On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 16:15, Sarah Stierch sarah.stierch@gmail.com wrote:
No, but, I can send you some pictures on Commons that have been "speedy keeps" of strippers with their legs spread wide because they are "educational and high quality."
I really don't care about strippers. However, it would be quite educationally to have short movies at least for the basic sexual concepts. That includes hygiene of reproductive organs for example, but some basic sexual positions, as well. And that would be much more unacceptable to pro-censorship people than strippers.
My boss, who is bound to have a baby any day now, can't open the pregnancy article at work because the intro is NSFW our workplace. I can't open the [[vagina]] article at work either, because of the really in your face photo of a vagina when you open it up, however, I can totally read the intro to [[penis]] since there isn't a big giant penis in one's face upon opening it. I work in an educational environment (a museum institution, which has exhibits on sexuality, gender, etc) and I can't even look at these articles at work, take that as you will.
[[penis]] is the wrong artcile. [[human penis]] is the right one ;) Note that depictions of penises are the most numerous in the future "sexual content" category. Our editor base is ~85% male and there are plenty of them willing to show their sexual organ.
I understand that access to nudity is a problem in many occasions. That's one of the problems of our civilization which sexual education should fix. In the mean time, we have to find some solutions for that. If you need it, contact me and I'll setup proxy for you and your boss to freely watch Wikipedia articles without images. ... Here is, actually, a number of options: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:Options_to_not_see_an_image