Re: Bug#283578: ITP: hot-babe -- erotic graphical system activitymonitor
On Thu, Dec 02, 2004 at 08:15:16AM +1100, Matthew Palmer wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 01, 2004 at 08:50:08PM +0200, Kalle Kivimaa wrote:
> > Yes, hotbabe is sexist (at least in it's current incarnation - if it
> > included a male theme then it would only be sexually offensive to
> > some)
>
> Anyone who feels that hot-babe would become less sexually offensive because
> it included naked male images as well as naked female images really does
> need to rethink their ideas about offensiveness. Somehow putting more
> offensive images into a package doesn't strike me as being the way to make
> something less offensive.
Not less sexually offensive. But adding naked male images would
probably take the edge of the argument of the package being sexist.
> Personally, I don't have a problem with the package as-is -- the pictures
> aren't exactly the most graphic thing that's likely to pop up unannounced in
> a web-browser window, but the authorities frown on distributing anything
> tittilating to minors in a lot of places, so I'd "vote" for making it a
> series of pictures of a tree shedding it's leaves or something in the
> default incarnation.
While being all for that series of pictures (nature is beautiful),
I find the package pretty meaningless anyway, so I don't see the point
of including it in Debian in the first place. I do, however, see some
relevance to the discussions.
Regards: David Weinehall
--
/) David Weinehall <tao@acc.umu.se> /) Northern lights wander (\
// Maintainer of the v2.0 kernel // Dance across the winter sky //
\) http://www.acc.umu.se/~tao/ (/ Full colour fire (/
Reply to: