a very different forum. I assume you will agree with me on that point.

Yes, in part, it is different. It is more inclusive of diversity.

Is different bad? Is inclusiveness bad?

To many, yes.

To others, no.

[Spang]

More images of hamsters having sex, please.

[Horizon]

Yes, in part, it is different. It is more inclusive of diversity.

Is different bad? Is inclusiveness bad?

To many, yes.

To others, no.
I have seen NO t&a anywhere in this thread.Animals doing what animals do to make baby animals,some strategically placed candy,and cartoon figures.
Not getting what is so bad.

Actually,I am Jenna Jameson in disguise.I was sent by the porn industry to turn internet forums into depravity central.

[CGP]

Murray, this forum is full of sexual comments and images.

Nancy, this is another exaggeration. Here we have one thread of comments/images, basically posted because you started the topic (prompted by misinformation). And yet you conclude the entire forum of 525,000 posts is "full of sexual comments & images" based on the presence (in this thread) of 3 images including an art picture, hampsters (?) and lollies. I am having difficulty respecting your discussion when you are making statements which are so grossly inaccurate. And this is disappointing as generally (when you post) your arguments are insightful & balanced. But not on this occasion.

[sojourner]

Yes, the forum is just over-run with Obama supporters! :rolleyes: About 3 in total. :rolleyes:


Only three! Seems like hundreds. :)

[Horizon]

Only three! Seems like hundreds. :)

They're a very prolific threesome.They seem to be everywhere,because we are not used to having them at all.

[MrSandMan]

They're a very prolific threesome.They seem to be everywhere,because we are not used to having them at all.

We stay proactive and keep everyone on their toes :P

Don't mess with the Zohan

http://logo.cafepress.com/5/3843412.3305265.jpg

[Horizon]

We stay proactive and keep everyone on their toes :P

Don't mess with the Zohan

http://logo.cafepress.com/5/3843412.3305265.jpg

That dumb movie cracked me up!

I actually think there are more than 3 of you.I think maybe 5 or 6.
Whatever.You're still outnumbered!:D;)

[kyforhillary]

I am really curious about something Nancy, you have been here since May, you have over 500 posts and you are asking about Porn being on this site like you are a newcomer? You know as well as I do that there is no porn, nor has there ever been porn. Are you really Nancy or did you steal her name? How could you say something about hearing about porn on this site form someone else when you have been here for months? Just asking.

[CGP]

I am really curious about something Nancy, you have been here since May, you have over 500 posts and you are asking about Porn being on this site like you are a newcomer? You know as well as I do that there is no porn, nor has there ever been porn. Are you really Nancy or did you steal her name? How could you say something about hearing about porn on this site form someone else when you have been here for months? Just asking.

I am asking also...:confused:

[Lealy]

I think Americans are way too uptight about nudity and sexuality in general. When we become more open about it and view it as a natural aspect of life, I personally think kids will be less apt to be irresponsible about it.

I was born in Germany and lived there for most of my childhood. The kids might not think it is a big deal alright and neither does anyone else. We had a candy lady (just like the ice cream truck) that came around in the window right next to the candy were magazines not just nudes but things as a adult I would not want to look at. She also sold weed and a few other goodies and no one thought twice about it. No I am not uptight. They have just as much pedophilia there as here and yes pregnant teens as well. Just because they are comfortable with it does not mean it happens less or more responsibly. There is alot of things that are done in Europe that can stay in Europe.

[Bubba Grizzly]

So what are the chances of merging the drunk posting and the "Nude" thread together. They do go together, Hand in Hand....well, sort of, you know, something to do with the hand . It seems We just take life too seriously.

[Nancy Kallitechnis]

Yes, in part, it is different. It is more inclusive of diversity.

I differ, this forum seems to inhibit feminism. There is more acceptance of Obama and less respect for women.

[Ikasu]

I differ, this forum seems to inhibit feminism. There is more acceptance of Obama and less respect for women.

There's like 3 or 4 Obama people on here. Granted they are very loud, but it's not like they're controlling the place. This is still a "pro-women" forum.

[CGP]

I differ, this forum seems to inhibit feminism. There is more acceptance of Obama and less respect for women.

Untrue. But you are entitled to your opinion.

How does the forum now "inhibit feminism?"

How is there "less respect" for women?

How is it healthy to not ever have to defend/explain one's views/opinions? (which was the case with the former HCF).

On a side note...do you think alleged Hillary supporters who say she should not accept SOS under Obama are "inhibiting feminism"? I do.

[sojourner]

...There is more acceptance of Obama and less respect for women.

Isn’t that statement redundant?

[Nancy Kallitechnis]

Originally Posted by Nancy Kallitechnis
Murray, this forum is full of sexual comments and images.

Nancy, this is another exaggeration. Here we have one thread of comments/images, basically posted because you started the topic (prompted by misinformation). And yet you conclude the entire forum of 525,000 posts is "full of sexual comments & images" based on the presence (in this thread) of 3 images including an art picture, hampsters (?) and lollies. I am having difficulty respecting your discussion when you are making statements which are so grossly inaccurate. And this is disappointing as generally (when you post) your arguments are insightful & balanced. But not on this occasion.

I meant that this thread is full of sexual comments and images. Do you intend to create a policy about sexual content? Sexual content causes very strong feelings, thus I believe it is helpful to have a policy about it.

[CGP]

I differ, this forum seems to inhibit feminism. There is more acceptance of Obama and less respect for women.

But if you think this, all the more reason for you to increase your participation in this forum to ensure strong/quality input from someone who can promote feminism and women's value in society. Exiting an environment which is not 100% partial to your views doesn't achieve anything other than you surrendering power that you don't have to.

[CGP]

I meant that this thread is full of sexual comments and images. Do you intend to create a policy about sexual content? Sexual content causes very strong feelings, thus I believe it is helpful to have a policy about it.

Feel free to develop a policy and we can review/discuss it in the forum.

It sounds like a good idea, yes.

[Nancy Kallitechnis]

I am really curious about something Nancy, you have been here since May, you have over 500 posts and you are asking about Porn being on this site like you are a newcomer?


I was a frequent poster on the old site. This new site is very different and I'm not familiar with it.

You know as well as I do that there is no porn, nor has there ever been porn.


Numerous people told me that there was porn on the day of the election. And the first person who responded to me put a naked buttocks on screen for me to see. The argument about whether a naked buttocks is porn will go on forever, but most people will agree that a naked butt is sexual content unless it is in a non-sexual context such as a medical book for the purpose of anatomical study rather than amusement.

Are you really Nancy or did you steal her name? How could you say something about hearing about porn on this site form someone else when you have been here for months? Just asking.


I read it at Hillary's Village which has a lot of members who have posted here for months.

[Nancy Kallitechnis]

How does the forum now "inhibit feminism?"

Recall, I said the forum "seems to inhibit feminism" I didn't say that it does. Feminism essentially seeks to decrease the power gap between men and women. A forum that welcomes women, that make them feel comfortable in the ways that women tend to prefer, would be a forum that promotes women. This forum seems to give greater power to traditionally masculine blogger activity than the other forum did, seems to be much more likely to attack pioneer women, etc.

How is it healthy to not ever have to defend/explain one's views/opinions? (which was the case with the former HCF).


In the old HCF we did have differences of opinion. I haven't been at the new forum long enough so I don't know how much conflict there is but I assume there is more conflict based on what I've read. A difference is on the old forum people were more polite to one another.

On a side note...do you think alleged Hillary supporters who say she should not accept SOS under Obama are "inhibiting feminism"? I do.

I would like to add that some Obama supporters don't want Hillary to be Secretary of State and some Hillary supporters want her to take the job. I don't think that it inhibits feminism for a woman to be Secretary of State.

[ZY123]

I am really curious about something Nancy, you have been here since May, you have over 500 posts and you are asking about Porn being on this site like you are a newcomer? You know as well as I do that there is no porn, nor has there ever been porn. Are you really Nancy or did you steal her name? How could you say something about hearing about porn on this site form someone else when you have been here for months? Just asking.

Answer: there is probably something else going on...this doesn't make sense. I think this is more about Obama than Meredith's avatar.....I could be wrong but that's what it seems like to me.

My opinion regarding the subject at hand: Promoting the American attitudes that view sex as somehow immoral or wrong PROMOTES sexism. Promoting sex as being wrong promotes the idea that men should view women as representations of something immoral, wrong and something to do behind closed doors (sex objects). Making sex wrong and bad encourages the drawing of this parallel. One of women's biggest steps in the sexual revolution came when the birth control pill was approved. This made women in control of their sexuality not attitudes that sex is wrong and immoral.

