Page 5 of 8 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 79
  1.   Click here to go to the next staff post in this thread.   #41
    Sentimental Machine Fiz's Avatar

    Weasyl
    Fiz
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Gender
    Female
    Posts
    1,476
    Okay I think at this point we know that people are not pleased with the wording and ruling, and people know that the staff's position is to try to uphold the law regarding this. Seeing as there is a large amount of people made to feel uncomfortable by this, that is not good and was never our intention.

    So, now let's try to collaborate to try to fix this! I'm sure there is a way we can come to a compromise here.


    Here are some ideas I've heard:

    - Change it back to all-inclusive, non-gendered "nipples" all going into Mature like it was before.

    Truth of the matter was, while that is how the wording was before, that was due to a typo. It was never enforced as it was written.

    - Clarify that we are going by what the law's ruling regarding what "female" is in order to (regrettably) censor things, and that on a personal level we do not subscribe to what the law's beliefs are regarding sex and gender.

    This was Armaina's suggestion. (replaced FCC with law since the FCC has no bearing on internet communications) I think it's a good idea but at the same time, I feel people will just believe we are hiding behind what the laws say in order to get away sound transphobic and/or cissexist.

    - Change it to remove gendered terminology, and have it say something closer to "defined breasts including areola and nipple".

    This might be our best bet so far, but people just may view the word 'defined' and think that it means large, so perhaps there is better wording for this one. Any suggestions?


    Feel free to throw us more ideas for us to look at.

    NEW: Further suggestions:

    - Move the hosting to a European country to bypass laws regarding showing "female" breasts.

    This isn't happening. It would be an expensive, logistical nightmare, and would possibly make our rules and guidelines more restricted depending on what country it was possibly moved to. It might solve the problem regarding the ratings of "female" breasts , but then we'd possibly have to entirely deny hosting for a lot more subjects. It'd cause more problems than it would solve.
    Last edited by Fiz; 06-17-2014 at 10:05 AM.

  2. #42
    Senior Gamedog's Avatar
    Weasyl
    Gamedog
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Москва
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    843
    Quote Originally Posted by Fiz View Post
    - Change it to remove gendered terminology, and have it say something closer to "defined breasts including areola and nipple".

    This might be our best bet so far, but people just may view the word 'defined' and think that it means large, so perhaps there is better wording for this one. Any suggestions?
    This is the best one in my opinion, but then you'd run into issues with people thinking that small/flat-chested women and transwomen don't count. To be completely honest, I don't think that there's a way to do this without offending at least one person, or making the rules unclear.
    I do believe this one should work though.

  3.   Click here to go to the next staff post in this thread.   #43
    Sentimental Machine Fiz's Avatar

    Weasyl
    Fiz
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Gender
    Female
    Posts
    1,476
    Quote Originally Posted by Gamedog View Post
    This is the best one in my opinion, but then you'd run into issues with people thinking that small/flat-chested women and transwomen don't count. To be completely honest, I don't think that there's a way to do this without offending at least one person, or making the rules unclear.
    I do believe this one should work though.

    Yea that's why I've said that the word "defined" is possibly not the best word for this, since then people would get confused regarding folks with smaller breasts or flat chests.

    You're right though, but I think we can come to a solution that'll make most people happy. Not everybody (because there is always going to be people that hate rules and guidelines as a default), but most people.

  4.   Click here to go to the next staff post in this thread.   #44
    Retired Staff Frank LeRenard's Avatar
    Weasyl
    MLR
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Land of the Finns
    Posts
    439
    Regarding drawn vs. photographed animal genitalia, I want to point out that we had a fairly long discussion about this. Originally I was in the camp that other folks here seem to be in, namely that if male dogs don't need to wear pants outside in real life, why should we be putting drawn dog genitals into the mature category? In the end, though, the longer we discussed it, the more I realized it was mostly a matter of practicality: no one is going to pay much attention to the rules if they're full of exception clauses, and enforcement of the rules also becomes a giant hassle, since a lot of the enforcement is by necessity subjective anyway. Differentiating rules by species is just adding a whole other level of complexity that we didn't even want to think about (because then you start having to worry about, for example, what to do with sexualized robots, aliens, magical elemental beings, and so on ad infinitum). So the moderate solution was, if someone intentionally draws animal genitalia, that's a bit different than incidental photography of animal genitalia, so we'll just lump artwork of sex organs all in the same category. Not an ideal solution, I admit, but it helps keep things from becoming completely intractable (for staff and for users).
    What that means is, the ratings guide applies across the board, from prairie dogs to spaceships.
    If anyone has a better idea, though, let us know. I'm still feeling rather wishy-washy on this one myself.


