Australian Politics Forum - Explicit Pictures

Dsmithy70 Gold Member Offline ire futuis vobismetipsis Posts: 13147 Newy Gender:	Re: Explicit Pictures Reply #15 - Feb 23^rd, 2012 at 9:52am Why? Don't you think 5 words equals a sentence? War - more often than not these days is fought over different political ideologies rather than territory or expansion of empire. Execution - Other than criminality why does the state kill people? Political ideology.
Back to top	REBELLION is not what most people think it is. REBELLION is when you turn off the TV & start educating & thinking for yourself. Gavin Nascimento IP Logged

freediver Gold Member Offline www.ozpolitic.com Posts: 52839 At my desk.	Re: Explicit Pictures Reply #16 - Feb 23^rd, 2012 at 1:59pm It would help me figure out what you are trying to say. I still have no idea what your views are on the use of graphic images in this context.
Back to top	People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words. IP Logged

Dsmithy70

Gold Member

Offline

ire futuis vobismetipsis

Posts: 13147
Newy
Gender: male

Re: Explicit Pictures
Reply #17 - Feb 23^rd, 2012 at 2:45pm

Quote:

What do people think of the use of graphic images of war, execution etc as part of political debate?

LOL

I should re-read before hitting post.
In my mind fog this morning I read:
Why do people think of the use of graphic images of war, execution etc is part of political debate?

Which of course makes my answer fit.

My view on the actual post is I have no problem with them as long as they are in context with the discussion & thread much like my views on swearing.
Just posting graphic images as a way of trolling, looking to offend & upset other posters should see posts deleted warnings given & if ignored suspensions.

Back to top

REBELLION is not what most people think it is.
REBELLION is when you turn off the TV & start educating & thinking for yourself.
Gavin Nascimento

IP Logged

Annie Anthrax Gold Member Offline Posts: 7062 Gender:	Re: Explicit Pictures Reply #18 - Feb 23^rd, 2012 at 5:53pm freediver wrote on Feb 23^rd, 2012 at 8:49am: What do people think of the use of graphic images of war, execution etc as part of political debate? Depends on the context. For the most part, I think using photographs of someone's dead child or parent or other loved one in order to score debate points is disgusting.
Back to top	IP Logged

freediver Gold Member Offline www.ozpolitic.com Posts: 52839 At my desk.	Re: Explicit Pictures Reply #19 - Feb 23^rd, 2012 at 6:40pm Is it OK to post a photo of a dead person if no-one loved them while they were alive? Do you think prohibiting such images sanitises war and makes it easier to promote war? People seem a lot less likely to support war if they are confronted with the reality of it.
Back to top	People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words. IP Logged

Annie Anthrax

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 7062
Gender: female

Re: Explicit Pictures
Reply #20 - Feb 23^rd, 2012 at 7:01pm

freediver wrote on Feb 23^rd, 2012 at 6:40pm:

Is it OK to post a photo of a dead person if no-one loved them while they were alive?

Yes, Freediver. Obviously that's what I think Roll Eyes

If someone blew your kid to pieces, would you want their remains plastered all over the internet?

Quote:

Do you think prohibiting such images sanitises war and makes it easier to promote war?

Where did I ask for them to be prohibited? I said for the most part, I find their use (and the responses to them) disgusting.

Quote:

People seem a lot less likely to support war if they are confronted with the reality of it

Do you? That's interesting. I've found the opposite - on this forum at least. Here graphic photographs of slaughtered children with their guts hanging out seem to provide an opportunity for humour.

Back to top

IP Logged

freediver Gold Member Offline www.ozpolitic.com Posts: 52839 At my desk.	Re: Explicit Pictures Reply #21 - Feb 23^rd, 2012 at 7:12pm The two are not mutually exclusive. Is your only interest in this issue the feelings of the surviving relatives of the photographed deceased?
Back to top	People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words. IP Logged

Annie Anthrax

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 7062
Gender: female

Re: Explicit Pictures
Reply #22 - Feb 23^rd, 2012 at 7:31pm

No.

I find it very difficult to look at those pictures and while I do agree everyone should be aware of what happens to innocent victims, I like to be prepared for viewing them. I saw a crap load of very explicit war pictures when I did some work for an anti-war organisation, so it's not that I haven't seen them before. But there's a time and a place - I don't want to scroll down a thread and see a dismembered child while my 5 year old son is sitting next to me or while I'm on the laptop at work or uni.

You yourself said you wanted Ozpolitic to be accessible and suitable for young people - I don't think exposure to something as emotional as suffering on that scale should be discovered in a forum like this.

Back to top

IP Logged

freediver Gold Member Offline www.ozpolitic.com Posts: 52839 At my desk.	Re: Explicit Pictures Reply #23 - Feb 23^rd, 2012 at 8:10pm We discuss all sorts of 'mature' concepts here. I don't want to limit that. I think young people can handle that. Discussing war while glossing over the violence aspect is not really discussing it at all. Would you be equally opposed to a graphic description of what goes on in war?
Back to top	People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words. IP Logged

Annie Anthrax

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 7062
Gender: female

Re: Explicit Pictures
Reply #24 - Feb 24^th, 2012 at 7:53am

No.

And I'm not opposed to the use of graphic photographs in all circumstances. As I said before, it depends on the context. Ideally, there would be some kind of NSFW warning on the thread, but I appreciate that's almost impossible to do - unless of course the OP is posting the pics and can put it in the title.

Anyway, you asked a question in Feedback and I answered it. I'm not on some kind of crusade to put limitations on what other posters can do.

Back to top

IP Logged

It_is_the_Darkness Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 4000 in a ReTardis Gender:	Re: Explicit Pictures Reply #25 - Feb 24^th, 2012 at 7:36pm I don't think such pictures need to be tooo graphic otherwise this Forum could get in trouble for promoting such stuff as 'Snuff Vidios/Images' etc. I'm sure we all get the message from a more respectable image.
Back to top	SUCKING ON MY TITTIES, LIKE I KNOW YOU WANT TO. IP Logged

Dsmithy70

Gold Member

Offline

ire futuis vobismetipsis

Posts: 13147
Newy
Gender: male

Re: Explicit Pictures
Reply #26 - Feb 24^th, 2012 at 8:09pm

freediver wrote on Feb 23^rd, 2012 at 8:10pm:

We discuss all sorts of 'mature' concepts here. I don't want to limit that. I think young people can handle that. Discussing war while glossing over the violence aspect is not really discussing it at all.

Would you be equally opposed to a graphic description of what goes on in war?

No one comes to this site from a search for anything a young kid would type.
Censorship on the "Off Chance" is already rampant in the R/W.

Any pictures that are relvent to the discussion should be allowed.
War is Hell.

Back to top

REBELLION is not what most people think it is.
REBELLION is when you turn off the TV & start educating & thinking for yourself.
Gavin Nascimento

IP Logged

Emma

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 9853
OZ
Gender: female

Re: Explicit Pictures
Reply #27 - Feb 24^th, 2012 at 9:09pm

Happily I wasn't lurking around where these images/since deleted . .. appeared.

I tend to agree with AA. If truly disturbing images are to be posted, in a relevant context. a fair thing would be the consideration of a warning beforehand.!

I won't speak for anyone else on this - just myself.

If the pictures are of butchered and mangled women and children... ...I can only assume one of the male supremacist types posted them. To score some point puerile point. no doubt.!!
SHAME ON YOU.

I don't need to see such things FROM YOU.. U R sole. whichever one of the suspects! Angry

you are.
I say to the mods/ Perc. now. if you consider this was ( 'cos I didn't see it) beyond the pale.. ban for a period of time. This sort of useage for shock value is almost an assault.!

So IM GLAD I MISSED IT.!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Very glad.

Back to top

live every day

IP Logged

perceptions_now Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 11694 Perth WA Gender:	Re: Explicit Pictures Reply #28 - Feb 24^th, 2012 at 9:21pm Photos showing people having their head cut off by a large sword, with blood spurting in all directions, which is one I recently deleted, or something similar obnoxious in sexual overtones, will be deleted, if I see them! Anyone wishing to disagree can do so, but that's what I will do, if I remain an Administrator!
Back to top	IP Logged

Emma

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 9853
OZ
Gender: female

Re: Explicit Pictures
Reply #29 - Feb 24^th, 2012 at 9:23pm

Dsmithy70 wrote on Feb 24^th, 2012 at 8:09pm:

freediver wrote on Feb 23^rd, 2012 at 8:10pm:

We discuss all sorts of 'mature' concepts here. I don't want to limit that. I think young people can handle that. Discussing war while glossing over the violence aspect is not really discussing it at all.

Would you be equally opposed to a graphic description of what goes on in war?

No one comes to this site from a search for anything a young kid would type.Censorship on the "Off Chance" is already rampant in the R/W.

Any pictures that are relvent to the discussion should be allowed.
War is Hell.

I think you missed AA's point.

Bu then again,, if you'd explain the context to me, and brief description of the 'acceptable' images I'd be better able to give YOUR point proper consideration.

Back to top

live every day

IP Logged