Nip Equality

[Love Zhaoying]

59 minutes ago, Chaser Zaks said:

The whole "female nipple" debate is a massive mess. Personally, I don't see why it was sexualized in the first place, and I do not see it as a sexual thing, but here is my thoughts regarding it being as neutral as possible:

We could for presume that the female breasts are probably considered sexual due to using them as a place to slide a hotdog, but this opens a whole other can of worms.
The anus, for example, is also not a sexual reproduction organ, however it is considered explicit as well, presumably due to it being a place to insert hotdogs.

With the above in mind, should the mouth also be considered explicit? What about hands and feet? There are even some countries who say ankles are explicit.

Butts can also be considered explicit, but now we also have another issue: Cartoony butts vs realistic butts, why is one explicit and the other not explicit?
If you show your avatar's butt in a general region and you are wearing a realistic avatar, you will likely get in trouble. But if you go around pantless as bugs bunny, you will not get in trouble.

So lets get back to basics and focus on just the female breasts. Say we set some ground rules on breasts, which I will promptly question, defining what is a explicit breast and what is a non-explicit breast:

• Non-explicit: A topless woman, any setting you would normally see a topless man in, say weight lifting, or at the beach, maybe doing some yard work.
• Explicit: Suggestively rubbing her breasts.

The reason why suggestively rubbing the breasts can be seen as explicit as it is seen as "sexy", but you also have men who flex their muscles who some people will also consider "sexy". What makes the difference here?

--end thoughts--

The whole logic behind the "x is explicit and y isn't explicit" baffles me. It should be as simple as "Is it used for sexual reproduction? If so, it is sexual. Otherwise it is not.", but the more you look into it, the deeper the rabbit hole gets and you find yourself questioning why this and not that?

As for LL enforcement of it, I believe it is a case of "Well our laws say it is explicit so we say it is explicit", especially when a majority of all states/counties in the United States also say it is explicit. Not saying I agree with the decision of the law, it is just "that's the norm".

Thoughts:

- The site "newtumbl" (tumbler replacement) marks both male and female nipples as "mature" for equality reasons.

- Euphemisms aside, I use my hands to eat hot dogs. Feet? Gross! My hind-paws are dirty.

[Orwar]

   I think that the argument that women's nipples aren't sexualized, or that it's only sexualized by men, is silly. Yes, in a picture of only a nipple, it's not always obvious whether it's a man's nipple or a woman's nipple, but in a picture of a woman where you can see the nipple, you generally also see more or less the whole breast. It's pretentiously naive to claim that women's breasts aren't largely viewed as sexual by a large majority of men and women across the world, and to rationalize it as 'it's for feeding babies and nothing else' is downright stupid. 

   The nipple itself isn't the object of objection, but rather the threshold of how much of a woman's breast is exposed. Can this threshold be circumvented, creating a more sexualized image with no nipple than a casual picture containing a nipple? Absolutely, but if we start messing around with what the threshold is or what it means, then every image containing an avatar on the forums, in-world within general-mature regions, as well as the marketplace would need to be scrutinized anew with a more vague and subjective perspective. 

   The argument that 'if women's nipples are disallowed, then men's should be as well!' is also plainly counter-intuitive. You want more progressiveness and more liberty, but if you can't have that, you want intermittency and prohibition instead? Please.

   I'm all for equality, but at the same time I'm pretty convinced that men and women are different, both physically and psychologically. I also think that pretending like not being allowed to display one's nipples is a form of oppression is downright childish. 

   As a heterosexual man, I'm in no way ashamed to admit that yes, if I see an attractive woman topless, my libido is quite likely to start revving up - that doesn't mean I'm unable to control myself in such circumstances, and absolutely doesn't make me some 'uncivilized caveman', but to pretend that there's nothing sexual there because someone has a misguided ideal that simply doesn't align with reality is, again, just silly.

   But what do I know, perhaps women are the same? Perhaps for the good of all, I should never appear topless in public again.

   ... What are you looking at?!

