Perhaps the REAL problem is GOVERNMENT of ANY kind PERIOD. Governments always lead to some form of control over the people. But there is always someone who wants to tell others what they can and can't do or say (back to the topic of Censorship).

LAF...What are you some little goth high school kid promoting anarchy?

Looking at this definition from socialism from Webster you could argue the US is socialist:
3: a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done.

Just showing how definitions don't always mean a whole lot... even they can be spun.

As long as you can admit that all you're doing is spinning

---

That is just such a gross distortion of the female figure.

A woman with un-natural body and strange lemon shaped breasts sucking on an ice-pop that is a euphemism for a penis is not my idea of something a mod should post.

I'm not suprised there are so few women (members or mods) involved in these forums if we represent women in such a way.

Sometimes we don't need to censor...

... We just have to create a vision of the world that people might not feel welcome in.

Would I censor the image? No.

Would I think it's a pile of dung? Yes.


Sorry.


.

Some like to abuse their own freedom of speech to provoke and degrade others.

The poster of that picture knows exactly the message he was conveying about his 'respect' for women when he posted it.

---

Account frozen...

HOW in the heck is THAT Image makin' iT onto these Boards - when there are 'Rules' . . .

< surely i am 'missin' soMEthing eh . . .

|
|
|
|
|
V

---

BOINC Wiki . . .

Science Status Page . . .

That is just such a gross distortion of the female figure.

SNIP MY STUFF....

.

Some like to abuse their own freedom of speech to provoke and degrade others.

I didn't mean to abuse my freedom nor degrade another.

I think I was provocative though.

The poster of that picture knows exactly the message he was conveying about his 'respect' for women when he posted it.

It's an image posted in lue of words.

I interpreted as best I could.

(Maybe the poster wanted me to discover the very issue I am so badly trying to express?. I have no clue.)


As I said I wouldn't censor the image.

But I don't like it no more than I would like a cartoon of a blond man with a bulge in his trousers the shape of a turnip and holding an obvious petalled rose or lotus shaped ice-pop to his face.

Though I doubt we would see such an image.

(Maybe we are being given carte blanc to portray such images? Men with extreme bodies and big bulges and suckin things?... Maybe not...)

I still believe that censorship isn't just about what we tell people they can or can't do.



It's often about what we portray and maybe more about what we don't.


Does this make any sense?


.

I didn't mean to abuse my freedom nor degrade another.

I think I was provocative though.

You were not the poster i was referring to. i was talking about the person who posted the image. Forgive me for not making myself clear.

It's an image posted in lue of words.

I interpreted as best I could.

(Maybe the poster wanted me to discover the very issue I am so badly trying to express?. I have no clue.)


As I said I wouldn't censor the image.

But I don't like it no more than I would like a cartoon of a blond man with a bulge in his trousers the shape of a turnip and holding an obvious petalled rose or lotus shaped ice-pop to his face.

Though I doubt we would see such an image.


I still believe that censorship isn't just about what we tell people they can or can't do.



It's often about what we portray and maybe more about what we don't.


Does this make any sense?


.

Censor it? No. But be allowed to fully express our disgust at the posting of such a picture. Yes..we should be allowed that. One sided debates are not debates.

The picture is intended to provoke. One can only make an educated guess at the eventual desired outcome the poster of the picture wants based on the history and character of said poster.

---

Account frozen...

The picture is intended to provoke.

Sorta like the Muhammad cartoons? ;)

---

It may not be 1984 but George Orwell sure did see the future . . .

The picture is intended to provoke.

Sorta like the Muhammad cartoons? ;)

It does get tedious though..

The picture is intended to provoke.

Sorta like the Muhammad cartoons? ;)

It does get tedious though..

. . . indeed iT does, indeed iT does

---

BOINC Wiki . . .

Science Status Page . . .

The picture seems to be politically incorrect, but pretty tame considering.

Let's see lately, I have noted people wanting to:
ban cartoons showing Mohammed
ban the Bible
ban the teaching of evolution
ban the teaching of creationism
ban a cross in San Diego
- and each side calls the other facist.

and considering what I can google - nothing seems to be very censored.

unless you are in North Korea, China or Pakistan.

---

Man - a creature made at the end of the week's work when God was tired. - Mark Twain

...
Quick, someone red-x this!
...

Sorry.

We would oblige but we're too busy being X-ed ourselves...

;o)~

.

Censorship, as I stated earlier, begins with things we don't like and ends with everything the censors don't like.

I believe Misfit is attempting to draw those opposed to censorship into a twisted argument that will only lead to acceptance in the end.

While this depiction Misfit has, not so cleverly, posted is in bad taste and offensive to some, it cannot be removed because that action of removal will justify previous cases where censorship of material and words was based on the same rational of bad taste or offensive.

Who makes the decisions for you?
Do you allow someone else to decide what you can and cannot see and read?

Censorship starts with sexual material and ends with the censorship of ideas.

While I find it remarkable that Misfit, as a moderator, seems to have rights over and above the rights of other forum members in that the censors haven't jumped all over this, it also allows me to draw a parallel to the book Animal Farm, wherein "All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others." (paraphrased)

Yes, I confess I red-x'd that stupid cartoon posted by Misfit. I rarely use the red-x system but besides the content of his post I also consider it flame bait. Misfit is known for his sexist attitude to women here and he needs to be more careful in his actions.

---

There is nothing blatantly against the rules in that picture.

---

Maybe not "blatantly against the rules"...

Posts must be 'kid friendly': they may not contain content that is obscene, hate-related, sexually explicit or suggestive.

No messages intended to annoy or antagonize other people, or to hijack a thread.

---

Happy birthday Calm Chaos!!! Terrible twos?


Calm Chaos... are you feeling it yet?

Yes, I confess I red-x'd that stupid cartoon posted by Misfit. I rarely use the red-x system but besides the content of his post I also consider it flame bait. Misfit is known for his sexist attitude to women here and he needs to be more careful in his actions.

What is the difference between that picture and Mystique's avatar? Both female figures show body contours, both cover skin, both are provocative. But your daughter's avatar is somehow OK?

What is the difference between that picture and Mystique's avatar? Both female figures show body contours, both cover skin, both are provocative. But your daughter's avatar is somehow OK?

One is implicitly sexual and the other is a sleek outline of the feminine form.

Once most of us get past 14 we recognize the difference between sexual and sensual.

It would seem that you don't recognize the difference between the statue of Venus and a skank magazine centerfold.

You beat me to it. I was going to point out that there seems to be some confusion in Qui-Gon's head between sexy and sexist. He should look the words up in his dictionary.

---

Account frozen...

You beat me to it. I was going to point out that there seems to be some confusion in Qui-Gon's head between sexy and sexist. He should look the words up in his dictionary.

Please no, not the dictionary....

You beat me to it. I was going to point out that there seems to be some confusion in Qui-Gon's head between sexy and sexist. He should look the words up in his dictionary.

"Sexism" is a form of discrimination. No one is being discriminated against by that image and it's certainly not more offensive than the lies and propaganda spewed forth by the author of this topic on a daily basis.

One might also point out that the "Mystique" image in your avatar is from a PG-13 movie...as in some material (like a nude woman decorated with paint and plastic) might not be suitable for children under the age of 13.

I'm certainly no fan of censorship...just pointing out that people in glass houses should not be throwing stones...

---

You beat me to it. I was going to point out that there seems to be some confusion in Qui-Gon's head between sexy and sexist. He should look the words up in his dictionary.

No need, sweetie, it has been demonstrated more than once that I understand the meaning of words much better than either you or Robert. I also recall that you said here that resorting to dictionary definitions is not a valid argument. You said, "I don't care how much you argue about dictionary definitions..that's just a refuge of someone who thinks that arguing a point on technicalities is the same as actually making a valid contribution to a discussion." But consistency has never been your strong point.

Speaking of your lack of consistency, your avatar, which shows a female figure, chest forward, the shape each breast clearly discernible, seems OK to you. The picture you are complaining about has a female whose breasts are covered with a shirt. Now, I don't think there is anything wrong with either picture, but your complaint about one without acknowledging the same criticism of your own simply proves that your opinion is really just bias against the poster.

I have never seen you apologize or admit error--even when the error is glaring.