And of course porn shouldn't be allowed on a website, but drawing a parallel between a cartoon butt and porn is not only unreasonable but makes me think something else is what's really going on with the posing of this issue right now right here at this forum. If Meredith's avatar is porn that means we all need to start a furious letter writing campaign to Fox since they've show Bart Simpson's butt on The Simpsons.

Forums get spammed, in fact I know of a forum who's members are receiving spam emails at the accounts they signed up with...annoying, offensive spam emails...and it's NOT this forum.

[Nancy Kallitechnis]

Originally Posted by Nancy Kallitechnis
I differ, this forum seems to inhibit feminism. There is more acceptance of Obama and less respect for women.

But if you think this, all the more reason for you to increase your participation in this forum to ensure strong/quality input from someone who can promote feminism and women's value in society. Exiting an environment which is not 100% partial to your views doesn't achieve anything other than you surrendering power that you don't have to.

It can be painful to be surrounded by sexism. And sometimes enduring that pain is not worthwhile. If this forum is almost always respectful towards feminism like it used to be then I would believe that I could help. I don't think it's helpful to regularly have conversations with people who don't listen to feminism but are just trying to stamp it down.

[CGP]

Numerous people told me that there was porn on the day of the election.

One thread from a Russian-based spammer!

And it was deleted as soon as it was detected. And the member banned.

As always, reality gets distorted and made into something else...

[calmati]

With all due respect to the OP, who is certainly entitled to their opinion, this has got to be one of the most ridiculous threads about sexuality/pornography I've ever read (and that's my opinion).

FWIW:

From: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/pornography

pornography:

Main Entry:

Function: noun

Etymology: Greek pornographos, adjective, writing about prostitutes, from pornē prostitute + graphein to write; akin to Greek pernanai to sell, poros journey — more at fare, carve
Date: 1858

1: the depiction of erotic behavior (as in pictures or writing) intended to cause sexual excitement

2: material (as books or a photograph) that depicts erotic behavior and is intended to cause sexual excitement

3: the depiction of acts in a sensational manner so as to arouse a quick intense emotional reaction <the pornography of violence>

I personally do not find any images in this thread to be of pornographic nature. Sexual: yes (though mildly). Pornographic: no.

Seriously, if Meredith's avatar (or any of the other images in this thread) evokes sexual arousal in... well ANYONE... I would be more concerned about the viewer than the image itself. I would not go so far as to call it "erotic" either.

However, in defense of the OP, perhaps a "sexual content" policy is necessary. Actually, it could benefit the Admin to have such a policy on board, so that any posts which violate that policy could more easily be removed without the need of a three-page thread discussing the offensive post's or image's attributes and effects.

Once again, these are my opinions, others may (and most probably will) differ.

[sojourner]

My opinion regarding the subject at hand: Promoting the American attitudes that view sex as somehow immoral or wrong PROMOTES sexism.

I disagree. Sexism has nothing to do with sex. It is the belief that one sex is superior to the other.

[ZY123]

I disagree. Sexism has nothing to do with sex. It is the belief that one sex is superior to the other.

I 1000% disagree. Look at how women are treated in countries like Afghanistan and the sexual attitudes there. Look at history and the advancement of the women's movement that came about as a result of the birth control pill. I consider some of the far religions-conservative attitudes to be the biggest barriers we women face in this country. Of course I'm not from the same generation as many posters here so that could be part of the differences of opinion.

More to the point I suspect this thread has nothing to do with porn at all and more to do with attempting to discredit this forum.

[CGP]

More to the point I suspect this thread has nothing to do with porn at all and more to do with attempting to discredit this forum.

That's possible.

I guess the OP can respond to that suggestion/question?

The title alone of this thread is inflammatory. I think it needs changing.

[ZY123]

With all due respect to the OP, who is certainly entitled to their opinion, this has got to be one of the most ridiculous threads about sexuality/pornography I've ever read (and that's my opinion).

FWIW:

From: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/pornography

pornography:

Main Entry:

Function: noun

Etymology: Greek pornographos, adjective, writing about prostitutes, from pornē prostitute + graphein to write; akin to Greek pernanai to sell, poros journey — more at fare, carve
Date: 1858

1: the depiction of erotic behavior (as in pictures or writing) intended to cause sexual excitement

2: material (as books or a photograph) that depicts erotic behavior and is intended to cause sexual excitement

3: the depiction of acts in a sensational manner so as to arouse a quick intense emotional reaction <the pornography of violence>

I personally do not find any images in this thread to be of pornographic nature. Sexual: yes (though mildly). Pornographic: no.

Seriously, if Meredith's avatar (or any of the other images in this thread) evokes sexual arousal in... well ANYONE... I would be more concerned about the viewer than the image itself. I would not go so far as to call it "erotic" either.

However, in defense of the OP, perhaps a "sexual content" policy is necessary. Actually, it could benefit the Admin to have such a policy on board, so that any posts which violate that policy could more easily be removed without the need of a three-page thread discussing the offensive post's or image's attributes and effects.

Once again, these are my opinions, others may (and most probably will) differ.

bingo.

With all due respect to the OP I think the issue of the original post was more about Obama supporters being allowed in this forum and is an attempt to somehow parallel the allowing of Obama supporters in this forum with porn. I don't agree with the parallel.

[Ikasu]

I 1000% disagree. Look at how women are treated in countries like Afghanistan and the sexual attitudes there. Look at history and the advancement of the women's movement that came about as a result of the birth control pill. I consider some of the far religions-conservative attitudes to be the biggest barriers we women face in this country. Of course I'm not from the same generation as many posters here so that could be part of the differences of opinion.

More to the point I suspect this thread has nothing to do with porn at all and more to do with attempting to discredit this forum.

Or maybe it's the social structure that women are subject to. The rap music, music videos, and Hollywood movies that depict women as sex toys doesn't promote the feminist movement. Perhaps that's why Palin was so disliked by our sexist media -- she was a conservative and someone like her shouldn't be "conservative".

[CGP]

bingo.

With all due respect to the OP I think the issue here is more about Obama supporters being allowed in this forum and is an attempt to somehow parallel the allowing of Obama supporters in this forum with porn. I don't agree with the parallel.

Yes, I think there is an attempt (either conscious or unconsious) to associate Obama supporters with "porn"...An attempt to associate Obama supporters with "toxicity" in a forum. When in REALITY (truth is not important to some) there was one thread contributed by a nonpartisan spammer! :eek:

[ggreen]

I 1000% disagree. Look at how women are treated in countries like Afghanistan and the sexual attitudes there. Look at history and the advancement of the women's movement that came about as a result of the birth control pill. I consider some of the far religions-conservative attitudes to be the biggest barriers we women face in this country. Of course I'm not from the same generation as many posters here so that could be part of the differences of opinion.

But all the things you've noted are about power, not sex. I think of sexism as diminishing women's power, thereby denying equality.
_

[Nancy Kallitechnis]

Promoting the American attitudes that view sex as somehow immoral or wrong PROMOTES sexism.


I agree that believing sex is immoral promotes sexism, especially the idea that women's sexuality is wrong. However, I think that some sex acts are wrong such as pedophilia. However, it's not just Americans that have an unhealthy view of sex, virtually every country in the world promotes an unhealthy view of sex.

One of women's biggest steps in the sexual revolution came when the birth control pill was approved. This made women in control of their sexuality not attitudes that sex is wrong and immoral.


Actually, there is no birth control that is 100% fullproof. So women don't have total control over their ability to get pregnant.

And of course porn shouldn't be allowed on a website, but drawing a parallel between a cartoon butt and porn is not only unreasonable but makes me think something else is what's really going on with the posing of this issue right now right here at this forum.


The cartoon in question is a typical cartoon that would be printed in a porn magazine. A lot of people would see it as pornographic. And there's nothing mysterious about my mentioning the porn. Try to see things from my view: I was told that there was a porn thread on election day and since have almost never visited this site. Then when I posted yesterday the first thing I see is a butt and realize that a person has been allowed to use a naked butt, a standard porn image, as their icon on every post all over the forum. It's reasonable for me to think that posting sexual images is standard practice on the new forum.

[Nancy Kallitechnis]

I personally do not find any images in this thread to be of pornographic nature. Sexual: yes (though mildly). Pornographic: no.


I saw two animations of sexual activity, photos of animal sexual activity and a candy composition depicting sexual activity.

[ZY123]

Yes, I think there is an attempt (either conscious or unconsious) to associate Obama supporters with "porn"...An attempt to associate Obama supporters with "toxicity" in a forum. When in REALITY (truth is not important to some) there was one thread contributed by a nonpartisan spammer! :eek:

Not even from this country if I remember right. A big forum like this is always subject to be a victim of some spam. A small forum no, but a large one yes it happens.

[calmati]

I saw two animations of sexual activity, photos of animal sexual activity and a candy composition depicting sexual activity.

As I said: "Sexual: yes (though mildly). Pornographic: no." I also stated that these observations were of my own personal opinion, just as your opinion belongs to you.

[CGP]

I saw two animations of sexual activity, photos of animal sexual activity and a candy composition depicting sexual activity.

Oh dear...

The hampsters (or whatever they are) - I've seen pictures like that featured regularly on mainstream television - only worse - the animals moved! :eek:

The candy/lollies - are you serious?

Your claims are so far-fetched to have no credibility whatsoever.

So, I can only conclude you have some other "agenda".

[Nancy Kallitechnis]

Originally Posted by sojourner
I disagree. Sexism has nothing to do with sex. It is the belief that one sex is superior to the other.

I 1000% disagree. Look at how women are treated in countries like Afghanistan and the sexual attitudes there. Look at history and the advancement of the women's movement that came about as a result of the birth control pill. I consider some of the far religions-conservative attitudes to be the biggest barriers we women face in this country. Of course I'm not from the same generation as many posters here so that could be part of the differences of opinion.

Perhaps sojourner is saying that sexism is not sex which is true. Sexism is a belief. Sex is an act.

Sexism can harm sex and harm women who do not even have sex. For example, sexist attitudes lead people to kill women who have been raped by a man because the sexist blames the woman instead of the man who is the real criminal.

More to the point I suspect this thread has nothing to do with porn at all and more to do with attempting to discredit this forum.

I wrote this thread to help me find out if I want to post here on a regular basis like I used to do.

[CGP]

The cartoon in question is a typical cartoon that would be printed in a porn magazine. A lot of people would see it as pornographic. And there's nothing mysterious about my mentioning the porn. Try to see things from my view: I was told that there was a porn thread on election day and since have almost never visited this site. Then when I posted yesterday the first thing I see is a butt and realize that a person has been allowed to use a naked butt, a standard porn image, as their icon on every post all over the forum. It's reasonable for me to think that posting sexual images is standard practice on the new forum.

And it's reasonable for me to conclude that your persistent repetition of the same points over & over & over again - despite them being defended/explained/debunked repeatedly - exposes the fact you have another agenda. It's also a form of troll-like behavior in that it is a form of baiting to get a particular reaction.

Which is unfortunate.

What, therefore, is your real agenda? To discredit the "new" forum? That is my conclusion.

[ZY123]

Oh dear...

The hampsters (or whatever they are) - I've seen pictures like that featured regularly on mainstream television - only worse - the animals moved! :eek:

The candy/lollies - are you serious?

Your claims are so far-fetched to have no credibility whatsoever.

So, I can only conclude you have some other "agenda".

I think the line probably could be: is it something that would be shown on mainstream television? If yes, it's probably OK to post...??? Just an idea. That was my rationale for why the butt didn't cross the nudity line (it definitely didn't cross the porn line).

[CGP]

I think the line probably could be: is it something that would be shown on mainstream television? If yes, it's probably OK to post...??? Just an idea. That was my rationale for why the butt didn't cross the nudity line (it definitely didn't cross the porn line).

I think that's a fairly good guide, especially since mainstream American TV is VERY conservative in what it will/won't show.

I don't see a single image in this thread that would not be shown on mainstream American TV.

[Nancy Kallitechnis]

Originally Posted by zhaan
More to the point I suspect this thread has nothing to do with porn at all and more to do with attempting to discredit this forum.

That's possible.

I guess the OP can respond to that suggestion/question?

I already answered that question on the third post when I told Meredith the reason that I posted my question: "before deciding how often I want to post here I would like to know what the rules are regarding nudity."

[ggreen]

I don't see a single image in this thread that would not be shown on mainstream American TV.

To be fair, I'm not sure about those bananas or whatever they are. But hey, I can handle it.

BTW: Where is the Asshat?

:eek:

[Horizon]

I think that's a fairly good guide, especially since mainstream American TV is VERY conservative in what it will/won't show.

I don't see a single image in this thread that would not be shown on mainstream American TV.

I am shocked that one bare ass wearing a hat caused this much of an uproar!!

And it stays until Murray tells me to remove it.I am personally offended that anyone would think this is pornographic or sexual in nature,and that I would knowingly use a pornographic/sexual pic as an avatar.
Anyone that sees this as such needs their head examined.JMHO.

[Nancy Kallitechnis]

With all due respect to the OP I think the issue of the original post was more about Obama supporters being allowed in this forum and is an attempt to somehow parallel the allowing of Obama supporters in this forum with porn. I don't agree with the parallel.


That's curious. Obama supporters and pornography are two completely different topics. I'm not sure what you are talking about when you talk about parallels between the two.

[sojourner]

I think that's a fairly good guide, especially since mainstream American TV is VERY conservative in what it will/won't show.

If you define mainstsream American TV as American broadcast tv.

[ZY123]

I think that's a fairly good guide, especially since mainstream American TV is VERY conservative in what it will/won't show.

I don't see a single image in this thread that would not be shown on mainstream American TV.


Exactly...that's why I picked mainstream American broadcast TV as a guide...it's ULTRA conservative.

[Nancy Kallitechnis]

depict women as sex toys doesn't promote the feminist movement. Perhaps that's why Palin was so disliked by our sexist media -- she was a conservative and someone like her shouldn't be "conservative".

Excellent observation. Our society has a Madonna/***** fixation. Women tend to be separated into good women who pursue God, family, fidelity to one's spouse and bad women who are sexually attractive to men. Palin confused sexists because she is a religious, family-oriented do gooder but also very sexually attractive to men. This probably enraged sexists who are constantly trying to promote an unhealthy view of sex and the idea that woman cannot be sexual and virtuous at the same time.

[ZY123]

That's curious. Obama supporters and pornography are two completely different topics. I'm not sure what you are talking about when you talk about parallels between the two.

You mentioned it somewhere....I may have read it wrong...I'll find it.

[Nancy Kallitechnis]

there was one thread contributed by a nonpartisan spammer!

Actually, there was another porn-related thread that also appeared on election day. Someone wrote that paying for sex should be legal.

[CGP]

Actually, there was another porn-related thread that also appeared on election day. Someone wrote that paying for sex should be legal.

Prostitution is not pornography.

They are competely seperate phenomena.

Legalization of prostitution is a completely different topic.

That said, I have never seen (or don't recall) the thread you are talking about.

And, by the way, do you honestly think I have read all 36,000 threads on this forum? Honestly? Do you think I have time to sit here 24/7 and read 525,000 posts?

[Horizon]

Prostitution is not pornography.

They are competely seperate phenomena.

Legalization of prostitution is a completely different topic.

That said, I have never seen (or don't recall) the thread you are talking about.

And, by the way, do you honestly think I have read all 36,000 threads on this forum? Honestly? Do you think I have time to sit here 24/7 and read 525,000 posts?

LMAO!!! Sure Murray.What were you thinking,having a job and a life?? You should be here 24/7!

[CGP]

Actually, there was another porn-related thread that also appeared on election day. Someone wrote that paying for sex should be legal.

The bigger question, which you have not answered, is what is your agenda?

Yes, there were some abusive trolls who joined the forum on election day who were subsequently banned and their posts removed.

Your point is therefore what?

And why did you not present your protest at the time? Why now?

[Nancy Kallitechnis]

Originally Posted by Nancy Kallitechnis
I saw two animations of sexual activity, photos of animal sexual activity and a candy composition depicting sexual activity.

As I said: "Sexual: yes (though mildly). Pornographic: no." I also stated that these observations were of my own personal opinion, just as your opinion belongs to you.

The word mild is subjective. A lot of people are extremely offended by pornography involving animals.

[Spang]

If it's Mr. Ed and a woman, sure.

[CGP]

Exiting a purposeless discussion...

Can someone else please takeover as I am no longer willing to respond to these posts...

[Horizon]

If it's Mr. Ed and a woman, sure.
ROFLMFAO!!! OMFG!!! You are killing me here!
Exiting a purposeless discussion...

Can someone else please takeover as I am no longer willing to respond to these posts...

I got your back!;);)

[Horizon]

The word mild is subjective. A lot of people are extremely offended by pornography involving animals.

A pic of two gerbils doing what God intended them to do is porn???

Since when??

Those pics were posted as examples and it seems as though you think these things are being posted in every thread.These are in fact,the first time I have seen anything of this nature in this forum,EVER,and I think they were well within the context of the topic,

[Nancy Kallitechnis]

The hampsters (or whatever they are) - I've seen pictures like that featured regularly on mainstream television...

Apparently we have different opinions about this topic. I think animal pornography is extremely offensive. Yet I've noticed you have not removed the photos so far.

The candy/lollies - are you serious?


Yes, they are pornographic. Do you deny it?

Your claims are so far-fetched to have no credibility whatsoever.

So, I can only conclude you have some other "agenda".

My claims is that the images portray sexual activity. That is a fact. It is far-fetched to deny the reality that the images actually portray sexual activity.

As I've stated before, my agenda was initially to find out what level of nudity is allowed here but now I want to find out also what type of sexual images are allowed because I need that information to decide whether to be a regular member again.

[Nancy Kallitechnis]

Originally Posted by Nancy Kallitechnis
The cartoon in question is a typical cartoon that would be printed in a porn magazine. A lot of people would see it as pornographic. And there's nothing mysterious about my mentioning the porn. Try to see things from my view: I was told that there was a porn thread on election day and since have almost never visited this site. Then when I posted yesterday the first thing I see is a butt and realize that a person has been allowed to use a naked butt, a standard porn image, as their icon on every post all over the forum. It's reasonable for me to think that posting sexual images is standard practice on the new forum.

And it's reasonable for me to conclude that your persistent repetition of the same points over & over & over again - despite them being defended/explained/debunked repeatedly - exposes the fact you have another agenda. It's also a form of troll-like behavior in that it is a form of baiting to get a particular reaction.

Which of my points has been debunked?

[hillarymyhero]

Murray posted:



I haven't been here much since the forum was updated. I don't recall ever seeing nudity in the old days but I see it now. For all of you who have been posting frequently for over a week could you tell me is there any nude content that crosses the line and is considered inappropriate for this forum?

I found this post to be inflammatory and sexist.

Originally Posted by MrSandMan
So if someone says "Hillary's breasts benefited her" would not be a sexist statement then? It's like saying she has a perfect proportion. That's a compliment, no?

Puleese, Get for real!

[calmati]

The word mild is subjective. A lot of people are extremely offended by pornography involving animals.

Yes it is subjective. Meaning that different people will most likely have their own interpretations. Again, I was expressing my own opinions -- no one has to agree with me.

I agree with you in that "a lot of people are extremely offended by pornography involving animals." Fortunately, I've yet to see any material of that nature on this site, including this thread.

If I saw evidence of un-moderated (or even moderated) posting of pornography on this site, I wouldn't remain as a member. While I will not condemn others for their preferences, pornography is not one of mine.

[Nancy Kallitechnis]

Originally Posted by Nancy Kallitechnis
Actually, there was another porn-related thread that also appeared on election day. Someone wrote that paying for sex should be legal.

Prostitution is not pornography.

That's why I said the pro-prostitution thread was porn-related. Pornography is related to prostitution because pornographers often pay people to have sex and because pornography often involves paying for sexual pleasure with money like johns pay for sex with money. The two are closely related.

I have never seen (or don't recall) the thread you are talking about.

And, by the way, do you honestly think I have read all 36,000 threads on this forum? Honestly? Do you think I have time to sit here 24/7 and read 525,000 posts?

I didn't assume you had read the thread. I was just mentioning it because you had said there was one porn thread and I was reminded of the other thread that day that was pornography-related.

[Nancy Kallitechnis]

The bigger question, which you have not answered, is what is your agenda?


I answered that question in my third post. I want to know the forum's policy about sexual images to determine whether I should be a regular poster or not.

Yes, there were some abusive trolls who joined the forum on election day who were subsequently banned and their posts removed.

Your point is therefore what?

And why did you not present your protest at the time? Why now?

On election day I was thinking more about the results than about the HCF.

[Nancy Kallitechnis]

I agree with you in that "a lot of people are extremely offended by pornography involving animals." Fortunately, I've yet to see any material of that nature on this site, including this thread.


Posts 19, 20, 27, and 46 portray animal sex.

[CGP]

Ok, enough is enough. You've been given ample space to express your views, which are very well known by this point.

You seem obsessed with this topic.

Closed.