|
and if our ISP found out they will directly BLOCK flickr
Posted 54 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
im against it..
Posted 54 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
Curious observation,, can't stop flickr from allowing nude of they chose to. However, with such a wide range of users from different cultures, backgrounds and ages it seems to me a nudity filter (together with the "May Offend" tag) should be on by default.
In practice, this maybe impossible to achieve, but I strongly feel that flickr management should at least have it in their terms of use - that posters of nude pictures should tick a box where it says "May Offend" or "Nude" rather than it being a voluntarily exercise.
I tried searching the terms of service and found no reference to posting of nude photographs.
Posted 54 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
yea ... i'm totaly agree with u bro ..
y3nee el9ra7ah .. fe nas 3ndhom 9war 7elwaa oo faj2ah y76oon 9wer ma95ah ..
7rkah malha m3naa =@
im against it too :(
Posted 54 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
I suggest people who participate in this debate:
1- Use english
2- Explain why they are with or against it if possible.
3- Stear away from heated language.
Otherwise no one will listen/understand what you are on about or wont pay it attention even if they did.
Posted 54 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
I am against it
But you dealling with non muslims
and they want it .
Etisalat can Block the Bas tag names i think .
All i can say is GOD help US from these sinners
Posted 54 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
I'm against it, cause my opinion is I'm in for Beautiful Photographs not body parts and I like to see people's talent that some of us never get to share it w/the World...and nudity or any kind of Erotic photos should be somewhere else,violence as well....but this is only my opinion...Against it..big time!
Posted 54 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
There you go, Eric (staff) says:
No, it [PORN] is not allowed, even by healthy people. Can you give us any URLs?
www.flickr.com/forums/help/3006/?search=nude
However that does not say anything about NUDE
Posted 54 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
I am totally against it too .. Dealing with non muslims is not the issue .. Such pictures should not be aloud .. and btw not only non muslims put share such pictures here ..
Posted 54 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
I'm very much against it as well, and suggest they go with what e3ashig said.
Adding a Nude filter is a great idea, and I think that it might be the best solution.
Posted 54 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
I'm REALLY against it too ,,and i totally agree with waht DA + Ge6iwa said ..
Posted 54 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
Why is flickr allowing such cheap pictures? I've always thought of it as a high-class website that would not degrade itself to a cheap standard. Be aware that as soon as our ISP discoveres the nudity allowed here, flickr will immediatly join the blocked sites list. Therefore, you will lose a lot of your loyal members.
Posted 54 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
Iam against it too!!
they should tag the pictures as nudetiy/may offend as e3ashig said..its an international web site and nudity does offend some cultures.. the viewr must be given the choice of viewing such pictures.
this massege should be convaied to the managment we'd apprecite it if flickr managment took this into consideration.
Posted 54 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
4 Sure I'm aGainST iT!!!
Posted 54 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
im against it bcuz not only its bad
and against our religon and culture..
but also it gives a bad reputation
about the site and the users.. people
with only mention the bad things and
if they do not know the site they will
only say that its a site where people
shows pictures of themselves and
therefore gives the user a bad
reputation..
adre wayed etfalsaft but i hope u understood what i meant
Posted 54 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
against !!
Posted 54 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
iam Definitely against it!
Posted 54 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
i am against it too...
Posted 54 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
Absolutely against it..
Some would consider nude photographs art.. but they arent! they're disturbing to us muslims.. And I really think that a 'filter' would solve most of the problem.. if not illuminate it..
keeping in miind that not only non-muslims are posting such pics..
Posted 54 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
i dont know whats intersting about those pictures elle y76oonha...ya3ne malha ma3na..what comments there waiting for ??? alah y3ena inshalla...
Posted 54 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
I'm against it of course LOL
but guess what..... flickr is american so.......... i hope photos would be blocked but i think it can't be done
what a world! may God help us....
Posted 54 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
Unfortunately, it's impossible for Flickr to cater to every single culture.
You'll always offend someone, no matter what you do – the trick is finding a balance. The Flickr devs have said that porn is not allowed, and that's about all they can do without some serious censorship (and trust me, censorship is not a good thing). Banning any photo depicting nudity is just the beginning of a very, very slippery slope.
flickr is american
Actually, the devs are Canadian. :)
Posted 54 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
I am totally against this ..
some picx show 3wrat alnas and that is
forbidden .. it is really shocking to
see people doing such things ..
