Re: sexist content in the package openclipart2-png
On Fri, Jan 1, 2016 at 1:05 PM, Martin Read <zen75502@zen.co.uk> wrote:
> On 01/01/16 17:47, Ric Moore wrote:
>>
>> On 01/01/2016 11:23 AM, peter@berghold.net wrote:
>>>
>>> I'm confused what specifically is meriting censorship?
>>
>>
>> I'm not seeing any full frontal nudity. Ric
>
>
> An image can feature full frontal nudity without being an exercise in sexual
> objectification, and equally can be an exercise in sexual objectification
> without featuring full frontal nudity.
>
> A reasonable person could certainly conclude that quite a few of the images
> specifically called out by the original poster in this thread
> fall into the latter category.
Actually that is incorrect. All such conclusions rest on the
interpretation of the graphic, and interpretation is guided or even
controlled by the biases of the observer. So objectification, like
beauty, lies in the eyes of the beholder.
So people who detect objectification in an arrangement of pixels
should be forbidden from interpreting imagery. Such a policy is NOT
censorship -- it is more an exercise of preventive medicine.
One might as well object to the data downloaded on the basis that the
bits involved were recycled rather than fresh. Prohibit images
composed of stale bits! Not.
Lee Winter
Nashua, New Hampshire
United States of America
Reply to: