Re: Bug#283578: ITP: hot-babe -- erotic graphical system activity monitor
- To: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Subject: Re: Bug#283578: ITP: hot-babe -- erotic graphical system activity monitor
- From: Sami Haahtinen <email@example.com>
- Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2004 05:16:16 +0200
- Message-id: <[🔎] firstname.lastname@example.org>
- In-reply-to: <20041130195155.GC2597@schmehl.info>
- References: <E1CYuzu-0001fP-00@Tatooine.r3z0> <1101802139.16795.10.camel@localhost> <20041130195155.GC2597@schmehl.info>
Alexander Schmehl wrote:
* Joe Wreschnig <email@example.com> [041130 09:08]:
However, pornography causes significant legal problems in the US, and
probably moreso in many other countries.
I'm not sure, how »pornography« is defined in the US and I really didn't
intend to join your nice discussion, but could you please keep in mind,
that it just show rough pixely pictures of a drawn woman?
for more info on legal aspects of pornography check out wikipedia:
It would be more worth of a discussion, if the package should have
"erotic" in it's description (my personal opinion would be: No).
I agree with you there.
Even though, i think this whole issue has been dealt with a million
times in this thread i must say this:
I think this is all about hypocrisy. I can say without a doubt that all
women in this world have seen a naked woman. And i seriously doubt that
there are many men out there that haven't seen a naked woman in some
point of their lives.
But as for this issue, this can all be solved by replacing the babe in
the images with a sheep, in the first pic it has all it's wool, the next
it's partially sheared and finally fully sheared. (in case of
overheating the image could change in to a roast)
I hope nobody objects to animal nudity.
There, issue solved.