[Gendergap] Hardcore images essay

[Andreas Kolbe]

--- On Tue, 15/2/11, George Herbert <george.herbert at gmail.com> wrote:
> From: George Herbert <george.herbert at gmail.com>
> But that claim
> has often been
> made by a lot of men, who also suspiciously were themselves
> offended
> by it, many of whom do themselves in fact object to any
> explicit
> imagery without regard to NOTCENSORED, beyond reasonable
> values of
> editorial judgement.


I am not offended by sexual content, or pornography. But pages illustrated
like these (not safe for work)


http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Cock_and_ball_torture_(sexual_practice)&oldid=367125005

(complete with spoken version)


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creampie_(sexual_act)


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gokkun


make us look like something else than what we want to be: an authoritative 
educational resource for everyone.

As a community, we were not even able to delete the goatse image from the 
goatse article on the basis of editorial judgment, and to agree to content 
ourselves with presenting an external link for those readers unfamiliar with 
the image and wishing to view it after they had read a description. The 
image was, if I recall correctly, deleted on a technicality, despite the 
fact that no mainstream published source discussing the image would include 
it. If that is so, why should we? Because they are censored and we are not?
Used in this way, the NOTCENSORED argument becomes one against editorial 
judgment per se.

 
> I am not going to lump Jimmy or Herostratus into that
> category, but
> the vast bulk of energy expended to remove explicit content
> seems to
> be done by people for whom the retort that Wikipedia is not
> censored
> is, in fact, a completely legitimate and completely
> adequate response.
>  They in fact make it harder for reasonable editorial
> judgement types
> to engage in discussion, as they're not very good at
> disguising their
> underlying moral contempt for that material and their fears
> that it
> will indelibly contaminate their precious children.


The fact is that most Wikipedians do not have children, or partners, and most 
people out there in the real world do.

Andreas