Someone I know did not recognise a venereal disease
and as a consequence
she
became barren. It is because of this that I asked a Dutch organisation for
illustrations of how venereal diseases visually manifest themselves. The
images I got show sexual organs, show ulcers and other things that are
quite
horrid. The only way I know that gives people a fighting chance is by
educating them, by providing information. That is in our mission. Our
mission does not say we will give you information, "sanitised"
information,
information that will not help you because it is incomplete.
When you argue that there is no need for "arty" nude pictures, I agree.
That
is a completely different subject then hiding essential information that
we
need in our articles. Our articles require the highest quality
illustrations
because in this way we are true to our mission to inform.
Thanks,
GerardM
I believe in this part of the discussion nobody argues that the images
like you mention should be removed, it is just a question whether they
should be tagged (named, categorized) appropriately so that communities
may decide to include them as hidden for instance.
This is under understanding the whole issue is not covered by BLP policy
(I assume if a vagina is shown but the face is not this is not a BLP
issue).
Cheers
Yaroslav