On Mon, 2004-12-06 at 16:57 +1100, Brian May wrote: > >>>>> "Russell" == Russell Coker <russell@coker.com.au> writes: > > Russell> As an example see some of the books of advice for > Russell> pregnant women. They have LOTS of photos of nudity > Russell> including nipples and public hair. Women seem to buy > Russell> such books in quantity. > > >From time to time they even have naked photos on broadcasted shows > too. Sorry, I can't remember all the ratings now. I suspect one show > was G (General), or similar (science show aimed at teenagers). > > What is scary is that I have all these nude photos on my website of > some friends. Included is one bitch (hmmm... should include the other > bitch sometime). No, I am not swearing (see dictionary reference for > "bitch" if you are uncertain; in particular, see the K9 > version). Should my website get censored? The subjects in question > don't mind or understand... > > I think the issue, for the general case (some cultures may be > different), isn't so much "seeing the naked body is bad", rather, > seeing pictures that present the body as a sex item is seen as bad. > There is a fine line between the two, people will have different > opinions. If you are presenting pictures that "appeal to the prurient interest and lacks serious literary, artistic, political or scientific value", then you very well might be violating your ISP's AUP. -- ----------------------------------------------------------------- Ron Johnson, Jr. Jefferson, LA USA PGP Key ID 8834C06B I prefer encrypted mail. "In America, only the successful writer is important, in France all writers are important, in England no writer is important, and in Australia you have to explain what a writer is." Geoffrey Cottrell
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part