[Marigold Devin]

17 minutes ago, Orwar said:

   I think that the argument that women's nipples aren't sexualized, or that it's only sexualized by men, is silly. Yes, in a picture of only a nipple, it's not always obvious whether it's a man's nipple or a woman's nipple, but in a picture of a woman where you can see the nipple, you generally also see more or less the whole breast. It's pretentiously naive to claim that women's breasts aren't largely viewed as sexual by a large majority of men and women across the world, and to rationalize it as 'it's for feeding babies and nothing else' is downright stupid. 

   The nipple itself isn't the object of objection, but rather the threshold of how much of a woman's breast is exposed. Can this threshold be circumvented, creating a more sexualized image with no nipple than a casual picture containing a nipple? Absolutely, but if we start messing around with what the threshold is or what it means, then every image containing an avatar on the forums, in-world within general-mature regions, as well as the marketplace would need to be scrutinized anew with a more vague and subjective perspective. 

   The argument that 'if women's nipples are disallowed, then men's should be as well!' is also plainly counter-intuitive. You want more progressiveness and more liberty, but if you can't have that, you want intermittency and prohibition instead? Please.

   I'm all for equality, but at the same time I'm pretty convinced that men and women are different, both physically and psychologically. I also think that pretending like not being allowed to display one's nipples is a form of oppression is downright childish. 

   As a heterosexual man, I'm in no way ashamed to admit that yes, if I see an attractive woman topless, my libido is quite likely to start revving up - that doesn't mean I'm unable to control myself in such circumstances, and absolutely doesn't make me some 'uncivilized caveman', but to pretend that there's nothing sexual there because someone has a misguided ideal that simply doesn't align with reality is, again, just silly.

   But what do I know, perhaps women are the same? Perhaps for the good of all, I should never appear topless in public again.

   ... What are you looking at?!

It's not the nipples on a man that do it for me, but the chest hair. And I am led to believe that a man's nipples don't have quite the same sensations as a woman's (!), not one of the "on" buttons as it were, therefore, they shouldn't be viewed as sexual when exposed.  Isn't that why men are allowed to be in public topless when the sun comes out?

NOT in front of the children!!!

Edited May 15, 2020 by Marigold Devin
I need a new keyboard

[Wulfie Reanimator]

#freethenipple

That means you too, @Orwar.

[Orwar]

1 minute ago, Marigold Devin said:

It's not the nipples on a man that do it for me, but the chest hair. And I am led to believe that a man's nipples don't have quite the same sensations as a woman's (!), not one of the "on" buttons as it were, therefore, they shoudn't be viewed as sexual when exposed.  Isn't that why men are allowed to be in public topless when the sun comes out?

   Well, I don't have enough hands to cover up my chest hair! Maybe I should find a jumper instead.

5 minutes ago, Wulfie Reanimator said:

#freethenipple

That means you too, @Orwar.

[Lillith Hapmouche]

Accepting bets now... the "solution" to this "problem" will most likely be along the lines of "no nude skin bits showing at all in forum posts".

[HeathcliffMontague]

3 hours ago, Orwar said:

Yes, in a picture of only a nipple, it's not always obvious whether it's a man's nipple or a woman's nipple

 

 

Perhaps you need to see more nipples if that's the case  But some good points made.

[Beth Macbain]

Y'all are making this WAY more complicated than it needs to be. It has nothing to do with PR - no one is going to bat a single eyelash if women's nipples are allowed on the forums. If LL isn't concerned about child avatars on adult regions, and that has far worse optics than a nipple, then this shouldn't even be a blip. You can see nipples all over SL, and on the MP, and not just on Adult rated land or content. 

It's a freaking nipple.

And as others have pointed out, it's not so cut and dry these days. We're not just talking about men and women. Why does everyone except women with anything other than a flat chest get to show nips? 

I am not talking about sexual content. I am not talking about southern genitalia - the moderation of those things are already applied consistently across the board. No man butts, no women butts. No man southern frontage, no women southern frontage. 

As for the legality of things from state to state, or even country to country, how about marijuana? It's legal in California. It's not legal here in Kentucky. I've bought Bento spliffs from major events in SL. I bet if I posted a photo of myself with my nips covered and a joint in my hand, no one would even notice. Of course, we're not talking about actual marijuana - but we're also not talking about actual breasts. it's a product. My boobs came with my Maitreya body. I bought them. 

If men can't control their libido at the sight of a bare female breast, that's not my problem. I'd also argue that the underside of the breast is far more sensual and sexually charged than a nipple, and as a straight woman, I do find men's chests sexually pleasing (some, not all). Also men's forearms. Inner thighs. Hands. Their Adam's apple. Should we forbid all those things because they might make me a little hot and bothered? 

I just want the rules to apply equally to all. If it means men (and other variations) can't post photos of their boobs on the SL forums, so be it. I'll check 'em out on Flickr instead, just like I do when I want to see pics of their twig and berries. 😜

 

[Evah Baxton]

I'm sure I've posted a few music videos from YouTube with nudity. Women and men. I didn't even consider if it was allowed or not because it wasn't lewd or sexual.

[Scylla Rhiadra]

13 hours ago, Sukubia Scarmon said:

I think it's not even about nipples being seen as sexual, or morality, or whatever serves an excuse. It's about womens bodies being governed by others who decide what we're allowed to do with them because surely we can't make that decision for ourselves.

YES YES YES. SO MANY YESES HERE.

[Scylla Rhiadra]

5 hours ago, Lillith Hapmouche said:

Accepting bets now... the "solution" to this "problem" will most likely be along the lines of "no nude skin bits showing at all in forum posts".

That's entirely possible.

In which case, that becomes a different fight.

This one is about the double standard, rather than about prudish morality per se.

[Lillith Hapmouche]

Is there really a reason to put it up as a "fight", taking it literally? 

[Marigold Devin]

1 minute ago, Lillith Hapmouche said:

Is there really a reason to put it up as a "fight", taking it literally? 

I'm always up for a mud wrestle type fight - at least that way EVERYTHING gets covered up with the mud!

[Lillith Hapmouche]

Yeah, that's pretty noticable in the Pet Peeve thread. 🙄

[Scylla Rhiadra]

There is a distinction between nudity and sexuality. SL itself already acknowledges that distinction in the CS, when it permits public nudity, but not public sexuality, in Moderate regions.

No one here is asking that sex acts involving breasts be permitted here. Indeed, the irony is that the picture threads are just oozing with sexuality -- suggestive lingerie and bathing suit pics, for instance, or pics that discreetly cropped -- but they are permitted, whereas non-sexualized images of women's breasts are removed.

So, please, don't try to argue that this is about "sexuality." If it were, a fifth of the vanity threads would be gone.

This is about how a culture views women's bodies. Or, more explicitly, about how a particularly puritanical proportion of our culture views women's bodies, because we are, as a society, opening up to the acceptance of women's breasts as more than mere sexual playthings.

So, why is SL catering to the lowest common denominator here, rather than acknowledging the way in which attitudes are changing?

[Scylla Rhiadra]

5 minutes ago, Lillith Hapmouche said:

Is there really a reason to put it up as a "fight", taking it literally? 

You've heard of "metaphors," right?

I'm all for discussions. For that to happen, however, we need the "other side" to engage -- and by that, I don't mean Alwin, I mean LL and those who've made this decision.

[Beth Macbain]

@Sukubia Scarmon and @Scylla Rhiadra - You both absolutely said it much better than I did. Thank you.

[Orwar]

39 minutes ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:

For that to happen, however, we need the "other side" to engage -- and by that, I don't mean Alwin, I mean LL and those who've made this decision.

   But this is a forum, i.e. a platform for all to voice their opinions - not necessarily a place to convince everyone that your opinion is the only truth. Arguing, or engaging, is part of the process, and the more opinions are heard the better, no? But at the same time, Second Life and its forums isn't a democracy, Linden Lab make the rules; if you don't want people disagreeing with you voicing their opinion, you might want to consider contacting LL directly.

   I've already voiced my opinions on the matter, and I've yet to see any argument to persuade me otherwise. I don't know for certain what position LL would take (and, LL isn't as much an 'entity' as it is a company that consists of several people - they may well end up having a discussion within the company to figure out which path to go with), but I'm thinking that the risk involved of both external anger (i.e. 'this game exposes my kids to sexual content!' - just look at Second Life's press history) and internal malcontent (i.e. those of us who actually put value in that which is traditionally regarded as decent, and view it not as an oppression of women but as a benefit to women - including many women themselves!), it appears unlikely that LL will change their rules. Again, does that mean that the community and marketplace moderators are to go back and re-view every image that has been uploaded to ensure that whichever new rules apply are adhered to? It seems like an awful lot of work to appease a part of the community.

[Beth Macbain]

5 minutes ago, Orwar said:

i.e. those of us who actually put value in that which is traditionally regarded as decent, and view it not as an oppression of women but as a benefit to women - including many women themselves!

Okay, but why does your opinion over whether or not my bare boob is decent or not take precedence over my own opinion as to the decency of my boob? And how is allowing me to make my own decision about whether or not I want to show my boobs a detriment to women? No one is going to force women to bare their breasts, just as no one is going to force anyone to view a photo, unless you would also consider it force for me to see male nipples as I'm scrolling the vanity threads. If that is force, then LL needs to prohibit all the nipples, not just some of them. 

I've no doubt that somewhere some people would be all like ZOMGBOOBIES but do you really think that would be the case when so much of LL's past bad press was focused on things so very much worse than boobs? Child avatars are still allowed on adult regions. I understand the logic and the rules behind it, but if we're talking about knee-jerk reactions to vile behavior, the optics surrounding that one and the possible PR repercussions of that are far more dangerous to LL than a boob or two. 

And no rule has ever been changed in history without someone speaking up to say it needs to be changed. 

If you (or anyone who isn't me) gets to make the decision about whether or not I'm free to show my nipple, then I demand to make the decision about whether or not others are free to show their nipples.

No more nipples, Orwar! I mean it, young man! You keep those dirty pillows to yourself!

All nipples or no nipples. 

[Orwar]

4 minutes ago, Beth Macbain said:

Okay, but why does your opinion over whether or not my bare boob is decent or not take precedence over my own opinion as to the decency of my boob?

   So you wouldn't want to have a say in whether or not my posterior would be decent or not? You share this world and this society with others, we can't all do whatever we want.

[Beth Macbain]

13 minutes ago, Orwar said:

   So you wouldn't want to have a say in whether or not my posterior would be decent or not? You share this world and this society with others, we can't all do whatever we want.

It depends. Is it perfectly acceptable for me to show my posterior? If it is, then no, I shouldn't have a say. If I can do it, so can you. 

[Sukubia Scarmon]

10 hours ago, Orwar said:

   But this is a forum, i.e. a platform for all to voice their opinions - not necessarily a place to convince everyone that your opinion is the only truth. Arguing, or engaging, is part of the process, and the more opinions are heard the better, no? But at the same time, Second Life and its forums isn't a democracy, Linden Lab make the rules; if you don't want people disagreeing with you voicing their opinion, you might want to consider contacting LL directly.

   I've already voiced my opinions on the matter, and I've yet to see any argument to persuade me otherwise. I don't know for certain what position LL would take (and, LL isn't as much an 'entity' as it is a company that consists of several people - they may well end up having a discussion within the company to figure out which path to go with), but I'm thinking that the risk involved of both external anger (i.e. 'this game exposes my kids to sexual content!' - just look at Second Life's press history) and internal malcontent (i.e. those of us who actually put value in that which is traditionally regarded as decent, and view it not as an oppression of women but as a benefit to women - including many women themselves!), it appears unlikely that LL will change their rules. Again, does that mean that the community and marketplace moderators are to go back and re-view every image that has been uploaded to ensure that whichever new rules apply are adhered to? It seems like an awful lot of work to appease a part of the community.

Would you mind explaining how it's benefitial to us?

[AyelaNewLife]

10 hours ago, Beth Macbain said:

Okay, but why does your opinion over whether or not my bare boob is decent or not take precedence over my own opinion as to the decency of my boob? And how is allowing me to make my own decision about whether or not I want to show my boobs a detriment to women? No one is going to force women to bare their breasts, just as no one is going to force anyone to view a photo, unless you would also consider it force for me to see male nipples as I'm scrolling the vanity threads. If that is force, then LL needs to prohibit all the nipples, not just some of them. 

I've no doubt that somewhere some people would be all like ZOMGBOOBIES but do you really think that would be the case when so much of LL's past bad press was focused on things so very much worse than boobs? Child avatars are still allowed on adult regions. I understand the logic and the rules behind it, but if we're talking about knee-jerk reactions to vile behavior, the optics surrounding that one and the possible PR repercussions of that are far more dangerous to LL than a boob or two. 

And no rule has ever been changed in history without someone speaking up to say it needs to be changed. 

If you (or anyone who isn't me) gets to make the decision about whether or not I'm free to show my nipple, then I demand to make the decision about whether or not others are free to show their nipples.

No more nipples, Orwar! I mean it, young man! You keep those dirty pillows to yourself!

All nipples or no nipples. 

I feel like I'm repeating myself here.

No one offered a single counter to anything I said yesterday. Let's break this down for a moment, again.

The same community standards apply to inworld, the marketplace and the forum. The forum is covered by the same guidelines as General-rated land. What you're effectively asking for here is a change to the General rating. The impact of that goes far, far beyond a few forum threads.

The opinion that matters here is not mine or yours, but that of the law. Primarily, the common view of the legal system of California, as that is what has jurisdiction over Linden Lab. We don't matter. They may also have regard to other sets of laws in order to avoid alienating large parts of their userbase.

If the view of the courts is that the pixelated boobies of a 16 year old girl is inappropriate, that view is the only one that matters. And consciously giving that the okay (rather than being slow to remove the content) would have massive legal ramifications for Linden Lab. If their legal team feel the risk of the court taking that view is likely, that opinion also matters more than yours and mine.

This is also true with the scenario of a 16 year old seeing adult pixel boobies; we all know 16 year olds have seen far, far worse, but that's not the point. If it's a legal no-no, it's a no-no. And again, the PR damage of the company openly saying that this content is okay is damaging in a totally different way to simply being too slow to remove offending content. Apples and oranges.

It is therefore entirely reasonable for Linden Lab to keep General ratings as they are, and play it safe with no female boobage allowed.

If your argument is then to ban the male nipple - remember that you are asking for the General rating to be changed. Every marketplace listing that shows a male nipple would need removing. Every male avatar topless at a General beach or other region would need to be banned. That's a massive and arguably unjustifiable restriction that would drive thousands away from the platform. Not viable.

I would love it if the above was not true. But it is true. Simply put, this is not the avenue to drive cultural and more importantly legislative change. Second Life cannot lead the way here.

[Mollymews]

i think Linden might have made a mistake by going from PG to G when they changed from PG-M to G-M-A.  PG allows brief contextual nudity where G does not, at least in the USA classification system

and given that in the USA, PG is classified for 13+ years of age and G includes under 13s, and under 13s are not allowed in SL then it seems to me that PG would have been a better choice than G

 

edit add. altho this said, I get why G as it means no nekkid at all in this area of the inworld grid. And given that there is lots of M and A land then getting nekkid contextually can be done anyways in SL in lots of places

so thinking about it a bit more then should the forums be classed as M ? Probably not. PG would be better I think but then it would be inconsistent with the G-M-A system. So I think we are stuck with forums being G

 

 

Edited May 16, 2020 by Mollymews

[Adamburp Adamczyk]

16 hours ago, Beth Macbain said:

It depends. Is it perfectly acceptable for me to show my posterior? If it is, then no, I shouldn't have a say. If I can do it, so can you. 

*remembers coming home from a stag do 20 odd years ago, and w got pulled over by the police,, 18 backsides hanging out of the minibus windows, thankfully the police saw the funny side to it*