Define "Adult Content" ?

[Thomas Hodges]

Ok, let's try again :-)

Earlier today, I started a discussion at another Ning based website, but the creator of that site seemed to feel the topic somehow questioned her authority, so she deleted it !

However, the said discussion sparked quite a few intelligent and rational thoughts, so I'm putting it here, where we can kick it around amongst the safety of artists.

So, define "Adult Content", especially where it is stated the likes of "adult content not allowed" etc., etc. Also, as the reverse of adult is child and most of the sites making such statements are only frequented by adults, what exactly should we interpret from this statement ? Clearly it is ambiguous. Are they saying no nudity, if so, why not just say "no nudity" ? Should any website frequented by adults only, have the moral right to impose rules such as "no adult content" ? Is it democratic ? Does it breach civil liberty ? From an artist's perspective, where does freedom of expression begin and end ?

There you go, the field is yours my friends . . .

[Lavinia Young]

Hi Thomas

I think that 'Adult Content' is a personal viewpoint for people but I think there is a difference between adult content and pornography, most people would agree I think.

The guy whose postings initially provoked your debate had posted a lot of material onto my page on another site.
1, the photographs didn't offend me, although they were a little suggestive maybe.
2, the fact that he had posted them onto my page and invaded my space as such slightly annoyed me.
3, the only thing that caused me mild offence was his rude/suggestive comments to me that accompanied the images.
If he had confined the images to his own page where the viewer could choose to look or not I do not think there would have been a problem.

I personally did not complain about him, I just treated him as a joke and moved on but others obviously were upset and he was removed.

I do not find the human body offensive.

Some of my images have been banned from other sites either because they cause offence or have been called 'scary' but I cannot paint pretty chocolate box pictures and if I did i'd rather give up painting and take up cooking. I like to make social comment too in my work .

We look at our own naked bodies every day, artists have painted nudes for centuries.
I think that if everyone is scared to push boundaries in art as well as other subjects then we will all stagnate and no progress will be made because everyone will be afraid of offending someone else.

I try NOT to deliberately cause offence but if I do I would hope that I would be able to discuss it in an adult fashion.

Not sure if this has answered anthing Thomas but it is how I feel.

B-uncut is a great site and it encourages growth and debate.

Lavinia xxx

[Thomas Hodges]

Hi Lavinia,

Thanks for you input, appreciated and very rational (if I may say so). I just wanted to clarify, that the photographer you mention (of whom I have no knowledge), is not an aspect of this debate, he was simply the catalyst that got it started. I wanted to make that clear, as I wouldn't want the debate to hover around that aspect.

Thanks again,

Thomas.

[Wren]

I do not know the Photgrapher Lvinia is talking about but do agree with what she has to say. Very sensible.

[Thomas Hodges]

Thanks for the feed-back Wren, appreciated. as I mentioned above, and must emphasise, this debate has no focus on any past incidents or any specific individual. It's just on the topic in question, as defined in the header.

[Michelle Gates]

Firstly Thomas, i'd like to say that said creator of the Ning based website was definitely not adult in her reaction to your discussion, so i'd be very interested to know her definition of the term "Adult Content" as she seems so adverse to the term.
I suppose the stereotypical definition would be material containing nudity, sex and violence, but in my view anything that a child's brain cannot comprehend or process can be interpreted as "Adult Content". This covers a huge area, ranging from the aforementioned to, lets say, politics.
I find it very hypocritical of these websites, which as you say, are mostly frequented by adults, to impose the "No Adult Content" rule, surely we are all intelligent enough to discern from what is deemed adult and what could be seen as offensive or morally challenging.

[Thomas Hodges]

Thanks for posting Michelle, I can't comment on the other Ning website, except to say I was a little surprised by the reaction, especially as I've since learnt than persons leaving comments on that discussion have since been banned !

Notwithstanding, keeping focus on the discussion, I agree with what you say completely. It is rather strange how some "adults" feel obliged to screen certain things from other "adults". It seems to undermine our overall status as an equal adult, unless perhaps we are not viewed as equals ?

[Leonard Zinovyev]

The thing is that kids do visit those websites sometimes. The Adult Content message is mainly for them. And for adults who can have the site prosecuted unless their children were not properly warned.

[Thomas Hodges]

Parental control is the responsibility of parents, not artists (or anyone else for that matter). With regard to the "adult consent message", do you really think a child will read it and click "no" ? In this day and age, children can access anything if they set their mind to it, so let's be realistic ! In any case, I think adults sometimes (often !), don't give children enough credit. I can think of many examples where children can be more "adult" than adults in their behaviour .

Don't get me wrong, I'm all for not exposing children to undesirable content, but I think war, killing, violence, etc., etc., which can be seen daily on TV, is far more undesirable than a nude human body. I believe that children should be made to be aware of nudity and appreciate it for what it is, not be taught that it is somehow taboo or shameful. That is where many adult's problems started.

With regard to legislation and being prosecuted, it rather depends on where you are located. My site has no such warnings (nor does this site come to that !).

[Leonard Zinovyev]

These are citizens with paranoid proclivities who want such messages, not us.
But the warning messages should be there and it should be more carefully worded. E.g., IMPORTANT!!! THIS SITE CONTAINS IMAGES OF BARE TITS AND FICTITIOUS MUTANT ANIMALS. WE ALSO MAKE FUN OF POLITICIANS AND THE CLERGY. IF YOU FIND SEEING SUCH THINGS OFFENSIVE AND STILL YOU HAVE CHOSEN TO ENTER THIS SITE, DON'T BLAME US BECAUSE WE WARNED YOU!

[Thomas Hodges]

I don't agree !

[Leonard Zinovyev]

Just imagine a carton of juice with no writings on it except JUICE. And you won't know what kind of juice is in it before you try it - apple juice? orange juice? or a alien mutant berry juice?

[Thomas Hodges]

I probably wouldn't buy it, but if I did buy it, I would not no what to expect. Don't dip your toe in the water if you don't want to get wet.

However, what I don't agree with essentially, is the extent of your wording. Let's not make the world more paranoid than it already is. So what if a website does have "bare tits", are you telling me that we should warn people about this. Are breasts offensive, rude, or somehow objectionable ? Babies don't think so, nor does the state of New York (and others), not to mention many other European Countries, where it is legal for women to be bare chested.

Once we begin to highlight anything, we just bring it more into the lime-light and tend to make people more conscious not less. Be like Michael, just sit back and watch the little girl get stung, but then again, the chances are she will not ! I believe this is an intelligent and constructive philosophy.