<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#ffffff">
On 5/16/2011 10:32 AM, Tobias Oelgarte wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid:4DD13586.7060505@googlemail.com" type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Reading the words of Sarah Stierch, someone could assume that a picture
of a naked male is fine. Do we get more female contributers by treating
them as some special, out of the oridinary? At the last meetings in
Germany i met several women, most complaining about this rather "useless
campaing", that they even found "discriminating".
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
Hi Tobias - I hate to break it to you, but, a nude male is not
always the most tasteful and appropriate thing either. And frankly
(sorry boys!) it's quite rare that the male genitalia is a beautiful
thing aesthetically. No matter how much we could argue this, I'm
sure there would be plenty of Wikimedia Commons contributors who'd
rather not see <br>
<br>
I'm glad that these German women felt that it wasn't offensive, I
don't even think the image is "offensive" because there are breasts
- I just can't believe people aren't thinking about who is looking
at this image - it's not just Wikimedians and German women who think
its tasteful.<br>
<br>
It's also school teachers, grand parents, Asian women who dislike
the stereotype, spiritually conservative people, etc. It's also a
lot of women, who go "oh great, the geeks are putting their anime
porn up on Wikimedia, ugh."<br>
<br>
I do believe that the majority of the images, nudes or not, BDSM
whatever, do have places in Commons, but, I disagree that just
because a few women aren't offended, doesn't mean a greater
community as a whole isn't. A global community, that we are working
towards encouraging to contribute more. <br>
<br>
Images like this set us back. <br>
<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:4DD13586.7060505@googlemail.com" type="cite">
<pre wrap="">
Back to the topic itself. Did you even know, that half of the mangaka
are females? Works like "Kodomo no Jikan" are written by female authors.
Sexuality is a primary topic. No one could life without it. Depictions
of sexuallity are known for thousands of years. And that is the point
where i start wondering. While old works are seen as something relevant,
new works aren't. Why not? They are from our time. In the time we life.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
I don't even know what a mangaka is. And trust me, I don't think I
could live without sexual activity <i>either!</i> But, it does
state that your image is a fictional character in a fictional
environment, so, if mangaka's are a real group of people, then I'm
not sure why your description states otherwise. Perhaps I'm just a
bit confused due to my lack of interest and knowledge about the
manga/anime world. Like I said, I've seen a few videos, and well,
have had a few beers watching Hentai in my past at parties - not
always the best introduction to the way women are viewed in Japanese
cartoons. LOL. <br>
<br>
Sarah<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-signature">-- <br>
<font face="tahoma,arial,helvetica,sans-serif" size="3"><a
href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:SarahStierch">Wikipedia
Regional Ambassador, D.C. Region<br>
Wikipedian-in-Residence, Archives of American Art</a><br>
-- <br>
</font>
<div><font face="tahoma,arial,helvetica,sans-serif" size="3"><span
style="color: rgb(39, 153, 128);">Sarah Stierch Consulting</span></font></div>
<div><font face="tahoma,arial,helvetica,sans-serif" size="3"><span
style="color: rgb(39, 153, 128);">Historical, cultural &
artistic research, advising & event planning.</span></font></div>
<div><font face="tahoma,arial,helvetica,sans-serif" size="3"><span
style="color: rgb(39, 153, 128);">------------------------------------------------------</span></font></div>
<div><font face="tahoma,arial,helvetica,sans-serif" size="3"><a
style="color: rgb(39, 153, 128);"
href="http://www.sarahstierch.com/">http://www.sarahstierch.com/</a></font></div>
</div>
</body>
</html>