About nudity...

[LittleB]

It's 18 where I live, California- woohoo I'm over 18!!

/me runs off for some inexplicable reason (carrying my wallet)

 

[Cybernoid]

Yes there are laws against nudity. You need to be over the age of 18 in most of Europe, and over the age of 21 in most of America to view pornography.

Pornography isn't the same as nudity. So, what about nudity laws?

Regardless, there are still no laws regarding discussion about or viewing images of games with a Teen rating (which I believe is 13+ anyway) so your argument about that is irreleveant and you're just being pedantic now.

It's 15 or 16 in many countries. The non-existence of such a law doesn't seem like a very good argument to me.

 

[DiSTuRbEd]

I believe it's 21 in some states isn't it?

Nope 18 in ever state, you can buy playboy when you turn 18, anywhere

 

[IchI]

I never really understood this my self. My family has been open about everything, I can happily walk around my house naked without a care in the world.

I think nudity is one of those things that are not accepted by people because other people don't accept them. In a way its like the marrage between two people. People seem to think they have to do it because everyone else does. Its exactly like that with the forum rules. Because another website says "we do not allow nudity". Everyone just follows. Its a vicious circle thats actually quite perfetic.

At the end of the day its just one of those stupid reasons made by stupid people. Its the way the human race works.

 

[Cybernoid]

It's just an opinion I have. I wouldn't feel good about letting my future kids watch pornographic imagery and not even extremely violent movies or games, especially when it's without a purpose.

Seriously: pornography and nudity are two different things.

Violent games often have a purpose, you have this opposing side of some sort to defeat, with violent features and events.

Often, but not always. Vice City is a prime example.

I think it simply isn't.. good for children to see women in sexually exciting images or nudity, it doesn't build up anything good, it's for lonely adult men and not something that should be part of a kids life.

Nudity is possibly the most natural thing on this planet. I mean, shit, Finnish family members take saunas together. Ultraconservative attitudes lead to no good. Girls asking their parents about menstruation are silenced and so on. It's all a product of an unhealthy society.

 

[Neutrino]

Pornography isn't the same as nudity. So, what about nudity laws?

Doesn't matter. To the law, most nudity is pornography. The government cannot always make a distinction between the two as the difference is open to subjective debate. Therefore it must cover anything that could be considered pornography, which means most any picture having a person in a state of undress. (There may be an exception in the case of medical pictures, though I don't know.)

I don't see what your problem is Cybernoid. It's against the law. The forums can't break the law and still get hosting. Thus they can't change the rules.

It doesn't matter what you or anyone else thinks on the subject. It's a law, and unless you can lobby to have those laws changed the forum rules aren't going to change.

 

[Chris D]

Seriously: pornography and nudity are two different things.



Often, but not always. Vice City is a prime example.



Nudity is possibly the most natural thing on this planet. I mean, shit, Finnish family members take saunas together. Ultraconservative attitudes lead to no good. Girls asking their parents about menstruation are silenced and so on. It's all a product of an unhealthy society.

The picture in question here was actually a pornographic picture.
"writing, films or pictures designed to be sexually exciting"

I think that pretty much covers what the picture in question was originally designed for. I'm sorry but a full frontal picture of a naked woman posing fully nude is pornography and we cannot legally show it on this forum. End of story.

It's irrelevant what your opinions are, we can't link to that picture or any others. And despite this being a very minor incident really, we still can't allow it.

 

[NeptuneUK]

some people just dont see the difference between sexual pornography and mild nudity

 

[Cybernoid]

Doesn't matter. To the law, nudity is pornography.

So basically, every film in the US is considered XXX-rated adult entertainment if it has nudity, such as breasts? For example, Lost in Translation would be porn under these supposed US laws, because it contains female nudity. I find that very, very hard to believe...

 

[blahblahblah]

Is there a reason to have nudity/pornography on this website? What would it accomplish? Are there no other reasonable alternative? How would you control it? What would its limits be? What about people who have a moral objection to nudity? What about the taboos for western society, should you respect them? What about legal obligations? If nudity was allowed, would this still be classified as a gaming site? How would you restrict people under the legal age for nudity/pornography? Why do you think nudity is a neccesity for a site like this? What about contractual obligations that this site may have to its hosts? What about additional bandwith costs? What about PR problems this site may incurr?

Those are only a few questions. If you take a look at some of the potential issues, there really isn't much discussion. Nudity doesn't need to be a part of this site.

 

[Neutrino]

So basically, every film in the US is considered XXX-rated adult entertainment if it has nudity, such as breasts? For example, Lost in Translation would be porn under these supposed US laws, because it contains female nudity. I find that very, very hard to believe...

No, if it shows female breasts then it's going to get an R rating, which means you must be 17 years or older to watch it.

 

[Dalamari]

They don't rate something XXX for nudity, they rate it that for sexual content.

And if there is a HUGE and obvious warning on the thread title, I see no reason why we couldn't have a thread like that in the model/skins forums, but no pron threads or anything.

 

[Champ]

Yes there are laws against nudity. You need to be over the age of 18 in most of Europe, and over the age of 21 in most of America to view pornography.

There's a standard disclaimer upon signing up that covers us for everything. People here are welcome who are over the age of 13. If they are under the age of 13 they require a parent's e-mail address for verification. If anyone bypasses that it's not our fault.

Regardless, there are still no laws regarding discussion about or viewing images of games with a Teen rating (which I believe is 13+ anyway) so your argument about that is irreleveant and you're just being pedantic now.

Of course it's illegal or immoral and if noticed by staff or reported to us then that poster would probably get banned. But that's not our responsibility if someone does that, that's the individual.

I think the law states that it is advised to be over 18 to watch pornography. Regardless, pornography and nudity is 2 different things. You can hit me with a rotten trout if the law regards those two as one thing.

 

[Cybernoid]

No, if it shows female breasts then it's going to get an R rating, which means you must be 17 years or older to watch it.

Ah, so I see. Still, you said that ANY AMOUNT of nudity is viewed as pornography, which would make LiT NC-17, which it is not. Controversial.

As a sidenote, Americans really, really need to get their shit together... R-rating for nudity!

 

[CrazyHarij]

I think nudity is one of those things that are not accepted by people because other people don't accept them. In a way its like the marrage between two people. People seem to think they have to do it because everyone else does. Its exactly like that with the forum rules. Because another website says "we do not allow nudity". Everyone just follows. Its a vicious circle thats actually quite perfetic.

At the end of the day its just one of those stupid reasons made by stupid people. Its the way the human race works.

I think you're right on spot there. I'd not be giving a shit about nudity or anything if not anyone else did.

 

[Chris D]

Well it looks like we're going to have to agree to disagree. We can't do anything about it and neither can you.

 

[Champ]

It's just an opinion I have. I wouldn't feel good about letting my future kids watch pornographic imagery and not even extremely violent movies or games, especially when it's without a purpose.

Violence without a purpose is horrible and entertainment for braindead people. Violent games often have a purpose, you have this opposing side of some sort to defeat, with violent features and events.

What is the purpose for pornography?
Well, in my dictionary it says "images with the sole purpose of causing sexual arousement".

I think it simply isn't.. good for children to see women in sexually exciting images or nudity, it doesn't build up anything good, it's for lonely adult men and not something that should be part of a kids life. They are barely sexually developed at all, it's just a "when you get older" thing. Protecting kids from this is a very basic instinct feature you have, so I doubt it's something people drag out of their asses.

I wouldn't give a shit if one of my future kids "accidently" saw a boob for instance, because overprohibiting is as bad as forcing pornography and nudity onto kids.

Believe me, I've been raised to "look away" instantly when there's nudity, this is now a pretty much traumatic problem since I don't know how to react or feel, when I see nudity or even TV commercials that play with sex and sexiness, together with a family member.

Overprohibiting causes the same kind of corrupting and uncertainity as giving unlimited access to nudity and pornography to your kids.

Looking at naked women and doing funny movements with your right hand over a long (preferrably) object of yours when you're a teenager is pretty damn common. Most of the people here aren't underdeveloped 8-year-olds which just aquired the ability to read and write.

 

[qckbeam]

I've seen films with nudity that were infact not given an R rating. Titanic for example was rated "PG-13 for disaster related peril and violence, nudity, sensuality and brief language."

Nudity and pornagraphy are different things.

 

[Neutrino]

Ah, so I see. Still, you said that ANY AMOUNT of nudity is viewed as pornography, which would make LiT NC-17, which it is not. Controversial.

As a sidenote, Americans really, really need to get their shit together... R-rating for nudity!

Doesn't matter. To the law, most nudity is pornography.

Also, pornography does not mean an automatic NC-17 rating. I don't know what the exact guidelines are, but a lot can be shown with just an R rating. Only explicit images get an NC-17 rating.

Anyway, there's really not much difference between an R rating and an NC-17 rating either. Here's what they mean:

# Rated R – RESTRICTED: Under 17 requires accompanying parent or adult guardian.
# Rated NC-17 – No one 17 and under admitted.

I've seen films with nudity that were infact not given an R rating. Titanic for example was rated "PG-13 for disaster related peril and violence, nudity, sensuality and brief language."

Nudity and pornagraphy are different things.

That's true. Sorry, I hadn't thought of that one. That does seem like a rather unusual case though as I can't really think of any others like that.

 

[Cybernoid]

Is there a reason to have nudity/pornography on this website? What would it accomplish?

Well, if these forums are supposed to be goal-oriented, this General forum ought to be removed.

Are there no other reasonable alternative? How would you control it? What would its limits be?

Easy enough. Every link linking to nudity must be accompanied by a warning. If that isn't enough, you can make a forum setting that censor all links that have been tagged as "porn." And I trust people's judgement on this... virtually anyone (excluding Americans, it seems) can tell the difference between nudity and actual porn.

What about people who have a moral objection to nudity?

Well... who cares? There's no reason to cater to sick, close-minded people.

What about the taboos for western society, should you respect them?

It's not a taboo of our entire culture. Nudity is not a really big deal in Finland for example.

What about legal obligations?

Why do you think nudity is a neccesity for a site like this?

Who said it's a necessity?

What about contractual obligations that this site may have to its hosts?

What about additional bandwith costs?

For hyperlinks???

 

[hasan]

you say what's wrong with nudity eh? well, what's right with it?

nvm replying, it's not like I'm gonna check back on this thread .. just wanted to throw my two cents

--- there goes --

P.S. nudity is a form of pronography, or well, it depends on the definition of pronography, but in my dictionary, nudity is a form of it.

 

[Cybernoid]

Anyway, there's really not much difference between an R rating and an NC-17 rating either. Here's what they mean:

If I'm not mistaken, the difference is nudity vs. anal incest bukkake pisspartying and whatnot.

 

[Neutrino]

If I'm not mistaken, the difference is nudity vs. anal incest bukkake pisspartying and whatnot.

I meant the difference as it pertains to who is allowed to watch it.

 

[Cybernoid]

P.S. nudity is a form of pronography, or well, it depends on the definition of pronography, but in my dictionary, nudity is a form of it.

Uh... so I'm actually participating in pornography when I take a shower?

 

[ComradeBadger]

hasan I was being sarcastic

 

[Chris D]

This is starting to become really pointless now.

 

[hasan]

hasan I was being sarcastic

lol

doesn't matter

Edit:
there you go, removed it

 

[CrazyHarij]

So you're going to lock it?

I think it would be good for people to exchange their opinions on this matter, but meh.

 

[Cybernoid]

Yeah, I guess this is pointless. The cultural gap between me and hl2.net seems too wide.

 

[Chris D]

So you're going to lock it?

I think it would be good for people to exchange their opinions on this matter, but meh.

It's not locked is it?

 

[CrazyHarij]

It's not locked is it?

No, but it sounded like you were going to lock it.

 

[blahblahblah]

Yeah, I guess this is pointless. The cultural gap between me and hl2.net seems too wide.

You bring up an excellent point. Why do you need to close that cultural gap? Is there some benefit for closing this cultural gap?

If you really need nudity to do art/modeling to understand the human form, okay. Do it in an academia or professional setting. I don't think HL2.net qualifies as either of those.

I only think a handful of people at this site are mature and responsible enough to handle nudity. The vast majority wouldn't.

 

[OCybrManO]

I always wanted the Olympics to be done nude again

especially female volleyball :naughty:

Well, Kazakhstan's Tatyana Gubina and Greece's Stravoula Kozompli each exposed the other's breasts during a water polo match... and it happened another time to Tatyana Gubina, except at the hands of Italy's Alexandra Araujo.

At least one of them is (or was... now you can't access it unless you know the URL) displayed in a photo gallery, provided by Reuters, on Yahoo News.