Join Now
Join ePHOTOzine, the friendliest photography community.
Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more for free!
Attention!
This topic is locked.Reason: Wall -> Head -> Thud Thud Thud. OUCH! There are guidelines for uploading images, and there are no plans to change them anytime soon.
Can someone explain to me why it is possible and acceptable to post male nudes showing all they've got, yet it is not acceptable to post the female equivalent.
I think there are some double standards going on among the censors (oops moderators).
after all we are told it is a family site, so if this is the case surely these images should not be acceptable irespective of gender.
Alister
I think throughout 'artistic' history it's been acceptable to display both (statues, carvings etc) but once it comes to 'arousal' then we hit the buffers... Let's be honest ..it's a lot more 'obvious' when a male is 'interested' than a female....maybe this is where 'society' finds it unacceptable... amusing really, because troll around Africa generally and you can pick up some very ....explicit.....wood carvings where they delight in the 'fertility' connections this entails..
I believe 'western' standards currently indicate... aroused male genetallia - unacceptable...
female gentallia...can't tell, so to be safe, unacceptable too...
However... I've got to agree with you and be puzzled as to why un-aroused conditions attract the attention of the censors...
Never had the impression it is not acceptable to show the sexual apparatus of females on epz. When you are going to try to define 'nudes' or 'porn' or 'art' for that matter you'll get a large area of black and a large area of white, for which it is rather obvious what exactly it is, what is it's (the photo's and the photographer's) intention, and how it should be handled/considered. But in between you'll aways have a rather large area of grey(s) where it's not so easy to define things clearly.
Most of the time I believe the mods handle these cases rather well.
Quote: Never had the impression it is not acceptable to show the sexual apparatus of females on epz
Its not.. but from the terms and conditions
Quote: Basically if the photograph would be seen in a newsstand non-top-shelf magazine it is likely to be safe on ePHOTOzine. If it's in a top-shelf pornographic magazine it may not be welcome on ePHOTOzine and may be deleted.
If you want us to delete male nudes then we would have to delete pictures such as yours
here [epz note: link is to an adult image)
Or is this is just to bring your grievance about
Quote: censors (oops moderators).
deleting your picture that did cross the line, again?
The point about arousal is a good one but I always thought that if an image looks like it could be a teaching aid for gynaecologists, then it's porn. Otherwise it's 'artistic nude' or glamour depending on presentation and whether the model is looking suggestively at the camera or not.... 
This site operates a censorship against 'pornography'. Unfortunately the definition of pornography used is different to that generally accepted. In effect, certain parts of the human body are not considered acceptable, regardless of whether the image is pornographic or not. On the other hand plenty of pictures are allowed which would fall under a conventional definition of pornography.
I find it amazing that, on a photographic site, we should have to read foolishness such as:
Quote: that if an image looks like it could be a teaching aid for gynaecologists, then it's porn
Generally from an "Artistic Nudes" point of view a "Curled up sleepy hamster" is considered acceptable whereas "hang your coat on it" isn't. I believe the equivalent for females is "Baps not flaps".
Of course it's all subjective and depends on the actual image the pornographer (oops photographer) has produced.
Stolzy, perphaps you could get together with Thebigyin and start an 'adult' site where anything legal goes.
Quote: from the terms and conditions :Basically if the photograph would be seen in a newsstand non-top-shelf magazine it is likely to be safe on ePHOTOzine. If it's in a top-shelf pornographic magazine it may not be welcome on ePHOTOzine and may be deleted
Some of the male nudes on here recently were certainly top shelf material, some even rewarded HC for the pleasure. The point I am making is if it is acceptable for male genitalia to be shown and rewarded, then why cant the famale equivalent be given the same consideration.
Quote: Or is this is just to bring your grievance about censors (oops moderators). deleting your picture that did cross the line, again?
Please don't come this one, my argument is about double standards.
Quote: The point about arousal is a good one but I always thought that if an image looks like it could be a teaching aid for gynaecologists, then it's porn. Otherwise it's 'artistic nude' or glamour depending on presentation and whether the model is looking suggestively at the camera or not....
Agree up to a point, but as i said above we don't appear to have a level playing field.
Alister
Quote: It would also be helpful if people could offer their own opinions without being labelled as 'foolish', should their opinion differ from yours.
The definition of words is rarely a matter of opinion. I have seen a number of definitons of the word 'pornography', not one of them included medical textbooks or teaching aids.
Attention!
This topic is locked.Reason: Wall -> Head -> Thud Thud Thud. OUCH! There are guidelines for uploading images, and there are no plans to change them anytime soon.
Join Our Free Newsletter
Awards
Current Competitions
Olympus 'Portraiture' Competition - Win £1000 Worth Of Gear!
30th April 2013 - 31st May 2013
This month, to celebrate the launch of Olympus' new micro site Olympus Image Space, Olympus are giving you the chance to win £1000 worth of Olympus gear!...
Featured e2 Photo
May's Photo Month
Check out ePHOTOzine's inspirational photo month calendar! Each day click on a window to unveil new photography tips, treats and techniques.