    Regarding the other thing (female nipples), I suppose we could put a clause in there stating that it's a legal issue... I can at least state that for myself, I agree that US law is pretty silly and Puritanical in this regard, and I can also state that I have no issue and feel I have no reason to ever take issue with anyone's sexuality/gender identity/etc. I also agree that the more we learn, the more it becomes clear that 'gender' isn't a purely binary concept (i.e. biology is not computer science). I can't speak for all staff members, of course, but that's where I stand. It is very difficult to please everyone about this, though.

    As for basing the servers out of Europe, amusingly enough I half-jokingly brought that up in chat last night.... I wouldn't know the first thing about the feasibility of moving our stuff there, though. Something tells me it would be prohibitively expensive/a logistical nightmare, but I could be wrong.
    Last edited by Frank LeRenard; 06-17-2014 at 08:44 AM.

  5. #45
    Senior Gamedog's Avatar
    Weasyl
    Gamedog
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Москва
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    843
    Quote Originally Posted by Frank LeRenard View Post
    Regarding drawn vs. photographed animal genitalia, I want to point out that we had a fairly long discussion about this. Originally I was in the camp that other folks here seem to be in, namely that if male dogs don't need to wear pants outside in real life, why should we be putting drawn dog genitals into the mature category? In the end, though, the longer we discussed it, the more I realized it was mostly a matter of practicality: no one is going to pay much attention to the rules if they're full of exception clauses, and enforcement of the rules also becomes a giant hassle, since a lot of the enforcement is by necessity subjective anyway. Differentiating rules by species is just adding a whole other level of complexity that we didn't even want to think about (because then you start having to worry about, for example, what to do with sexualized robots, aliens, magical elemental beings, and so on ad infinitum). So the moderate solution was, if someone intentionally draws animal genitalia, that's a bit different than incidental photography of animal genitalia, so we'll just lump artwork of sex organs all in the same category. Not an ideal solution, I admit, but it helps keep things from becoming completely intractable (for staff and for users).
    What that means is, the ratings guide applies across the board, from prairie dogs to spaceships.
    If anyone has a better idea, though, let us know. I'm still feeling rather wishy-washy on this one myself.
    My argument was not that it should be divided through species, but that feral animals when the genitalia is not the focus of the image, should not be considered pornography. It would not be hard to enforce, either. The examples Atarashi and I provided are examples of an image not focusing on genitalia:
    https://www.weasyl.com/static/media/...ab4f90e04c.png
    https://www.weasyl.com/static/media/...c783be2f53.png

    However, an image like this (NSFW) WOULD be considered mature/18+: https://www.weasyl.com/static/media/...5d41bee549.png

    I mean the rule for animal photography was changed to allow animal photos but as long as any genitals visible were not the focus of the picture. Why can't this be the same with art?

  6.   Click here to go to the next staff post in this thread.   #46
    Crabby Admin Term's Avatar

    Weasyl
    Term
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Jersey Shore
    Posts
    392
    Quote Originally Posted by Frank LeRenard View Post
    As for basing the servers out of Europe, amusingly enough I half-jokingly brought that up in chat last night.... I wouldn't know the first thing about the feasibility of moving our stuff there, though. Something tells me it would be prohibitively expensive/a logistical nightmare, but I could be wrong.
    Even then the "just go to Europe" suggestion isn't really helpful when you consider what pornography laws exist in the EU. Depending on the country, we could possibly make Weasyl more restrictive by doing so, rather than more open.

  7.   Click here to go to the next staff post in this thread.   #47
    Sentimental Machine Fiz's Avatar

    Weasyl
    Fiz
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Gender
    Female
    Posts
    1,476
    Quote Originally Posted by Term View Post
    Even then the "just go to Europe" suggestion isn't really helpful when you consider what pornography laws exist in the EU. Depending on the country, we could possibly make Weasyl more restrictive by doing so, rather than more open.
    Yea, I think depending on the EU country, it'd heavily restrict what we could even host, let alone put into ratings. Plus like what Frank said, it'd be an expensive and logistical nightmare.

    It's not an option. It might fix one problem but it'd cause so much more.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Gamedog View Post
    My argument was not that it should be divided through species, but that feral animals when the genitalia is not the focus of the image, should not be considered pornography. It would not be hard to enforce, either. The examples Atarashi and I provided are examples of an image not focusing on genitalia:
    https://www.weasyl.com/static/media/...ab4f90e04c.png
    https://www.weasyl.com/static/media/...c783be2f53.png
    Those seem more like bumps to me than detailed/defined genitalia though. Those -probably- wouldn't be bumped up rating wise unless there was some other context going on.


    I mean the rule for animal photography was changed to allow animal photos but as long as any genitals visible were not the focus of the picture. Why can't this be the same with art?
    Real animals cannot help being naked and having their genitals showing. People can chose what is and is not in a drawing though. Real dog can't chose whether his balls are flopped out, a person drawing a dog can chose whether or whether not to included flopped out balls. That is why.

    Hope that helps a bit.

  8. #48
    Senior Gamedog's Avatar
    Weasyl
    Gamedog
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Москва
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    843
    Quote Originally Posted by Fiz View Post
    Those seem more like bumps to me than detailed/defined genitalia though. Those -probably- wouldn't be bumped up rating wise unless there was some other context going on.
    When does it cross the line from "bumps" into "detailed/defined"?

    Quote Originally Posted by Fiz View Post
    Real animals cannot help being naked and having their genitals showing. People can chose what is and is not in a drawing though. Real dog can't chose whether his balls are flopped out, a person drawing a dog can chose whether or whether not to included flopped out balls. That is why.

    Hope that helps a bit.
    Well we're debating on whether or not rating breasts/nipples as mature, surely people can just omit those in their art? :S

  9. #49
    Regular armaina's Avatar
    Weasyl
    armaina
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    34
    Quote Originally Posted by Gamedog View Post
    Well we're debating on whether or not rating breasts/nipples as mature, surely people can just omit those in their art? :S
    You're riding a very disturbing line, here. I'm no mod obvs, but I have to voice, I'm pretty bothered by the fact that you consider those the same at all. If you're genuinely upset about the idea that you can't show genitalia on animals and have it be regarded as 'general', then this maybe isn't the place for you.
    Last edited by armaina; 06-17-2014 at 10:51 AM.

  10. #50
    I have a small question: Would't it when it comes to the ratings be easier to make it 3 instead of 4? I mean Explicit and Mature are basically the same thing, and both of them requires you to be at least 18 years old before you can watch the content from them, to which nothing else is needed as you can legally watch everything.

    A suggestion I would like is to also maybe give links or something to examples of art which would fit under each category, because I, and I might be one of a very few. Have both trouble and concerns about what actually fits in where, at least when it comes to Moderate and Mature because in some cases there's a small and thin, sometimes invisible line between the two depending on art.

    And I know this have been answered already... But why should it come down to a simple choice of whether or not what the animal can choose to do? In a real picture yes the dog can't help itself but be naked, unless their owner or someone else put clothing on them, but the one having taken the picture, could have done it differently to avoid visible genitals, much like a artist can choose to either not make it in their art or then make it from a angle it would't be visible at in the first place either.

    So why should a artist be afraid to make a anatomically correct picture of a Dog, jumping for a frisbee for instance, simply because they choose to do it from the side where the Sheath might be visible, just like if the artist had taken a picture of a Dog like that instead, where the Sheath would be visible to? That just seems unfair to the artist they have to shy away from something natural, simply because it's art and they can choose not to make it be there, if they wanna make something not only natural and common in the real world and life for any kind of age, but anatomically correct.

    If a artist can't make and upload a picture of a dog laying on it's back or jumping or something, where the sheath is visible and they decide to make it. Then people should be allowed to upload a picture either where a dog does that and it's visible, because they decided to take it like that. Because then I can say in both cases: One decided to make it when they could also choose not to. But the one having taken the picture, could also have chosen not to. It's failed and stupid logic, you cannot say no to one but yes to the other, because of a choice of like that, that's unfair for the other party!

 

 

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •