[Commons-l] Fwd: [Gendergap] Photo of the Day on Wikimedia Commons

[Tobias Oelgarte]

Do it in your freetime and not at work?

Am 16.05.2011 16:43, schrieb Gnangarra:
> Tobias
>
> Please explain how does one participate when their employment contract 
> specifically states that viewing of sexually explicit material over 
> the internet is a dismissable offense.
>
> The issue isnt hosting the image its about where its displayed.
>
> On 16 May 2011 22:32, Tobias Oelgarte <tobias.oelgarte at googlemail.com 
> <mailto:tobias.oelgarte at googlemail.com>> wrote:
>
>     Just logged in, so please bear with the possible wrong entry place.
>
>     I strongly disagree with the removal. Not because that it is an image
>     that i created. Because this is some kind of censorship, that goes
>     strictly against the aims of the project itself. Some topics are fine
>     and anybody can laugh about them, for some topics nobody cares and
>     some
>     topics causing confusion, hate and are a general nuisance.  The later
>     mostly because of misunderstanding and lack of knowledge.
>
>     But which kind of world will we describe? The world how it is - the
>     truth? Or do we want to select some mild topics and enjoy little
>     bunnies
>     on a field with dozens of flowers, while one house away bombs fall and
>     the doughters of the family begging for money? Isn't it a bit
>     ridiculous
>     to select topics and to show only the bright sides?
>
>     Im just wondering why illustrations of war machines are ok, while
>     anything that is related to sexual nature is considerd as evil. Some
>     saying that they couldn't tell there children what such images are
>     about. But what about a picture of a gun? Can you explain to your
>     children, why people kill each other? You should and could at
>     least try
>     to explain. The earilier the better. Kids have an open mind, that
>     i miss
>     so much in this project.
>
>     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".
>
>     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.
>
>     Sorry for my English. But English isn't my main language.
>
>     Tobias Oelgarte
>
>
>     Am 16.05.2011 16:24, schrieb Chris McKenna:
>     > On Mon, 16 May 2011, Ryan Kaldari wrote:
>     >
>     >> The image is also not artistically, historically, or culturally
>     significant,
>     >> unlike all the other examples you cited.
>     > Please cite your sources for the (lack of) artistic, historic,
>     or cultural
>     > significance for this image and all the other examples cited.
>     >
>     >> The only reason it's featured is
>     >> because it's sexually arousing to anime fanboys who happen to
>     dominate the
>     >> culture of Wikimedia Commons.
>     > Citation needed for a /very/ offensive remark.
>     >
>     >> I don't need to crawl into a semantic
>     >> rabbit-hole to defend this observation.
>     > Why? Please be objective, preferably include references to reliable
>     > sources.
>     >
>     >> I think its obvious to any
>     >> reasonable person. If the image would be embarrassing to pull
>     up in front of
>     >> a classful of students, it shouldn't be on the Commons Main Page.
>     > Please define "reasonable person" in an objective, culturally
>     neutral way.
>     > Please list an objective set of culturally neutral criteria that
>     would
>     > allow any image to be safely displayed to any given group of
>     people in a
>     > way that does not introduce censorship or cultural bias.
>     >
>     > "Not censored" means just that. If you aren't happy that some
>     images that
>     > offend you (or you find offensive on others' behalf) might be
>     displayed
>     > then you should not use Wikimedia Commons.
>     >
>     > Chris
>     >
>     > ----
>     > Chris McKenna
>     >
>     > cmckenna at sucs.org <mailto:cmckenna at sucs.org>
>     > www.sucs.org/~cmckenna <http://www.sucs.org/%7Ecmckenna>
>     >
>     >
>     > The essential things in life are seen not with the eyes,
>     > but with the heart
>     >
>     > Antoine de Saint Exupery
>     >
>     >
>     > _______________________________________________
>     > Commons-l mailing list
>     > Commons-l at lists.wikimedia.org <mailto:Commons-l at lists.wikimedia.org>
>     > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
>     >
>
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     Commons-l mailing list
>     Commons-l at lists.wikimedia.org <mailto:Commons-l at lists.wikimedia.org>
>     https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
>
>
>
>
> -- 
> GN.
> Photo Gallery: http://gnangarra.redbubble.com
> Gn. Blogg: http://gnangarra.wordpress.com
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Commons-l mailing list
> Commons-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l

-------------- nächster Teil --------------
Ein Dateianhang mit HTML-Daten wurde abgetrennt...
URL: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/commons-l/attachments/20110516/6b77ddcc/attachment-0001.htm