People should show something that can
please others or send a message in
otherwords .. however, showing some
parts of people's body, well i do believe that this is not acceptable whatsoever ..
Why dont those people represent sth
that can be useful or pleasant ..
They would have more comments on them
i believe ...
I guess some of them are happy coz
they are getting many comments on one
indecnent pic .. well, i guess if
those ppl comments reached 70 or more
they should believe that those sy2at
.. views that reach 150 , those also
sy2at .. why they really harm themselves .. u never know what would
happen to you at a sudden and then
regret wont help ..
sry for expressing that much ..
but i really feel bad when i see
ppl harming themselves that way ..
thankx uae ..
god bless u all :]
Posted 54 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
I'm against it as well... there should be some limits set here! I think e3ashig's suggestion is really good and can help solve the issue.
Posted 54 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
there should be some limits set here!
There are limits set here! Porn is not allowed, and if you find someone who's posting it, report them to the devs and they'll have their account deleted.
Posted 54 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
censorship of any kind is a big pile of steaming dog poo. if you have a problem viewing certain types of photos, i'd suggest not looking at them just like i do with every medium i'm viewing.
but that's just my canadian mouth running off at the very thought of limiting others in what they're producing.. more specifically, limiting something as generic as art.
anything that's purposely explicit has been limited in the past by flickr staff. i think it's appalling that you're asking them to screen everything.
and more so, the artists DO have an option when uploading photos they think might offend, and that's the privacy features already built in.
now, i'd suggesting focusing your time on something more creative.. perhaps taking pictures?
Posted 54 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
Flickr is meant to filter photos that "may offend" from public areas (the global tag pages for example), but I think it would be a horrible thing for flickr to ban anything that could be construed as offensive from the site as a whole.
If you see a photo on flickr that you don't think should be in a public area, click the "Flag this photo as "may offend" link on the right hand side of the photo page.
In short, Flickr isn't forcing you to view nudity and while we obviously respect your religious beliefs, the community is unlikely to change to suit them.
Posted 54 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
So am I the only one who is pro-allowing this? Really, outside of a few cultures it is not a big deal. As was said, it is impossible to cater to the wishes of every single culture or faith on this planet. There are simple too many. It would be easier to just shut flickr down. And I think none of us want that.
Posted 54 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
i agree with e3ashig. there has to be some kind of warning for those under 18. flickr is like any medium and you cant stop ppl from posting nude pics if they feel they surve a purpose. its up to your culture background to accept it or choose not to see it. simple really :)
Posted 54 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
.
Posted 54 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
This is not only a problem for people from the Middle East. This topic had been raised many times in different forums on Flickr and it will not go away unless something is done about it.
Personally, I am not against nudity per se, but at the same time I do understand that some people and cultures are. What we do need, and rather urgently, is a way for individuals (or groups of people) to block what they do not want to see.
How that can be done effectively is not a trivial problem, but a good interim measure would be for Flickr to screen new photos published – perhaps only the ones appearing in the public streams – and to flag them appropriately. For this to work well there should also be a user setting where members can choose not to see photos marked as such.
This has nothing to do with censorship (which many of us abhor). Instead it has everything to do with giving members more choices.
There could be other solutions as well. But I agree with a few comments above, that some countries might ban Flickr totally if this is not addressed soon. That would be sad, since we would lose some of our wonderful diversity.
Posted 54 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
This strikes me as a completely organised attempt to artificially create a huge thread for this.
Loads of similarly worded (suggesting the same non-english native language to me) posts all within a few minutes of each other?
Not normal forum activity...
I shall, however, add my opinion. The fact that it offends Muslims, or any other culture, is pretty irrelevant unless it is a Muslim website or is based in a Muslim country. It isn't, so get over it. It is not Flickr's responsibility to cater to your culture. This would lead to having to cater for every single culture, and would leave about 5 pictures left, total. I exaggerate, but the point is valid.
If you are so offended by naked people, then don't look at them. You don't see enough in a thumbnail to permanently scar you, so calm down a bit. No-one is making you go to the photo page.
Flickr has made a stand on nudity (there is - rightly - no problem with this) although it draws the line at Porn or offensive images - See the TOS for a better description. I can't be bothered to link to it, as the cynicism and transparency of this fake 'uproar' has killed my enthusiasm to care...
Posted 54 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
surely against
Posted 54 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
Brock – I don't think there's anything fishy going on here. Maybe this thread will help explain what's going on...a bit:
www.flickr.com/groups/topic/37106/
Posted 54 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
s'private, dude.
Posted 54 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
Oh, right. Never mind, then. (Unless you want an invitation to that group, in which case you can make me a contact.)
Posted 54 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
First of all what is considered nude?
Secondly, do you know that you are a minority. There are thousand of people who join flickr on a daily basis. Do you truly believe the rules will change for group of people?
Thridly, why should flickr listen and change rules because we are offended?
What do you think the solution is?
Perhaps flickr will just say that if you are offended by the 'nude' images, then simply do not look at them.
Or, perhaps flickr might create an icon that says "DO not show me any Nudity". However, this goes back to the first question. What is considered nude?
Posted 54 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
quas: You could always paraphrase here?
Posted 54 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
If you don't like, don't look. Again as I and many others have said, people under 18 should not be viewing alone, or on the internet alone. period. ...
Nudity is one thing, porn another, most of us agree porn is not welcomed and views on the matter, just like a lot of things is subjective.
Posted 54 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
Brock, it’s easy for us to say Flickr is for the West only – take it or leave it. The problem is that some countries might ban access to Flickr altogether which will drastically impact the diversity of Flickr, something quite a few people value very much.
Posted 54 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
Brock – it's a very similar thread in the fdaitna group, which seems to be a gathering place for Flickr's UAE users.
a good interim measure would be for Flickr to screen new photos published – perhaps only the ones appearing in the public streams – and to flag them appropriately
Not sure how this could be done, short of hiring about 50 people full-time to do the job...
Posted 54 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
quas, yes its not perfect although I suspect 10 can easily do the job now, depending on how it is implimented. Over the long haul, some more thinking is needed.
Posted 54 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
Do you really think that 10 people could screen all the images? There are over 600,000 people on flickr. Even if only half of them posted 1 a day, that is still 30,000 pictures to go through per person. Would you want to do that in 8 hours?
And how do you think that people will react to all of their photo's being 'censored'?
Which will do more damage?
And I'm not saying (by any means, please don't twist my words) that Flickr is for the West only, I am saying that it is a Western site, and so shouldn't be bound by the rules of a culture that has no relevance to it.
I agree about the diversity, but I remind you that it is the blinkered and backward atttitude and fear of such diversity coming from the Muslim (and other) censors that is the issue. It is of no fault of Flickr. If they refuse to let their populace see a site that they deem inappropriate for fear of them being led astray )which is what it boils down to) Flickr has no obligation to bow to their wishes, and nor has anyone else unless Muslim themselves, or living in a Muslim country.
Posted 54 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
there are a lot of things i disagree with but that doesnt necessarily mean others are going to listenand take action
i choose to avoid looking than make a huge fuss about it obscenity is everywhere and to each is his own i guess
if etisalat chooses to block this website then i guess it has every right to i get accross some pretty disturbing photos from time to time lol
Posted 54 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
im against it for sure .. i have little sisters who r members here!
Posted 54 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
I read an article a while back where Stewart said something about 70,000 images a day being uploaded. That was a few months back, so I'm guessing it would probably be more now. Those images are uploaded around the clock because Flickr is used worldwide. That means that you would need at least three shifts of people scanning images. I figure there's probably an average of 1 picture per second uploaded, though uploading won't be spread that evenly. And those rates are only going to increase.
The idea of pre-screening all those images seems, well, insane.
Posted 54 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
Maybe the admins could rate each photostream thereby providing the alternative of viewing a certain member's photostream rate (g-rated/r-rated/under 12/etc..)before actually viewing their photos
not that would make such a drastic difference but at least those who DO have a problem with nudity, and eventually stumble accross nude fotos by chance, wouldnt have to blame anybody but themselves :p
Posted 54 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
First, the "Nudity?" and "Offensive Pics" threads have a lot of thoughtful discussion of this issue. The Muslim perspective in this discussion is a new and important addition, however.
I urge people whose values are rooted in Western culture not to be dismissive of other viewpoints. You might not agree with them, but you do have an obligation to engage them thoughtfully. The same is true for the Muslims on this thread. If we explain why we feel the ways that we do, we can get somewhere.
All too often, moral discussion bogs down because we take the values at the bottom of our beliefs for granted. They are imbedded so deep that we reflexively treat people who think differently as abberant. Whether we term such abberation "sin" or "neurosis" doesn't really matter for our purposes.
Westerners have debates on the differences between "mere artistic nudity," "artistic erotica" and "crass pornography"--debates which must seem bizzare and pointless to conservative Muslims. Frankly, Westerners aren't even sure what falls where.
The debates stem from a conviction that somewhere, there is some legitimacy in publicly addressing the sexual side of our nature. There is no denying that such discourse is legitimate--the Koran, Bible and Torah all deal with it extensively. So does the commentary on those scriptures. If God, and those who devote their lives to understanding His wisdom, see fit to discuss the body and the drives that He has given us, then they must be legitimate subjects for discussion.
If the body and sexuality can be talked about, then the question is: how? The distinction between text and photography is very important here, and is even more important in some Muslim traditions. Text does not, in itself, contain any image. Text is an array of symbols. The images, and their conotations, arise purely from the imagination. This provides more opportunity for an individual's moral filters to operate.
Images, however, are immediate. "Immediate" not only in the sense of "instant," but in the sense that there is no intermediary between the art and the soul. Photography is even more immediate than painting, if such a thing is possible, because it is grounded in an image taken directly from life. Imagination and moral filters have no chance to operate before the artist's message hits your soul. For a viewer, it feels like the subject is right in front of him. Rather than a dialogue, it feels like an act.
And we react as if the subject were acting right in front of us. We react to nude photography as if it were a person exposing herself to us in our homes, offices or schools--wherever we happen to be viewing the photograph on the Internet. When this happens, it is important to remember that a photograph is just like a painting or an essay--only the mechanics are different.
It's also important to remember that nude and erotic photography convey many more messages than mere arousal. It can protest the very exploitation of spirit that TorturedLady describes. Joint portraits convey the joy that a husband and wife find in each other. Self-portraits show the pride and gratitude that people feel for the bodies that God has given them, and as such are a form of devotion. A photo of a baby peacefully suckling at his mother's breast, with his caring mother looking down at him, has taught me more about motherhood and infancy than a whole page of text could.
Please, if you disagree with this perspective, tell us why.
Posted 54 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
Brock:
The problem of how to handle huge streams of products has been solved quite effectively in the QA processes of industry. As the stream flows by the inspector(s) can just push a button (click on a photo) and it will be diverted to an inspection area where it can be evaluated in more detail later.
I visit the “Everyone’s photos” stream regularly and my experience is that there are not that many potentially offensive pictures that come in. All you have to do is the ability to set markers in the stream which OKs all the previous content. That way one does not have to OK each picture individually.
I agree that Flickr is a western site and that it should not have to step down to the lowest common denominator. But my suggestion is that we allow everything we do now, while at the same time giving those who think different a tool to avoid stuff that they find offensive.
Regarding your point about censorship – I think you will agree that it is not the fault of individuals if their government decides to ban something. Whatever we might think of the censorship issue, I think we should not just say tough luck – it’s the fault of your censors, not ours. If there is something that can be done (and I think there is), then we should seriously consider it.
EDIT: Great post Matt!
Posted 54 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
I agree that many people do get offended by showing nude pictures, but there are another set of people who view nudity as a form of art and i guess you can't stop that..
Personally I'm against nudity and I dont see it to be artistic in any way..
Posted 54 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
Good post, Matt. I gots to say, however, that with comments like "All i can say is GOD help US from these sinners" I don't hold toooo much hope of rational discussion. :|
I can respect that nudity seems be culturally offensive to some, but I can't respect a desire to strong arm a worldwide site to the very strict tenets of any one culture. By its very nature, something like this would seem to need to lean towards the permissive side, self regulation, and the creation of groups or smaller communities within the whole where individual ideals reign. I'm guessing that I won't see any nudity if I hang around fdaitna or other UAE groups, nor will I see it in the Flowers group. Personally, I never visit the All Photos page, as I have more than enough on my plate from my active groups and contacts. Flickr should no more remove the possibility that I will see bad party snaps than the possibility that I will see nudity if I choose to wander the site away from the places that appreciate what I appreciate.
Any content rating of images would have to be self-regulated, and there will always be those that either choose not to play by the rules or otherwise don't meet the expectations of those who wish to be shielded from certain imagery.
Posted 54 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
awfulsara: Absolutely. I agree entirely.
Jan: If finding and stopping these images appearing is as easy as you say, perhaps it isn't as big a problem as the people above suggest? If 10 people could stop all of them, then surely only a tiny proportion of that could find them by accident?
Therefore, a non-issue.
Also, what about the people that find images of Christ offensive? Or misuse if the crucifix? Or the people that consider cows holy, and so don't wish to see them in inappropriate pictures? Or an extremist gay culture that finds pictures of straight couples offensive?
Should we have a "May offend" system for every eventuality? Surely we should if we are to be even handed?
Of course not. Just because this particular one gets people all hot and bothered in this thread doesn't give it any more validity than the "I find shots of red flowers" cult. Or are you suggesting that we grade people's worth, and so their validity of culture?
Posted 54 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
nude photos.... done with style and class.... not in a degrading manner are beautiful....
The human body should be celebrated...
Nude photography is big in the art and I see no reason as to why these photographs should be prohibited.
By opposing the art, you're placing boarders on cultures and and the artisitic values of other flickr users. If you have issues with nude photography.... than move on to another page.
Posted 54 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
Brock – you really have not addressed my points. As this threat and others like this one show it is definitely NOT a non-issue. If you owned a factory it would have been an issue even if only a small percentage of your products could come back to haunt you. Like I have implied, that is why we have QA.
No system is perfect, but to imply that because our “failure rate” is low we do not need to do anything is obviously not taking into account the views of the people who think different from you.
Awfulsarah, I agree with you. If you live in the west, even if you find some stuff offensive you have to get used to it. There is just no way to avoid it.
Unfortunately, the problem here is slightly different in that whole countries could potentially be cut off from Flickr. That will deprive us of a lot of cross-cultural communication that can only be good for everyone. Should we lower our standards to the absolute safest view? Of course not. But it would not hurt looking for solutions.
I also think self-regulation is the answer, although how to implement an effective system is not entirely apparent to me. Obviously the current one is generating some valid concerns, which I think will have to be addressed.
EDIT: Brock, you have added some stuff since I have read your last post. Nope, I do not suggest that at all, and that should be clear from my posts. But let’s get back to the original issue.
Posted 54 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
Well I'm not going to espouse my personal views on nudity/porn since I've done that enough before :) but we've seen that this topic definitely comes up pretty often - and unfortunately I think it will continue being a major issue unless flickr finds some way to filter these types of images more effectively. I agree the safeguards in place now are somewhat effective, but the problem is they're very easy to get around and people always find ways to do that. You get people who were kicked off flickr coming back and making brand-new accounts, uploading some sunset/water shots to get their account approved, and as soon as it is they start posting photos of women spread eagle and other pornographic-type images (I'm not just talking *nude* pics here) and you have people adding you as a contact, then deleting you without you knowing, but you visit their photos and oops! get broadsided with a page full of that crap. All I can think is somehow enabling a filter that users can easily turn off or on blocking any photos that have been flagged "may offend" wherever they are - and as has been suggested, you could have in its place a white box saying "this image has been flagged as offensive" (similar to how it is with "this photo is unavailable) - that way it doesn't in any way "censor" photos because they're still viewable by those without the filter turned on, and it doesn't invite people to post that kind of stuff because having it off would be exactly like flickr is now. :)
Posted 54 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
Posted 54 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
Posted 54 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
Smokeyproggg - the photos in that link do not work because they point to files on your local harddrive. You need to upload them somewhere.
And as I have said before, I still think it is very strange that you got that e-mail. I have never seen flickr staff ask someone to remove photos with nudity before.
Posted 54 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
Smokey even if you add someone as a contact and delete them immediately - the email still gets sent and there's no way to know if you've been removed from someone's contacts unless the person goes to the profile page and scrolls down to the contact info and sees either "[user] has added you as a contact" or "you aren't on [user's] contacts list"... just fyi.
Posted 54 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
i'm against nudity because we have minors here in flickr. if ppl want nudity there is a special sites for it. btw if flickr got blocked flickr will lose alot of members
Posted 54 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
I only can say that I can't say It any Better than "Another Camera Operater" said it! If you could do something about those Big Naked Whales.. or TV.
Posted 54 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
Lodesafun: TV actually has a filter-type option called the V-chip - something we employ in my household.
Posted 54 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
Posted 54 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
Posted 54 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
Smokey I asked for help by email because I didn't want to publicly "out" you - but the fact that not only did I come across those photos thru flickr but your comment to my blog directly linked to them was my biggest concern. Esp. because I have family who reads my blog and if they clicked on your name they would be directed to those photos you had public... I appreciate that you made them private. I did enjoy your other photos I previously commented on. :)
Posted 54 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
Well, after reading so many of these postings, I have to come out in favor. There is nudity and there is pornography. There are some beautiful nudes which I do not find offensive at all, though there are some very offensive photos which I've stumbled across here. When I find something that offends me, I mark it as "may offend" and then I make use of that little button that takes me off that page, and leave the photo for those who want to see such stuff.
Posted 54 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
Posted 54 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
Why is nudity so offensive?
I don't get it.
Posted 54 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
In the same argument, some people might find a picture of someone eating a hamburger offensive.
Honestly...
Posted 54 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
Smokey I don't want to get in a discussion back and forth with you here- if you want to continue, you can contact me by flickrmail. The fact is, there were photos clearly against the TOS, I reported it (this is the first time I have ever done so, btw) I thought somewhat anonymously and have now been named publicly - but the fact is, flickr staff have the last word on whether something is acceptable or not, and since you were asked to make them private then apparently it wasn't only my opinion that they shouldn't be out in the "open."
Posted 54 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
For now flickr is a very small team. However they do have people who directly respond to specific concerns. So use the help system
The amount of artful nudes and porn is actualy really really low. Unless you are activly looking the chances of unintentionally discovering them is really really low. Spend some time at flickr random and you'll see what i mean.
please speak for yourself and not a community of people, unless you have a mandate to do so.
Posted 54 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
ellipse if you are referring to me, I did use the help system, and a flickr staff member responded very quickly and was the one who asked that the photos be marked private. Unfortunately, even if there is such a small chance of this happening, I've been on flickr since the beginning of Jan. and have "happened" upon it many times... so it's not exactly *rare* - and I do not speak for anyone but myself.
Posted 54 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
Posted 54 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
.
Posted 54 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
From my point of view, Nudity Art is offensive to us Muslims and we dont accept it at all because it doesnt consider as a type of Art within our Religion manners and believes. As many said above that Flickr is an international website and those kind of pix may be offensive to some while they are not to others. So from my point of view, just to ignore the nudity pix uploaded in flickr. It is easy dont go across these pages. But what concern me the most is posting nudity pictures by Arab and Muslims and let me specified if those are from my country. It is so un acceptable and that is aganist our Religion believes and ours too. So what i want to point out we must have an action towards those people who post nudity pictures and they say that they are from Arabian and Muslim country. We should fight those coz it is like an obligation to do. Those are giving islam a bad image which we dont want to be showed here in a multi-culture website. I think this action will clarify the image to non-Muslims and show them that it is totally aganist our Religion to post nudity pix. So what do you think?
Posted 54 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
There should be children/muslim/whatevergroupisoffendedbynuditytoo-channel or sth for people that start whining when they see a bit naked flesh.
When you have a picture, for example, where people run naked into the sea, it can be a very funny or beautiful picture of nature, and many people did this when they were a child, i think.
the others shouldn't be offended and if they are, they can use the options already given here.
Pornography is something other,that is explicitly forbidden here!
so better not watch pictures in the net, if you are so affraid to see sth naked.
Posted 54 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
Posted 54 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
Dovaneh- Thank you for not going to the extreme and recognising that others do not have a problem with this. I've seen people act differently.
I'd like to note, though, that being from a Muslim country is not enough to classify someone as Muslim. Just like being from the US does not mean you even believe in a god. Also, just like not all Christians go to church every sunday, I suppose not all Muslims abide by every rule in the Kuran either.
In my opinion, the best thing to do here is to just avoid the images for yourself and to leave other people at peace with whatever the hell it is they want to do.
Posted 54 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
I agree, @Marco.
Posted 54 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
Donaveh, we have exactly the same situation in the West. Not everyone here agrees on the same thing as well, and some Christians object quite vigorously to nude pictures.
Now I am a Christian, but I do not feel as strongly as some do. What I do feel strongly about is that both parties have the right to disagree, and that we do not have the right to force other people to accept our perspectives.
I am a bit concerned with your view, that you expect all Muslims to think exactly as you do. Are there not differences of opinion between Muslims as well? I know at least one that does not agree with you.
Again, what we need to find is some way to make everyone as happy as possible. It seems to me that there are two requirements for that to happen. Firstly we need to accept that we differ, and not expect others to agree with us (whether they are Muslim, Christian, or else does not really matter). And secondly, we need to find a way so that people who are easily offended by nudity can set some sort of preference so that they can be spared most of this.
No system will work 100%, but if we at least try to be fair to everyone and respect their position then we might have the beginnings of some way we can co-exist on the same planet. But if we say that all Christians or all Muslims should do as we say then I fear that we will drift even further away from each other.
Posted 54 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
Smokeyproggg ~> It is not the issue where the muslim person is from.. It is more about the issue of nudity and how Islam taught us not only in the Middle East reigon but all over the world that nudity is not acceptable.. So that what i meant, i think we as Muslims should fight this kind of nudity that show to others that Muslims are ok with Nude Art while they are not indeed.
Macro ~> It is exactly what i do when it comes to this issue i avoid going across such pages and leave every1 live in peace.. but again what i want to point out that in our religion it is not accaptable at all to shot and post such pictures.. it is forbidden by Allah. That what concern me the most.. and as you said some ppl might not be from this particular Muslims country but they live in it.. However they should not post such pictures and when you check their profile it says s/he is from a muslim country.. here is the misunderstandment.. and again what i want to said those show that it is ok in Muslim culture to shot and post such picuters while in real life it is extermly un accaptable.. I wish i clarified my point of view..
Posted 54 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
Posted 54 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
Jan Tik ~> In this issue, there cant be an argument between muslims about it.. It is forbidden and a clear one.. i would love to debate with the person who thinks it is ok with Nudity Art in Islam..
I agree with you there is not a system can work 100% in a right way.. but what i want to insist on is we the muslim ppl over here to fight the nudity Art that is posted by Muslim ppl.. i am not going aganist the ppl who thinks it is ok to post nudity pictures and they are not from my religion.. they can do whatever they think it is right to do.. But i am more concern about the ppl who are from my religion and they post those pictures while it is forbidden to shot and post them.. It is an obligation from Allah that Each muslim should advice any other Muslim who is doing the wrong thing.. and here comes our duty to be done towards other muslims..
Posted 54 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
Smokey – in a country where the national ISP (yes, there is only one, and it's government-run) blocks any site that contains nudity, for religious reasons, I think you can safely say that there is not much separation between church and state.
Posted 54 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
Smokeyproggg ~> Yes there is no spearation between the two.. we live according how Islam taught us to live.. we do things that we weigh if it is accaptable to be done or not..
Posted 54 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
quas ~> exactly and that how the blocking system is done here in my country.. block any website that has nudity contents..
Posted 54 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
Flickr should not be polluted with nudity. Let's keep it clean so we can all enjoy beautiful photos from all walks of life who are very much passionate and talented too.
Posted 54 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
Posted 54 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
"The people who will be most severely punished by Allaah on the Day of Resurrection are the picture-makers."
Before I start discussing the nudity issue, I'm curious as to how this stands up, this being a picture-sharing site and all.
This isn't meant as a troll, I'm genuinely curious.
Posted 54 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
I personally have no problem with nudity, but it's clearly a big issue for some people, and I think a simple filter based on the "may offend" settings is a reasonable request, and shouldn't be so very hard to implement.
I was thinking of maybe a three-level set up, "show", "hide" and "ask":
"hide" would hide any images marked as "may offend" as if they were set to "private", i.e. you'd never know they were there; if your setting were "ask" you'd see a message saying "this image has been marked as potentially offensive by x people / by its owner" and could then choose to view it or move on; and "show" would, er, show them.
it wouldn't be perfect, of course, because it would depend on people marking images as "may offend", but I don't think anything else is feasible - screening every single image on upload certainly isn't. and while under the current system I would never mark anything as "may offend", I'd be far more likely to do so if all it meant was that people who'd rather not see those images don't, while everyone else is not affected. and I don't think I'm alone in that.
Posted 54 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
@xmark: I'll throw in my non-Muslim understanding, which might illuminate the Western point of view. As it has been explained to me, that verse refers to the raising up of what the Old Testament refers to as "graven images"--i.e. the worship of idols. Very conservative Muslims take that literally, but most tend toward the "idol" interpretation. That's why many good Muslims own cameras. :-)
The issue that the Muslims are raising in this thread stems from different considerations.
EDIT: By the way, I ask Muslims to forgive us non-Arabic speakers for using translations of the Koran. I know that any translation is only an approximation of the sacred text, but it serves better than nothing.
EDIT 2: Although no one has brought it up, I am aware that during the classical period, the literal interpretation was more prevalent. For those who may not know this, that is why much Islamic architecture emphasizes abstract designs and forms--they're a way of decorating without depicting. In the above post, I'm referring to the modern era, in which even conservative Muslim theocracies issue government posters bearing illustrations.
Posted 54 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
@Dovaneh, you have taken the time and effort to step forward and explain the Islamic point of view. I am very grateful for this. I understand that you are not pressing your point of view on people of the Book and other non-Muslims, but I would be very interested in learning about the Koranic injunctions that form the basis of posters' heartfelt opposition toward the depiction of the human body and sexuality.
So, would you quote and explain these in more detail?
Posted 54 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
Matt, I'm not asking to be forgiven for anything - just so we're clear on that. I know that there's an "interpretation" bypass. I'm hoping to get to what else can be "interpreted".
I'll hold off and wait for more answers.
Posted 54 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
@xmark: That "forgiveness" remark isn't aimed at you or your point of view. It's motivated by the Muslim belief that only the Arabic version of the Koran is the one true text, since it was the language chosen by Allah to convey it to Muhammad during the Night of Power (or in gradual revelation through several decades of his life, depending on which school of scholarship you accept). Muslim scholars distinguish sharply between the Arabic original and any translation, because key nuances and rhythms are lost. I've seen a distinguished Muslim scholar put such a caveat in a translated Koran that he wrote himself, so it's not a prejudice against non-Muslim translators!
I just wanted to make clear that, even though we might be relying on English translations in this discussion, we're aware that those aren't the text.
Posted 54 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
One more post: While exploring Dovaneh's photostream (beautiful), I found a caption by her that sheds some light on this discussion: "Fragile and so Precious as this Jar".
From this idea Islam thought of the woman as a valuable creature and insisted in protecting her from being broken and lost. Allah obligated us to be covered and wear Hijab because we are like a valuable pearl which always handled with care and covered to keep the glow of the pearl. And we - Muslim women- are too Covered outside to glow and benefit the world from our inside.
When another poster pointed out that Muslim women, while precious, are a long way from fragile--having "carried arms into battle, brokered treaties, run markets, led revolutions, built trading empires, and of course, borne the excrutiating pain of childbirth millions of times"--Dovaneh clarified:What i meant by Fragile that once it is broken cant be fixed and you know without me explaining what is in the woman that is valuable that if it ruined or broken cant be fixed which includes her reputation.. so Allah obligated us to be covered and wear Hijab so we stay valuable and not to be touched by anyone.. i know what u meant that modesty and frahility are two different things and i agree with u on this point but i looked at the idea from another angle and i wish i have made a sense here.. and in the end let me give u an example of a daily life.. " when u travel by plane and u bought a girft that u have paid alot to get for someone special wont u stick on a fragile sticker so it would be handle with care.. coz if they broke it.. u ll lose it " that was my idea here.. Muslime Women are too valuable and the reputation they have got is a very delicate thing they own so they have to handle it with care and to take care of it and as a help Allah obligated us to be covred and wear Hijab.
Posted 54 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
Thank you for your clarification, Dovaneh. Just two questions in order to understand your position better:
1. If you debate with a fellow Muslim (say one who grew up in England), and you cannot convince this person, what can you do about it - even if you are right?
2. Say that person is from the UAE and he/she does not think it is wrong to use nudity in art - do you have the right to force that person not to publish his/her art?
Posted 54 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
we are saying we are against it, but what the managers of Flickr are going to do??
Posted 54 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
In AlmaZ's stream: lady from africa tagged with (african)art and nudity, nude...
So, when it is a statue of a naked woman it is art and accepted???
Posted 54 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
There is no reliable way to filter images by content automatically, so unless everybody starts tagging their images this whole discussion is moot.
Personally, I think nudity in itself is rather rad. As for photos: It takes immense skill to take interesting (yet non-corny) pictures of nude bodies, by banning nudity you would shut out a very popular photographic genre.
And the nudes I've seen on Flickr so far were all very tame anyway. Imagine if photography superstar Terry Richardson showed up here with his work! ;)
Posted 54 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
|
|
I am offended that nobody cares about my culture. I am an Australian who loves porn and wants more porn on Flickr, but nobody cares about Australian cultural sensibilities.
Do not discriminate against Australians. Put more porn on Flickr now.
Posted 54 months ago.
( permalink
)
|
Feed – Subscribe to help discussion threads
|
Deutsch
|
English
|
Español
|
Français
|
