inappropriate avatars
01-10-2008, 05:48 AM
#31
In our society (secular democratic western) pictures of the naked body are not considered offensive to the majority of the population.
People who do find it offensive are usually religious fundamentalist nutters (the loud but small minority) who are only doing so because their version of "the book" told them so.
They are brainwashed to believe that nudity is offensive, hence trying to force their religious dogma on the rest of society through censorship.
Sure a few girly pics at first, but then what will they ask for next? (Last time I checked we are trying to move our society forward not back to the Dark Ages)
we should never ever allow censorship to start.
(sorry about the rant but this topic gets to me)
People who do find it offensive are usually religious fundamentalist nutters (the loud but small minority) who are only doing so because their version of "the book" told them so.
They are brainwashed to believe that nudity is offensive, hence trying to force their religious dogma on the rest of society through censorship.
Sure a few girly pics at first, but then what will they ask for next? (Last time I checked we are trying to move our society forward not back to the Dark Ages)
we should never ever allow censorship to start.
(sorry about the rant but this topic gets to me)
01-10-2008, 06:10 AM
#32
agree totally. Also, i believe the problem alot of peole have with some of "the pictures" is that the expressions on the womens faces does have a sexual conotation to them for example the carmen electra picture i posted earlier, provided here, below;
http://imagecache2.allposters.com/im...ra-Posters.jpg
DO NOT CLICK ABOVE LINK IF BELOW 18
it is exactly these facial, body, and posture ques which adults use to detect if someone is interested in them, or if they should approach them. Throughout our adult lives we use these subtle cues to detect if the opposite sex is interested or wants us to approach. so when these cues are seen on pictures, adults instantly have various brain signals and chemical reactions within their brains kicking of, whether it is a real person, or just a picture doesn't matter, the ADULT brain still interprets it as sexual
in most cases people find uncomfortable the images which instigate within their mind a sexual urge, or reaction. it does not have to be a strong one, but just being concious of a sexual image, ie; a good looking woman, with a provocative pose, or a provocative look triggers within humans basic sexual urges, and basic chemical systems in our brains, which kick us into
"alert alert! possible female mating partner" mode
these hormonal urges are exactly what makes, funnily enough, Adults anxious, excited, or embarrased to see these images.
the funny thing is little kids, the people we are "supposedly" protecting DO NOT have these reactions because their bodies have not hit puberty, so hence they DO NOT have large amounts of testosterone, or estrogen, or any other mass amounts of sex hormones going through their bodies.
so really, we are hidding these images from ourselves, because quite frankly, kids are not entuned, nor do they have the hormonal development to be atune to these sexual images.
if you showed a child just the head shot of the carmen electra picture above, they would say "it's a lady smiling"...
show it to a guy, and he knows it's a sexual look
AND THIS IS THE BIG DIFFERENCE and defining argument i believe to these idiotic, religously based sexually repressed arguments!
kids ask about tits and bums, but it's adults and society at large that create the stigma to these body parts, not the children. If kids are taught in an adult manner what the body parts do, in a educated manner they are more likely to grow up with a balanced view. What's not new, and not suprising, is not exciting to kids, so teach them young, and more importantly teach them how to treat a person with RESPECT and they will grow up to be good people.
get over it, and if you are an adult, enjoy a tit or two...you may be less stressed as well.
...at the end of the day only very recent new borns and adults know how much fun they can be
http://imagecache2.allposters.com/im...ra-Posters.jpg
DO NOT CLICK ABOVE LINK IF BELOW 18
it is exactly these facial, body, and posture ques which adults use to detect if someone is interested in them, or if they should approach them. Throughout our adult lives we use these subtle cues to detect if the opposite sex is interested or wants us to approach. so when these cues are seen on pictures, adults instantly have various brain signals and chemical reactions within their brains kicking of, whether it is a real person, or just a picture doesn't matter, the ADULT brain still interprets it as sexual
in most cases people find uncomfortable the images which instigate within their mind a sexual urge, or reaction. it does not have to be a strong one, but just being concious of a sexual image, ie; a good looking woman, with a provocative pose, or a provocative look triggers within humans basic sexual urges, and basic chemical systems in our brains, which kick us into
"alert alert! possible female mating partner" mode
these hormonal urges are exactly what makes, funnily enough, Adults anxious, excited, or embarrased to see these images.
the funny thing is little kids, the people we are "supposedly" protecting DO NOT have these reactions because their bodies have not hit puberty, so hence they DO NOT have large amounts of testosterone, or estrogen, or any other mass amounts of sex hormones going through their bodies.
so really, we are hidding these images from ourselves, because quite frankly, kids are not entuned, nor do they have the hormonal development to be atune to these sexual images.
if you showed a child just the head shot of the carmen electra picture above, they would say "it's a lady smiling"...
show it to a guy, and he knows it's a sexual look
AND THIS IS THE BIG DIFFERENCE and defining argument i believe to these idiotic, religously based sexually repressed arguments!kids ask about tits and bums, but it's adults and society at large that create the stigma to these body parts, not the children. If kids are taught in an adult manner what the body parts do, in a educated manner they are more likely to grow up with a balanced view. What's not new, and not suprising, is not exciting to kids, so teach them young, and more importantly teach them how to treat a person with RESPECT and they will grow up to be good people.
get over it, and if you are an adult, enjoy a tit or two...you may be less stressed as well.
...at the end of the day only very recent new borns and adults know how much fun they can be
01-10-2008, 06:10 AM
#33
I believe the main issue on hand here is not everyone who use's this forum is an Adult, or has the same views as others..
We must understand that there are young people who go onto this forum, and some (not all) of the images displaying a form of sexuality may not be appropriate. Imagine if you will, you have a young child, someone you love and cherish, would you mind if your young Son or Daughter saw an image of a young scantly clad woman? Lets say for argument sake that they then believed this to be appropriate to expect all women to dress and act like that (ok maybe i am being a bit to pedantic on that case there, and getting into a freudian argument)
But we should respect the well wishes of other people, who may have a sound reason for their claims. If it were only adults who used this forum, i doubt the problem would be here, but we should try to realize the issue from the point of view of the concerned parents, and realize that it may be there wishes not to have their kids objected to that material.
Obviously it is everywhere these days, but should we also just use that as an excuse to follow? Is not what makes us human the ability to make rational, logical decisions based on our values, ethics, morals and beliefs? I believe by using the excuse it is everywhere somehow makes us more like mindless zombies, as we just follow, and recreate what we see or hear. (again i believe i could be a little if not allot narrow minded and pedantic with that post)
I agree allot with what Tom has said, although knowing Contact personally, i do know what he is like. I believe it is his wishes not only for his kids, but for other under age less mature people, that they do not have to see the very explicit images. I mean sure a couple key presses and they can find it anywhere on the internet, but should we do what is in my opinion the more moral and ethical or just have selflessness or narrow mindedness that just because we believe it is acceptable, and just because we can make a good argument for it, that everyone would feel the same?
Again maybe i am wrong in voicing this view point? Maybe we should display these images for youngsters to see. It is hard for any one person to make judgment on this matter. But i do believe as a group we could agree to maybe just tone them down slightly.
P.S I do agree with you Tom, that it is strange we allow violence, drugs, foul language on TV, Movies, News, Newspaper, Radio, Magazine (basically all our forms of media) but we still get uptight about the human body (EG Janet Jackson incident) although we dont get so upset or create an uproar when it comes to other instances.
Is it the protestant religion so wound into our lives through government, media and education, or is it more philosophical? That is a very good question, one that is immensely hard to answer, i do suppose the Protestant religion could be the answer, as the Western World is so heavily based on this religion, thanx to many reasons. But when you look at the Eastern World who have other religious belief's they are very much the same, and in most case's worse. So that in many ways points to it being philosophical in nature, or a result or the world we live in today, one that has changed greatly....
Hmmmm that was fun, love using my brain and thinking for a change. Keep them coming Tom, be great to debate this (note i will most likely lose, but it would be with great honor and valor...
)
We must understand that there are young people who go onto this forum, and some (not all) of the images displaying a form of sexuality may not be appropriate. Imagine if you will, you have a young child, someone you love and cherish, would you mind if your young Son or Daughter saw an image of a young scantly clad woman? Lets say for argument sake that they then believed this to be appropriate to expect all women to dress and act like that (ok maybe i am being a bit to pedantic on that case there, and getting into a freudian argument)
But we should respect the well wishes of other people, who may have a sound reason for their claims. If it were only adults who used this forum, i doubt the problem would be here, but we should try to realize the issue from the point of view of the concerned parents, and realize that it may be there wishes not to have their kids objected to that material.
Obviously it is everywhere these days, but should we also just use that as an excuse to follow? Is not what makes us human the ability to make rational, logical decisions based on our values, ethics, morals and beliefs? I believe by using the excuse it is everywhere somehow makes us more like mindless zombies, as we just follow, and recreate what we see or hear. (again i believe i could be a little if not allot narrow minded and pedantic with that post)
I agree allot with what Tom has said, although knowing Contact personally, i do know what he is like. I believe it is his wishes not only for his kids, but for other under age less mature people, that they do not have to see the very explicit images. I mean sure a couple key presses and they can find it anywhere on the internet, but should we do what is in my opinion the more moral and ethical or just have selflessness or narrow mindedness that just because we believe it is acceptable, and just because we can make a good argument for it, that everyone would feel the same?
Again maybe i am wrong in voicing this view point? Maybe we should display these images for youngsters to see. It is hard for any one person to make judgment on this matter. But i do believe as a group we could agree to maybe just tone them down slightly.
P.S I do agree with you Tom, that it is strange we allow violence, drugs, foul language on TV, Movies, News, Newspaper, Radio, Magazine (basically all our forms of media) but we still get uptight about the human body (EG Janet Jackson incident) although we dont get so upset or create an uproar when it comes to other instances.
Is it the protestant religion so wound into our lives through government, media and education, or is it more philosophical? That is a very good question, one that is immensely hard to answer, i do suppose the Protestant religion could be the answer, as the Western World is so heavily based on this religion, thanx to many reasons. But when you look at the Eastern World who have other religious belief's they are very much the same, and in most case's worse. So that in many ways points to it being philosophical in nature, or a result or the world we live in today, one that has changed greatly....
Hmmmm that was fun, love using my brain and thinking for a change. Keep them coming Tom, be great to debate this (note i will most likely lose, but it would be with great honor and valor...
)
01-10-2008, 06:27 AM
#34
Sub post:
I agree some if not most of the images are fine, and should stay. But i believe some are a bit to much...
Also in regards to the Religious brain washing, i find that over the top. It is their beliefs and we should respect that (we are a multicultural society). If they believe the woman body should be kept sacred etc than who are we to say our opinion is better or more just? Having said that i do believe it is wrong, and all people created equal etc etc, but i respect what they believe in. Again should we then Censor the material for the minority... In short no we shouldn't.
We should just make sure the images are not as sexually suggestive as the Beautiful Carmen Electra picture Tom came up with. The Marry Magdalene one is fine i believe. As she was an amazing woman (if you believe either story really)
By the way i basically class myself as having no religion, and i do not find any of the images offensive.
I agree some if not most of the images are fine, and should stay. But i believe some are a bit to much...
Also in regards to the Religious brain washing, i find that over the top. It is their beliefs and we should respect that (we are a multicultural society). If they believe the woman body should be kept sacred etc than who are we to say our opinion is better or more just? Having said that i do believe it is wrong, and all people created equal etc etc, but i respect what they believe in. Again should we then Censor the material for the minority... In short no we shouldn't.
We should just make sure the images are not as sexually suggestive as the Beautiful Carmen Electra picture Tom came up with. The Marry Magdalene one is fine i believe. As she was an amazing woman (if you believe either story really)
By the way i basically class myself as having no religion, and i do not find any of the images offensive.
01-10-2008, 06:31 AM
#35
lol, Nitrobuggies, debate is food for the brain, and excercise. don't be shy.
i see your point, and yeah i agree for the sake of simplicity, you aren't going to show kids pornography, this is just insane, but i mean, healthy knowledge of the human body is fine. The discussion on sex etc can come when they are older, they have a more rounded opinion on boys/girls and they are at a age when they need to know (ie puberty)
the point is, all these arguments have essentially a religious base. let's not kid ourselves, religion both christian and Muslim are very repressive, and regressive. Ie no sex before marriage, no contraception, women must be covered, seriously it does not work when we as a society have evolved in both our knowledge of humans, and other factors.
i honestly see no problem int he carmen electra picture, i mean, she has suspenders on, and you can see heaps of skin...big deal. At the end of the day it is the sexual conotation that we, as adults see in that picture that make us think it is "Bad". Kids DO NOT and will not, until puberty, really understand the subtle sexual cues in that picture...
and guess what when kids hit puberty you will not stop them from seeing titties or from gigelling when they see a tit it's human nature, and again, it is the HORMONES that drive us, not some repressive religion that designated rules some 2000 years ago from priests who thought they heard god all mighty...
by the way the moral basis to christianity was not in the old testament. it was infact edited into the new testament by st Augustine, and the moral basis was taken from earlier works by the greek philopsopher Socrates and Plato and a few others i believe. I studied philosophy of psychology last semester and this was one of the topics we discussed.
so really not even christianity can dictate to us that they are the "moral saviours" cuz heck, it wasn't even in the old testament! it came from the greeks and dude...the greeks were a freaky sexual bunch
umm hello...the Island of Lesbos lol lesbos = Lesbian
i see your point, and yeah i agree for the sake of simplicity, you aren't going to show kids pornography, this is just insane, but i mean, healthy knowledge of the human body is fine. The discussion on sex etc can come when they are older, they have a more rounded opinion on boys/girls and they are at a age when they need to know (ie puberty)
the point is, all these arguments have essentially a religious base. let's not kid ourselves, religion both christian and Muslim are very repressive, and regressive. Ie no sex before marriage, no contraception, women must be covered, seriously it does not work when we as a society have evolved in both our knowledge of humans, and other factors.
i honestly see no problem int he carmen electra picture, i mean, she has suspenders on, and you can see heaps of skin...big deal. At the end of the day it is the sexual conotation that we, as adults see in that picture that make us think it is "Bad". Kids DO NOT and will not, until puberty, really understand the subtle sexual cues in that picture...
and guess what when kids hit puberty you will not stop them from seeing titties or from gigelling when they see a tit
it's human nature, and again, it is the HORMONES that drive us, not some repressive religion that designated rules some 2000 years ago from priests who thought they heard god all mighty...by the way the moral basis to christianity was not in the old testament. it was infact edited into the new testament by st Augustine, and the moral basis was taken from earlier works by the greek philopsopher Socrates and Plato and a few others i believe.
I studied philosophy of psychology last semester and this was one of the topics we discussed.so really not even christianity can dictate to us that they are the "moral saviours" cuz heck, it wasn't even in the old testament! it came from the greeks
and dude...the greeks were a freaky sexual bunch umm hello...the Island of Lesbos lol lesbos = Lesbian
01-10-2008, 06:52 AM
#36
oww and final note, and more succinct argument is;
do you think the tribes people in the amazon, who have their women showing skin left right and centre, and the men in many cases naked cover their kids eyes? no. So really the argument is not about nakedness, but really what people REALLY are uncomfortable with, yet they do not say it, is the sexual NATURE, ie the sexy LOOKS or POSTURES these girls have in the pics.
but the problem is most people i don't realise this, and in most cases nudie pics come with a chick showing these sexual cues ( acertain smile, a pose, a look, a head posture, body posture etc), yet people confuse these sexual facial cues with nakedness and think it is the nakedness that gets them all hot and bothered ...yet it was a simple sly look from the girl in the picture that got you all steamed up
if you get a stiffy when you watch national geographic, then, i may admit it is the skin that gets you excited...but i doubt it is that
do you think the tribes people in the amazon, who have their women showing skin left right and centre, and the men in many cases naked cover their kids eyes? no. So really the argument is not about nakedness, but really what people REALLY are uncomfortable with, yet they do not say it, is the sexual NATURE, ie the sexy LOOKS or POSTURES these girls have in the pics.
but the problem is most people i don't realise this, and in most cases nudie pics come with a chick showing these sexual cues ( acertain smile, a pose, a look, a head posture, body posture etc), yet people confuse these sexual facial cues with nakedness and think it is the nakedness that gets them all hot and bothered
...yet it was a simple sly look from the girl in the picture that got you all steamed upif you get a stiffy when you watch national geographic, then, i may admit it is the skin that gets you excited...but i doubt it is that
Last edited by TomB; 01-10-2008 at 07:04 AM.
01-10-2008, 10:28 AM
#37
cliff notes on tom's posts... anybody ?
im not reading all of that
im not reading all of that
01-10-2008, 02:29 PM
#39
Well i just been convinced, from now on i'll blind fold my 4 boys when we go to the shops or beach , i cant see a young kid sitting at a computer screen oggling over a avatar, OMG they only have to pick up the Daily rag and see more
, i cant see a young kid sitting at a computer screen oggling over a avatar, OMG they only have to pick up the Daily rag and see more
01-10-2008, 02:43 PM
#40
TomB, when your finished here, could you please spare some time to start a new thread discussing/debating the effects of trade liberalization on the world sugar market. it would be cool!
01-10-2008, 03:58 PM
#41
agree totally. Also, i believe the problem alot of peole have with some of "the pictures" is that the expressions on the womens faces does have a sexual conotation to them for example the carmen electra picture i posted earlier, provided here, below;
http://imagecache2.allposters.com/im...ra-Posters.jpg
DO NOT CLICK ABOVE LINK IF BELOW 18
it is exactly these facial, body, and posture ques which adults use to detect if someone is interested in them, or if they should approach them. Throughout our adult lives we use these subtle cues to detect if the opposite sex is interested or wants us to approach. so when these cues are seen on pictures, adults instantly have various brain signals and chemical reactions within their brains kicking of, whether it is a real person, or just a picture doesn't matter, the ADULT brain still interprets it as sexual
in most cases people find uncomfortable the images which instigate within their mind a sexual urge, or reaction. it does not have to be a strong one, but just being concious of a sexual image, ie; a good looking woman, with a provocative pose, or a provocative look triggers within humans basic sexual urges, and basic chemical systems in our brains, which kick us into
"alert alert! possible female mating partner" mode
these hormonal urges are exactly what makes, funnily enough, Adults anxious, excited, or embarrased to see these images.
the funny thing is little kids, the people we are "supposedly" protecting DO NOT have these reactions because their bodies have not hit puberty, so hence they DO NOT have large amounts of testosterone, or estrogen, or any other mass amounts of sex hormones going through their bodies.
so really, we are hidding these images from ourselves, because quite frankly, kids are not entuned, nor do they have the hormonal development to be atune to these sexual images.
if you showed a child just the head shot of the carmen electra picture above, they would say "it's a lady smiling"...
show it to a guy, and he knows it's a sexual look AND THIS IS THE BIG DIFFERENCE and defining argument i believe to these idiotic, religously based sexually repressed arguments!
kids ask about tits and bums, but it's adults and society at large that create the stigma to these body parts, not the children. If kids are taught in an adult manner what the body parts do, in a educated manner they are more likely to grow up with a balanced view. What's not new, and not suprising, is not exciting to kids, so teach them young, and more importantly teach them how to treat a person with RESPECT and they will grow up to be good people.
get over it, and if you are an adult, enjoy a tit or two...you may be less stressed as well....at the end of the day only very recent new borns and adults know how much fun they can be
http://imagecache2.allposters.com/im...ra-Posters.jpg
DO NOT CLICK ABOVE LINK IF BELOW 18
it is exactly these facial, body, and posture ques which adults use to detect if someone is interested in them, or if they should approach them. Throughout our adult lives we use these subtle cues to detect if the opposite sex is interested or wants us to approach. so when these cues are seen on pictures, adults instantly have various brain signals and chemical reactions within their brains kicking of, whether it is a real person, or just a picture doesn't matter, the ADULT brain still interprets it as sexual
in most cases people find uncomfortable the images which instigate within their mind a sexual urge, or reaction. it does not have to be a strong one, but just being concious of a sexual image, ie; a good looking woman, with a provocative pose, or a provocative look triggers within humans basic sexual urges, and basic chemical systems in our brains, which kick us into
"alert alert! possible female mating partner" mode
these hormonal urges are exactly what makes, funnily enough, Adults anxious, excited, or embarrased to see these images.
the funny thing is little kids, the people we are "supposedly" protecting DO NOT have these reactions because their bodies have not hit puberty, so hence they DO NOT have large amounts of testosterone, or estrogen, or any other mass amounts of sex hormones going through their bodies.
so really, we are hidding these images from ourselves, because quite frankly, kids are not entuned, nor do they have the hormonal development to be atune to these sexual images.
if you showed a child just the head shot of the carmen electra picture above, they would say "it's a lady smiling"...
show it to a guy, and he knows it's a sexual look
AND THIS IS THE BIG DIFFERENCE and defining argument i believe to these idiotic, religously based sexually repressed arguments!kids ask about tits and bums, but it's adults and society at large that create the stigma to these body parts, not the children. If kids are taught in an adult manner what the body parts do, in a educated manner they are more likely to grow up with a balanced view. What's not new, and not suprising, is not exciting to kids, so teach them young, and more importantly teach them how to treat a person with RESPECT and they will grow up to be good people.
get over it, and if you are an adult, enjoy a tit or two...you may be less stressed as well.
...at the end of the day only very recent new borns and adults know how much fun they can be
01-10-2008, 05:35 PM
#42
This may be a first. But I think i agree with some of his dribble......
01-10-2008, 05:57 PM
#43
Inappropriate Avatars
If you have to have your half naked chick as your avatar then go ahead, but why. Do you have to have an alcoholic drink every day after work, whats wrong with water does everything have to revolve around a sexual nature.
I dont go to church even though I went to a private school, but have some respect for your self and others, for goodness sake we should be talking about RC and not how far people can push the boundaries of their avatars.
I dont go to church even though I went to a private school, but have some respect for your self and others, for goodness sake we should be talking about RC and not how far people can push the boundaries of their avatars.
01-10-2008, 06:04 PM
#44
01-10-2008, 06:19 PM
#45
I'm glad i've tickled your intellectual curiosity. That's critical thinkingActually, i only thought about this topic when this thread came up, but it's pritty interesting, and i think i might do a bit more research on it. There is already alot of psychology journals that outline the role and importance of just the face alone in how humans interpret others, so really it makes sense.
i also think there is a large element of these "sexual" images which is classically conditioned in a simple stimulus response method, and stimulus pairing method....otherwise how can you explain that the carmen electra picture is more "sexual" than the Leonardo Da Vinci Mary Magdalene picture?
I'm sure we have all seen images of fully clothed women with a provocative look, and suggestive body posture that are more sexual than a a fully naked woman with a muted expression and statuesque body posture right?
Nothing wrong in thinking, it might lead us to learn something in the process
