Forums / Discussion / General

171,060 total conversations in 5,483 threads

+ New Thread


Censorship vs. self-censorship

Last posted May 27, 2013 at 02:10AM EDT. Added May 25, 2013 at 02:06AM EDT
23 posts from 8 users

I had a much longer version of this believe it or not, but I realized the topic I wanted to address was much simpler than I was making it to be.

Super-short version: What is your opinion on self-censorship?

Full version: Yesterday, I was cleaning up images on the Katawa Shoujo entry, and I came across an image that, while clearly deserving a NSFW tag, may have been too much for KYM’s content guidelines, but I wasn’t 100% sure. I ended up sending a message to amanda b. for a second opinion.

I realized that one of the reasons I was unable to decide was that honestly, while I don’t disapprove of KYM having the content it does, on a web site I owned personally, I wouldn’t even host an image as racy as this:

…although you’d be hard-pressed to find someone who’d call that pornography.

Now, while I hear a lot of people denounce censorship, (and I generally denounce it as well) occasionally I hear people denouncing even self-censorship. That is to say, while there are many pictures that get removed from KYM for violating content guidelines, I know there are sites out there that will end up hosting those images anyway, and I have no problem with that; but I also know there are people who are insulted that KYM (or me) would not allow any and all content a user might post.

So what I’m saying is, while I think it’s wrong to say, “I find such-and-such work of art offensive, and therefore think it should be removed from the public eye,” contrary to some people’s opinion I think it is my right and responsibility to say, “I find such-and-such work of art offensive, and refuse to be party to its display or promotion.”

While the U.S. Constitution’s 1st Amendment guarantees that the government cannot stop self-expression, individuals and organizations have the right to control what content is displayed within their domains. Do you agree or not? (For that matter, am I being clear in expressing the issue?)

May 25, 2013 at 02:06AM EDT
Quote

I think we should have mods individually approve all images in a article. I also think that NSFW images should be completely removed. There are several MLP images in the Image section that are pornography; a kids show, seriously guys?

Last edited May 25, 2013 at 02:21AM EDT
May 25, 2013 at 02:20AM EDT

Bat Pug wrote:

I think we should have mods individually approve all images in a article. I also think that NSFW images should be completely removed. There are several MLP images in the Image section that are pornography; a kids show, seriously guys?

Well, there’s the general issue of self-censorship, and then there’s the specific issue of KYM’s content guidelines, which have been discussed many times in the past. There’s some appeal to trying to make KYM into a “family-friendly” site, but there are some memes that you just can’t make fit that mold. Rule 34 is an obvious one.

The MLP stuff has been a sticking point for a lot of people, too. I have two 9-year old daughters who are fans of the show, and while even the worst of the MLP image gallery isn’t quite pornography either, I certainly wouldn’t allow them to view it. however, when you consider what I said above, I think it’s the nature of KYM to not be kid-friendly, so my kids shouldn’t be on the site anyway. I think KYM is clean enough to be acceptable for teenagers, though, which a lot of bronies are, right?

May 25, 2013 at 02:45AM EDT
Quote

I am very much an advocate for self-censorship, I suppose… That is to say, I am for people behaving appropriately according to what the situation they are in calls for.

To expound in a specific manner, I expect people to add images to KYM that are not only memetic, but also appropriate for a site that I know for a fact young children browse for fun. That being said, I understand there’s a catch in that certain memes, What Would X Do for Money/Fistful of Yen for example, necessitate the NSFW option wherein external censorship must take over.

The whole issue is a morass of sorts to me, in that what I consider to be appropriate may be completely inappropriate to someone else, likewise the same views could be harshly puritanical to others. It can get deeper than just umbrella views of what’s appropriate, too. The image in question that you posted is actually somewhat tame to me, but that may be because I was actually pulling for a Miki route HARD, so maybe there’s also a bit of a learned acceptance of a quasi-risqué image of her. Because I happen to really enjoy both her character and the VN she’s from, my view of the situation is compromised.

To make another connection, someone may think rule 34 of MLP is acceptable to others due to it being so acceptable to them when this is in no way the place for such images.

(Geez. I understand what you meant by the topic being simpler than what you made it out to be… I feel I’ve followed suit.)

To make matters worse, I would expect the amount of censoring you perform upon yourself to both decrease and increase in certain situations… As an extreme example, if you were on 4chan’s /b/ board, I would expect little to no self-censorship of any given poster, as that board knows no shame. However, that same poster would never post the same things on Facebook, at least not through a public post. Why is that, you ask? Barring the anonymity you have on /b/, you wouldn’t want gram-grams knowing you’ve collected all the Dragon Dildos available, or heaven forbid your mother learns you have every chapter of some loli manga.

(…neither of those examples actually apply to me, I assure you. I simply restated things I’ve seen/heard about on 4chan. :^|)

So yeah. The amount of self-censorship required changes based on the situation. In a perfect world, we would always know exactly what is apropos at any given time, but sometimes we slip up so some external censorship becomes a necessary evil. As for the image you posted, again, I’m personally fine with it as it’s not overtly sexual. But as I said before, I’m biased towards KS, so who knows.

TL;DR- yes, I am for self-censoring as I prefer it to external censorship, but it’s a dynamic thing that is far from black and white. Also Miki is top-tier.

Last edited May 25, 2013 at 03:35AM EDT
May 25, 2013 at 03:32AM EDT
Quote

I’m going to be that guy and quote the rules, but only because they actually pretty well cover this already.

When it comes to nudity, images are OK as long as it’s something that can be seen on a summer’s day. Images that include bathing suits, side boob, cleavage, but would still be okay to walk around with outside in public during the summer are ok and just need a NSFW tag. This still means no genitals and no sexual activities.

This young lady is clearly wearing a two-piece bikini, so she does fall into the “allowed” area.


After that, however, it comes down to what the point of this site really is about: documenting memes. Most memes are circulated amongst mid-to-late year teens and people in their early twenties, and so they could be sort-of called this website’s target audience.

Let’s go by the FCC ratings standard (I know, it’s awful. Bear with me.) for what we typically see behind a NSFW tag on this website.

TV-PG – These images sometimes go behind a NSFW cover. Suggestive poses, somewhat crude language, and moderate violence.
TV-14 – These are required, but a bit of a hit-and-miss for NSFW cover images. Obvious sexual situations, very crude language, and quite a bit of violence/gore.
TV-MA – These are always behind a NSFW cover image unless OP is new/an idiot. Explicit sex in rare circumstances (Daily Dose), and extreme gore (Cupcakes).

All of these fall under the “teen” category (outside of the rare TV-MA stuff), and are pretty much safe enough for them to view unguided. They’ll view the image if they have the intent to, and there’s not much that will stop them from doing so. Like you said, if it isn’t hosted here – they’ll find it somewhere else. I talked with Verbose a few months ago about some of the stuff in the pony gallery, and he mentioned that Amanda B. (at least, I think it was her) stated that the more resources we had, the better.

Occasionally you’ll have the outlier. The young kid who walks in knowing/not knowing what he or she is getting into. There’s really not much you can do about this with any sort of censoring. These are the kids that will lie to get into porn sites or aren’t under parental guidance on the internet. While censorship WOULD help protect them, it damages the resource library for the targeted main group, and becomes detrimental to the overall focus of the website.

I do agree with you that it is the right of individuals, groups, and companies/corporations to be able to control what is and isn’t allowed on a website – KYM is no exception (for a tame example, just look at all the deadpooled “memes”). It’s really up to those people, though, as to how far things should go.

As far as controversial, offensive, or just plain disagreeable materials… Someone somewhere is always going to be offended. Remember how many people complained about the autism article? I sometimes like to see how long it takes for people to complain about News, Events, and People articles not being memetic. You’re never going to please everyone, even yourself, on a website with this much variety. The NSFW stuff is just one of those things that clicks wrong with a greater number of people than others.

You don’t have to play party with it, but until the staff decide that enough is enough (you can convince them!), there really isn’t much you can do about it as just a regular user/moderator.


WARNING – Talk about the pony gallery ahead

I’m sorry, Bat Pug, but every time I see someone saying something about it being a kids’ show, I want to beat my heat into the wall repeatedly. The show being targeted for kids really doesn’t have any bearing as to whether or not explicit/suggestive material is going to be made, and whether or not it qualifies as a resource – I could make the same complaint about ANYTHING like that. Shipping celebrities? They’re people, not characters! It’s a weak argument, and it gets old. Next time, say something like, “Kids are more likely to stumble into these galleries than any other. Maybe we need to have a higher standard for them.” The images you’re complaining about do usually fall under the NSFW guidelines the site has set up, though – so until we get those higher standards, there’s not much the mods can do.

And you should run that “mods individually approve images” thing by RandomMan. I bet I could hear him laughing all the way over here in the States. That’s really just not feasible with a website as large as KYM.

The My Little Pony gallery has a lot of issues. NSFW material is one of the major ones. Considering how most of the bronies are in their mid-to-late teens, however, I’m going to say that the guidelines fit well enough. The gallery has WAY bigger issues that need working on right now: cleaning up meme pages, tagging images, reducing the amount of of meta images, cleaning up opinion images, cleaning up troll posts, and getting people to just generally behave.

My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic is memetic/cultural because of its adult fans. The art, safe and explicit, is memetic and a resource to the overall fandom. I know it doesn’t sit right with everyone, but it’s something they’ll really have to tolerate until someone high up chooses to do something about it.

As Brucker said: he wouldn’t allow his two girls on this website, even if they are pony fans. This is because he is practicing good parenting, of which, there is no adequate substitute for.

Last edited May 25, 2013 at 04:31AM EDT
May 25, 2013 at 04:26AM EDT

@Brucker
Since you bring up rule 34……
It simply states there is porn of it and porn isn’t allowed on kym. The entry is (or at least should be) more of a parody than actual porn being loaded but I notice that quite a few pics there don’t really belong because they really don’t support what that entry is.
But to get back on topic here is a perfect example

Should this be hidden as NSFW? Even though there is no nudity, no genitals shown it still is 2 AT-AT’s fucking and by definition of the rules should be NSFW. I personally think it’s funny and is completely safe and I would think most people wouldn’t see why it would need to be marked NSFW. (And it isn’t marked NSFW by the way) But if I post two ponies in the same position all hell breaks loose from mods and users alike. We (as in regular forum users) have been hiding anything “racy” under NSFW as to not hear the bullshit that comes with it. We have been mainly NSFWing every pic that is or could be deemed NSFW by certain mod standards even though Amanda’s rules say otherwise. So I really wish some one would explain the logic of why two AT-AT fucking is still safer than the girl in the bikini you posted.
So you ask do I agree that sites can set standards… YES they can
My question has always been can the mods all be on the same page with same standards? I’ve found that no they can’t because like you said of your standards “I wouldn’t even host an image as racy as this”.

May 25, 2013 at 04:31AM EDT
Quote

The more the time has gone on, the more I’ve started to loathe censorship and self-censorship, the terms “Not safe for work” and “family-friendliness”.

The term “Family-friendly” for me is getting almost synonymous to sterile, watered down thing run by soccer moms who think they know what’s best for others. As bad as Encyclopedia Dramatica is, it somehow feels better than viewing Oh Internet.

By the way, try viewing those “safe form work” pictures at work. Getting caught watching ponies or any children’s show would cause you as much trouble as pornography. Meanwhile, while many sites label “curse words” as NSFW, it’s still better to get caught up viewing these pictures than episodes of Hamtaro animé or something.

I also think that all the fuzz about that pornographic stuff is extremely overblown. I think we only continue doing that is because we have used to. “Protecting” children from that stuff doesn’t really work. I bet many people who are so worried about this have seen porn themselves during childhood. Did it affect them? Well, I don’t think not much.

I think things should be like many image boards, the only person who would be allow to completely censor the stuff, is yourself. The only thing site has to do, is to warn the viewer what are they going to view.

May 25, 2013 at 04:54AM EDT
Quote

@Patrick: As I think I said in my message to amanda b., my sense of acceptability was feeling rather skewed after looking through several hundred images, a fair portion of which were outside of my personal zone of acceptability, but well within the standards of a site like this. And of course, one’s personal feelings (both emotional and sexual) can get mixed up in the thing; the image in question bears a strong similarity to another image with different characters wearing more clothing. That other image doesn’t even have a NSFW tag, but to be perfectly honest, I find it far more sexy than the one I considered throwing out.

@Crazy☾: Yeah, my point about the Miki pic is that it falls well within the range of acceptability of KYM, but that has nothing to do with my personal standards. As for MLP, while bronies have made it a big deal that’s more pervasive than other memes/subcultures, I think this is one of those areas in which it is unfairly singled out. Yeah, MLP is for kids. So is Dora the Explorer,

Pokemon,

and Family Circus.

I think it’s the nature of Internet fandoms to make this sort of thing. (And is it hypocritical that I’m a major contributor to two of these three entries, but wouldn’t put such material on my own blog?)

@Derpy Vazquez: AT-ATs don’t have genitals, so while everyone knows what it’s suggesting, it’s obviously a joke and not “real” sex, but then maybe it should have the NSFW flag? I think images on the Rule 34 entry get treated a bit more loosely because the entry itself is already tagged. But if a kid were on the site searching for Star Wars images, should we be concerned that that image might come up? I’m not sure, and I couldn’t explain why I can’t decide. I think it’s possible to set objective standards for 95%+ of the situations that come up, but there’s always a small portion that fall into a grey area, and people have to depend on subjective judgment calls. Erring on the side of discretion is usually advisable, IMO, but there still can be tough decisions.

May 25, 2013 at 03:42PM EDT
Quote

Bat Pug wrote:

I think we should have mods individually approve all images in a article. I also think that NSFW images should be completely removed. There are several MLP images in the Image section that are pornography; a kids show, seriously guys?

This request would ask of us to completely remove several image galleries, which is against the purpose of the site, as the internet we document simply isn’t always family friendly.

As for having mods individually approve all images before they get put on the site, not going to happen. What you’re asking here is an impossible task. We don’t always the time to look at KYM uploads, not even mentioning how many there are to look at. Asking us to do that would therefore significantly damage the daily user uploads.

Or was this more a bad attempt at pointing fingers to the MLP gallery?

And you should run that “mods individually approve images” thing by RandomMan. I bet I could hear him laughing all the way over here in the States. That’s really just not feasible with a website as large as KYM.

Goddamnit Crazy.


Crazy wrote:

As far as controversial, offensive, or just plain disagreeable materials… Someone somewhere is always going to be offended.

^This very much. We aren’t here to appeal to the indvidual, we are here to appeal to the masses. The internet isn’t always happy fun times, not everything that will become a thing is something we all like. Does that mean we should adapt our guidelines to certain groups? No, of course not.

Sometimes (more like often) what gets a big thing on the internet contains topics like sexism or racism, or is based around a case that many dislike such as cyberbullying. But what we document is internet phenomena, regardless of type or difference in opinions. Spread through hate is still spread.


Patrick wrote:

To expound in a specific manner, I expect people to add images to KYM that are not only memetic, but also appropriate for a site that I know for a fact young children browse for fun. That being said, I understand there’s a catch in that certain memes, What Would X Do for Money/Fistful of Yen for example, necessitate the NSFW option wherein external censorship must take over.

The Cheezburger guidelines state something about needing to be 12 years old in order to browse the Cheezburger Network. As KYM is part of the Cheezburger Network, we can assume this applies to us as well. Thus Brucker’s 9 year olds shouldn’t even visit this site, and Brucker is being a good parent for not allowing them.

Articles like the Fistful of Yen are commonly tagged through the article itself. If an entry is tagged NSFW, it can be assumed the risk of stumbling upon more adult humor in the images is big.


Derpyvaz wrote:

Should this be hidden as NSFW? Even though there is no nudity, no genitals shown it still is 2 AT-AT’s fucking and by definition of the rules should be NSFW. I personally think it’s funny and is completely safe and I would think most people wouldn’t see why it would need to be marked NSFW. (And it isn’t marked NSFW by the way) But if I post two ponies in the same position all hell breaks loose from mods and users alike. We (as in regular forum users) have been hiding anything “racy” under NSFW as to not hear the bullshit that comes with it.

These two AT-AT’s is a case of implied NSFW, but that does not make it NSFW (and with that, tagging it is unnecessary). In de mind of a pervert everything is “dirty”.

In the mind of a pervert, this is implied intercourse. But due to that should Brucker suddenly disallow his 9 year old from eating that candy? Kids don’t look at these packages thinking how dirty it is.

And yes, in the case of the MLP ponies standing in the same position as those AT-AT’s, it should be marked NSFW under specific circumstances. Are they arroused or can it be assumed they’re having intercourse through specific details in the image like their facial expressions? The answer to questions like that decide if it’s better to tag or not. Those cases are no longer implied NSFW, it’s just NSFW. Perhaps cases like implied should be made more clear in the guidelines, I’ll bring it up in the mod mail.

But let’s not forget that you will call bullshit and get your jimmies rustled on everything mods do that you disagree with. It’s not what the rules state, to you it’s just what you want, and fuck tah police amirite xD?

My question has always been can the mods all be on the same page with same standards? I’ve found that no they can’t because like you said of your standards “I wouldn’t even host an image as racy as this”.

We have clear guidelines regarding NSFW. It has some gray areas, but it does its job. And Brucker wouldn’t host such an image on his own website, but does that mean he will apply the same judgement on KYM? Of course not, as he acts differently on both sites.

To each site its own guidelines. All sites have a different focus and target audience, and change their guidelines to work alongside this. As was pointed out before, whatever we disallow can still be found on other sites, but in return we offer info those sites don’t have. You should adapt your expectations to the sites you visit, and if you are incapable of that and feel the need to post porn on KYM, then the consequenses of your stupidity are only to blame on yourself.

Last edited May 25, 2013 at 04:21PM EDT
May 25, 2013 at 03:54PM EDT
Quote

Evilthing wrote:

The more the time has gone on, the more I’ve started to loathe censorship and self-censorship, the terms “Not safe for work” and “family-friendliness”.

The term “Family-friendly” for me is getting almost synonymous to sterile, watered down thing run by soccer moms who think they know what’s best for others. As bad as Encyclopedia Dramatica is, it somehow feels better than viewing Oh Internet.

By the way, try viewing those “safe form work” pictures at work. Getting caught watching ponies or any children’s show would cause you as much trouble as pornography. Meanwhile, while many sites label “curse words” as NSFW, it’s still better to get caught up viewing these pictures than episodes of Hamtaro animé or something.

I also think that all the fuzz about that pornographic stuff is extremely overblown. I think we only continue doing that is because we have used to. “Protecting” children from that stuff doesn’t really work. I bet many people who are so worried about this have seen porn themselves during childhood. Did it affect them? Well, I don’t think not much.

I think things should be like many image boards, the only person who would be allow to completely censor the stuff, is yourself. The only thing site has to do, is to warn the viewer what are they going to view.

Finally, someone with a strong(er) anti-self-censorship opinion joins the discussion!

I think Encyclopedia Dramatica is a great site, for what it is. In my mind, though, the fact that ED exists is actually useful for keeping a site like KYM (relatively) clean. If you want to see meme pics and such that are outside of KYM’s guidelines, then you can go to ED, 4chan, and similar places. There’s probably even room on the Internet for a “family-friendly” meme site, even more “watered down” than KYM. And we are “watered down”, as there is a lot of memetic content out there that we wouldn’t come close to touching. I don’t know what they would be, but I would be surprised if there were not memes that exist in the hardcore porn industry, for example; every community has them. (If someone knows of such memes, please don’t feel free to share, thank you.)

I think your point about “safe for work” is missing the point of the term NSFW, although you may be just making a point about what’s literally “safe for work”. Sure, I once got disciplined by my boss for taking too much time checking personal e-mail, which had nothing to do with sex or violence. At present, I don’t have a full-time job, so NSFW tags are more of a warning of what I’d do best to avoid while browsing KYM while sitting in a coffee shop for instance. What’s really not safe for any individual’s work is up to them to judge.

Your point about how most people end up seeing porn in their childhood is an interesting one, but once again is a personal issue. Speaking as both a parent and someone who in my case saw pornographic images even as young as six years old, my view is that sexuality is natural, but young children often aren’t emotionally ready to process such concepts. Does a parent want their child to learn about sexuality from porn, which tends to give a rather twisted view of it, or from a mature, responsible individual like a parent or sex-ed teacher? I imagine my kids could learn a lot about sex just from browsing the MLP image gallery, but what exactly would they be learning, and would it be a healthy lesson?

The only thing site has to do, is to warn the viewer what are they going to view.

For some sites, that works. Katawa Shoujo’s image board has a disclaimer on its home page that “This site is not safe for work.” Like a lot of similar sites, the idea is to say essentially, “Once you go past this page, you could see pretty much anything.” But on the other end of the spectrum, I’d hope that my own kids can be safely allowed to browse MLP content on Hasbro.com or HubWorld.com without me having to screen each link for them. KYM exists in the in-between area where there are legal issues, among other things. Surely you don’t think Hasbro.com should allow the sorts of MLP pictures that we allow with the NSFW tag?

May 25, 2013 at 04:26PM EDT
Quote

RandomMan wrote:


In the mind of a pervert, this is implied intercourse.

I must be a pervert, because that looks nastier than the AT-ATs.

And Brucker wouldn’t host such an image on his own website, but does that mean he will apply the same judgement on KYM? Of course not, as he acts differently on both sites.

It would have been easy to miss in my previous tl;dr post, but I had a question about this. I indeed do act differently on different sites and in different contexts. There’s probably a larger portion of my own uploaded images to KYM that I wouldn’t show my kids than of the KS gallery. Do people think it’s hypocritical, or is it reasonable?

^Excellent example, and part of the more complicated issues I included in my first draft of OP. I claimed my standards would preclude me hosting a pic of a person in a swimsuit, but I made and posted the above image on KYM. Cognitive dissonance, anyone?

Last edited May 25, 2013 at 04:47PM EDT
May 25, 2013 at 04:45PM EDT
Quote

Brucker wrote:


AT-ATs don’t have genitals, so while everyone knows what it’s suggesting, it’s obviously a joke and not “real” sex

Well technically neither do ponies and not just cuz they are all female but because It’s a children’s show. If they did have genitals that would make it not allowed not just NSFW. I am talking about suggestive and not “real” sex. I think you are missing my point and yes I do realize that it is the suggestive stuff that always falls into that grey area of NSFW. What I am saying is that one pic because it is an obvious joke even though it’s suggestive fucking (but fucking is still fucking whether suggestive or not) is still less offensive than a girl in something sexy ie. a bathing suit etc.

Also I am glad you brought up this topic last time I did only 2 mods and a small amount of users even wanted to discuss it and all I got was idiots saying “if you want to post porn there are other sites to go to hur dur”. Which how can you post porn on a site that doesn’t allow it. It’s always been about that grey area that could be simplified for all of us so mods and uses can be on the same page.

RandomMan wrote:

But let’s not forget that you will call bullshit and get your jimmies rustled on everything mods do that you disagree with. It’s not what the rules state, to you it’s just what you want, and fuck tah police amirite xD?

Coming from the guy who used to draw dicks on ponies, wut? Coming from the mod that banned me for this pic…

and according to rules is safe to post. You cant bullshit a bullshiter Random, I know why you banned me and it wasn’t for the pic. Random we fuck with each other all the time and I have srsly never been mad at any of the mods here. It’s always in fun, shits n giggles, for me. My jimmies remain unrustled.

Do you remember when all the new bronies started to show up in the MLP General? They would flip their shit at the sight of plot. Now those same guys (most of them shipping and wanting to rape BSoD as you read this) look at it as the joke I saw it as back then. It was because of bronies not being able to handle plot that the NSFW tag came about. Even now, under these tighter rules, plot is allowed without a NSFW tag. Oh the irony heh?
>MFW Every time you guys edit and NSFW a pic that is safe under the rules
R U fukken kidding me.jpg
It’s like the plot days all over again
At least it was funnier back then, most mods didn’t go into MLP General so we made our own rules of posting, and you weren’t such a swagfag NSFW nazimod who tells senior mods to dig graves for their sick cats.(I still can’t believe you were that big a dick to amanda) WTF.jpg

Last edited May 26, 2013 at 02:56AM EDT
May 26, 2013 at 02:32AM EDT
Quote

Um, are we really still discussing the topic, or is this something personal between you and RM?

I thought you would call me on that AT-ATs don’t have genitals thing, but I was hoping you’d understand the bigger picture: that any picture in an entry like Rule 34 are going to be borderline at best anyway.

Yes, MLP characters, as cartoons, don’t technically have genitals, but there’s a real difference anyway. They’re representations of animals (which have genitals IRL) while AT-ATs are vehicles. There’s another whole layer of silliness to the AT-AT pic, albeit a thin layer. While I don’t know if this is a personal issue for you for whatever reason, I think RandomMan’s statement is true for any user: anyone can call anything they want dirty and claim the mods are being unfair, but in the end, the judgment has to be left up to someone.

Example? That Gangnam Style picture you posted is too sexually suggestive; that scene in the video was downright obscene! What, don’t agree? How about now?

Filth.

Now stop talking about your jimmies, there may be children present.

May 26, 2013 at 03:32AM EDT
Quote


A lil of both

I’m not talking about the entries though. I’m talking face value 2 pics. One with a girl in a bikini and one of 2 AT-ATs fucking. Why is the girl in the bikini going to be tagged NSFW when the other wouldn’t? Is it because like I said the joke factor of it or like you said cuz they are machines? I don’t know, but there are plenty of entries where this is a factor anime, furry, mlp, hell any cartoon entry for that matter you will have definite NSFW and questionable (or grey area). We all know that genitals and nipples aren’t allowed and we aren’t talking about that. What we are talking about is that grey area between SFW and NSFW. For instance, the pic of the girl in just a bikini should be SFW. Where the pokegirl showing panties and ass cheek (personaly I think is SFW cuz no genitals) I would deem NSFW because of this sites rules but others could even say it’s loli, it’s CP and you should be banned for posting that pic.

Last edited May 26, 2013 at 04:17AM EDT
May 26, 2013 at 04:15AM EDT
Quote

Oh, the picture of Miki isn’t tagged NSFW, I was using her of an example of something I wouldn’t post on a site of my own despite not being particularly racy.

I don’t think the Pokemon pic I posted is tagged, but it probably should be because I think you’d be more likely to cause scandal by having it visible on your screen. As I sort of hinted, the way I tend to decide whether to mark something NSFW is imagine I’m looking at the picture on my laptop in a Starbucks, and someone from my church walks up behind me. If they shit their pants, it gets a tag.

Pretty subjective, but I think it gets the job done. And I don’t think the AT-AT picture passes the test.

What’s your opinion on my hypocrisy question, though? You know I value your opinion as my elder, right? ; )

May 26, 2013 at 04:35AM EDT
Quote

yes, it’s hypocritical. Shit my mom had my older brother when she was 16, me at 18. Both my parents did smoke weed. Was it hypocritical for them to tell me not to have sex and do drugs? yes but that’s what parents do. Did I do just the opposite of what they told me? yes I did.

Having said that do you find the younger generations to be
1. more sheltered
2. same as our generation
3. better / smarter than our generation
4. other
when it comes to sex, drugs, n violence?

May 26, 2013 at 05:39AM EDT
Quote

My mother never told me to not do anything. Most people think that sounds cool, but I’ve always hated it. I’m not talking about doing stupid things and then later saying “Don’t do what I did when I was your age.” I’m talking about “I’m going to keep my blog clean from even a hint of smut, but so long as I’m on KYM, here’s some boob jokes!”

It’s hard to generalize about kids. My kids are way more sheltered than I was, but I don’t get the impression that they’re the norm. I think the Internet in particular opens up the possibility of crazier crap. Like I said, I did see porn when I was a kid, but a single Google search could turn up nastier stuff than everything I ever saw before I was eighteen, and that’s even with friends who had imported X-rated anime stuff.

May 26, 2013 at 05:57AM EDT
Quote

Also what about vidya embeds and uploads? No one has brought that up yet. I have to be logged in to youtube to see any adult content but if I embed it or upload to kym you can watch it. We have been doing it without any NSFW tag this whole time. I can post vidya of girls in their underwear and no one says anything. The moment I post a pic of the same thing peeps go apeshit. I mean what’s the difference between the two?

Last edited May 26, 2013 at 06:49AM EDT
May 26, 2013 at 06:31AM EDT
Quote

As I see Hitagi drying her hair in that picture, I wonder to myself if there will someday be an evolutionary offshoot of Godwin’s law that states when people are speaking of NSFW material Bakemonogatari’s name will be invoked… It was only a matter of time, really.

On a more serious note, as someone who is still pretty young, I wanted to chime in on your penultimate post, Derpy (and I’ll have you know Paul Hardcastle made my age quite noteworthy, so my input is incredibly relevant, thank you very much). I honestly don’t think there’s much of a difference between “kids these days” and “kids from back in the day,” so to speak. Kids are kids, no matter how much easier it is to access certain stuff compared to how it used to be. This is solely my opinion, I have nothing to back it up, but I believe that it’s ultimately up to the kid whether or not they walk the straight and narrow. No matter how much sheltering you do for your child, they will be inundated with the real world sooner or later, and you just have to hope you instilled some sort of moral code into them so that they make the right choice. I was raised similarly to Brucker it seems, and I actually enjoyed it. I felt as though I was trusted to know that injecting smack into my eyeballs was bad, or that beating the snot out of the neighbor kid for no reason boded as bad karma. I can see where Brucker’s coming from, though… In retrospect I think I would have actually preferred perpetual reprimanding from my parents, as odd as that probably sounds.

…wait, would that be external-censorship? This tangent’s made a hypocrite of me D:

Last edited May 26, 2013 at 09:00AM EDT
May 26, 2013 at 08:57AM EDT
Quote

You know, I don’t think videos are given the same level of policing that pictures are, or even attention in general. I could be wrong, of course, but that’s my impression. Actually, you know what? There’s no NSFW tag available for videos anyway. That’s pretty iffy, isn’t it?

You know, sometimes you can think you see a striking difference between generations, and then when you examine it, it’s not really there. I saw a report on TV some time ago that was talking about how many teens “these days” (whenever that report was) didn’t think oral sex counted as “real” sex. It seemed shocking, but I later remembered that I knew people my own age in college who thought that way, and oh yeah, we had a President in the ‘90s who apparently thought that way! It’s not really new at all.

Oh and regarding parenting, even worse than never getting in trouble (and I seriously have a handful of specific crazy stories, if anyone wants to hear) is parental inconsistency, which is sort of what got me on this tangent by way of Vazquez. As a kid I was intelligent (I used to ace every test at school) but not a good student (I got a lot of C’s, and got into college on my SAT scores alone), and my parents told me if I got on the honor roll, they’d buy me a Nintendo. I didn’t; they did anyway. So I had a Nintendo, but I never really enjoyed it because of the sketchy circumstances under which I acquired it.

May 26, 2013 at 05:04PM EDT
Quote

Okay, here’s a discussion point to pool opinions (which once again don’t matter so much because admins get last say, but whatever).

Cleaning KS images again today, I come across this image. It’s not flagged, but maybe it should be. It shows two characters from the game who, while they can only be seen from the shoulders up, are clearly naked. That in itself may raise the question without further analysis, but it’s not a stretch to say that if you’ve got two nude people facing each other, sex is implied. (In fact, since they can only be seen from the shoulders up, one could conceivably imagine they are having intercourse outside of the frame.)

If it were up to you, would you leave the pic alone, flag it, or remove it? Why? And would you do differently if it were on a site you owned rather than on KYM?

May 26, 2013 at 09:33PM EDT
Quote

Really is it breaking any rules? no. Should it be tagged? no. Sex implied? every rape face image is sex implied.

I would have a site that would have a place for NSFW but rules simple
anything showing genitals hidden
everything else fair game

Last edited May 27, 2013 at 12:11AM EDT
May 27, 2013 at 12:10AM EDT
Quote

Brucker wrote:

Okay, here’s a discussion point to pool opinions (which once again don’t matter so much because admins get last say, but whatever).

Cleaning KS images again today, I come across this image. It’s not flagged, but maybe it should be. It shows two characters from the game who, while they can only be seen from the shoulders up, are clearly naked. That in itself may raise the question without further analysis, but it’s not a stretch to say that if you’ve got two nude people facing each other, sex is implied. (In fact, since they can only be seen from the shoulders up, one could conceivably imagine they are having intercourse outside of the frame.)

If it were up to you, would you leave the pic alone, flag it, or remove it? Why? And would you do differently if it were on a site you owned rather than on KYM?

I would leave it up. Nothing is shown and I think that the intended audience of kym is old enough to know about the birds and the bees. If it were my site, I still wouldn’t care. Sex isn’t something I see as naughty. Sex is perfectly natural. As long as no genitals are showing, I have no problem with it.

May 27, 2013 at 02:10AM EDT
Quote
Skeletor-sm

This thread is closed to new posts.

Old threads normally auto-close after 30 days of inactivity.

Why don't you start a new thread instead?

O HAI! You must login or signup first!