GRATUITOUS BOOB! SHOTS

not that im defending thomas, but, the thread is self explanitory. if any thread was to have nudity it better be this one. atleast its not in some other non sexually oriented thread. THAT'D be wrong. like the creepy thread. god help us if the virus got to that point.

NoLuv4Hoes wrote:

GoZ wrote:

TJ wrote:

GoZ wrote:

TJ wrote:

True Believer wrote:

GoZ wrote:

Ummm...not that I'm complaining...but...since when is nudity okay to post, when not in a spoiler?

It's really not.

The fuck, Thomas?

Wouldn't it only be a problem if members complained?

Unless there's a content agreement somewhere.

There is, like I said, I hate to be a killjoy.......but, we've been getting away with some posts, because they were "SPOILERS"...(Kind of then authorities saying, "Well, you shouldn't, but...ok, it's in a Spoiler, so we'll look the other way!") I don't want to ruin the few and far between times we do it, by making it blatant....

Well i believe we borrow space from a bigger website on a whole i think.......right? So, I don't wanna see our moderators get shit for this if there's gonna be a problem. If putting it in spoilers is ok, than cool.

I don't want ANY of us to get shit! I seem to remember Red saying, "Don't post nudity"(I'm para-phrasing). I just don't want ANY of us getting in trouble, and more importantly, getting us shut down. Maybe I'm being overly sensitive, and if I am, I apologize. I love naked women as much as anyone, I just want to watch out for our best interests......Maybe I should be a MOD...over what? I have no clue!

GoZ does have a valid argument i dig wasting time in between things and hiding out from work here so idk someone should look into just exactly what the official ruling is one spoiler-less bared knockers

Agreed, we should post nudity in spoilers. I have many times had to scroll up superfast or close the pge because other people were in the room and there was some boobs on page.

Tayley wrote:

not that im defending thomas, but, the thread is self explanitory. if any thread was to have nudity it better be this one. atleast its not in some other non sexually oriented thread. THAT'D be wrong. like the creepy thread. god help us if the virus got to that point.

You have a point also.

i figured as much.

TJ wrote:

Tayley wrote:

not that im defending thomas, but, the thread is self explanitory. if any thread was to have nudity it better be this one. atleast its not in some other non sexually oriented thread. THAT'D be wrong. like the creepy thread. god help us if the virus got to that point.

You have a point also.

No. Not really.

True Believer wrote:

TJ wrote:

Tayley wrote:

not that im defending thomas, but, the thread is self explanitory. if any thread was to have nudity it better be this one. atleast its not in some other non sexually oriented thread. THAT'D be wrong. like the creepy thread. god help us if the virus got to that point.

You have a point also.

No. Not really.

i figured as much.

True Believer wrote:

TJ wrote:

Tayley wrote:

not that im defending thomas, but, the thread is self explanitory. if any thread was to have nudity it better be this one. atleast its not in some other non sexually oriented thread. THAT'D be wrong. like the creepy thread. god help us if the virus got to that point.

You have a point also.

No. Not really.

how does he not have a point?

TJ wrote:

True Believer wrote:

TJ wrote:

Tayley wrote:

not that im defending thomas, but, the thread is self explanitory. if any thread was to have nudity it better be this one. atleast its not in some other non sexually oriented thread. THAT'D be wrong. like the creepy thread. god help us if the virus got to that point.

You have a point also.

No. Not really.

how does he not have a point?

Because the point isn't whether or not this thread should have nudity it's whether or not it's allowable by the host site.

True Believer wrote:

TJ wrote:

True Believer wrote:

TJ wrote:

Tayley wrote:

not that im defending thomas, but, the thread is self explanitory. if any thread was to have nudity it better be this one. atleast its not in some other non sexually oriented thread. THAT'D be wrong. like the creepy thread. god help us if the virus got to that point.

You have a point also.

No. Not really.

how does he not have a point?

Because the point isn't whether or not this thread should have nudity it's whether or not it's allowable by the host site.

Don't you think though the host site is gonna assume something with the title "Gratuitous Boob" thread? I agree with what you said earlier in putting the naked shots in spoilers, but I don't think the host is ignorant enough to not believe there's no nudity here.

only problem with that logic is ur counting on people to have good and/or common sense more often than not, ull just end up disappointed when u do that

I was the one moderating all the nudity that Wholesome kept posting back at the beginning. Until I got tired of trying to keep up with it. I thought the nudity was just something Red didn't want us to post not something not allowed on the site.

yeah. and if its not allowed on the site how are we still in business? does that mean the host isn't doing it's job? if so, the host wasn;t really much of a host to begin with were they?

so there;s my point. "i figured as much."

Thomas wrote:

I was the one moderating all the nudity that Wholesome kept posting back at the beginning. Until I got tired of trying to keep up with it. I thought the nudity was just something Red didn't want us to post not something not allowed on the site.

personally, I think we should not post nudity here if only because Red asked us not to. i think when we signed up to the site it was a condition of acceptance. We don't want the host to have to police us, because they'll come down hard. it's just better to police ourselves. It really should not be that difficult to not post nude pictues or movies. I have a hard time getting on this site at work, just because a lot of the signatures are questionable.

ah the great boob debate continues.......

im pro nudity, but also pro spoiler, its courtesy to those usin the ARA on the job

REEF aka Luke Cage wrote:

ah the great boob debate continues.......

im pro nudity, but also pro spoiler, its courtesy to those usin the ARA on the job

^this^ to be frank it really doesnt affect me either way no one sees me using my computer and any of my "bosses" wouldnt give a fuck what i was doing on it, but the fact is its better safe than sorry for the rest of the ARA. not to mention the whole we dont wanna get shutdown 4 violating any policies the host site may have.

idk really until someone takes it up to actually figure out the guidelines we can debate all day but it doesnt really matter. what may happen, will, if nothings done to take preventive measures within the host site's official rules.

REEF aka Luke Cage wrote:

ah the great boob debate continues.......

im pro nudity, but also pro spoiler, its courtesy to those usin the ARA on the job

What he said. And pretty much what I've been saying.

I wouldn't say I'm pro-nudity, but I'm anti-censorship. I think spoilers are a reasonable level of restraint that we can all practice without chaffing too much. And it's respectful since, as Jim said, people get on here at work.

A simple "NSFW" and a spoiler should be simple enough.

True Believer wrote:

REEF aka Luke Cage wrote:

ah the great boob debate continues.......

im pro nudity, but also pro spoiler, its courtesy to those usin the ARA on the job

What he said. And pretty much what I've been saying.

I wouldn't say I'm pro-nudity, but I'm anti-censorship. I think spoilers are a reasonable level of restraint that we can all practice without chaffing too much. And it's respectful since, as Jim said, people get on here at work.

A simple "NSFW" and a spoiler should be simple enough.

^^^ BUT, I think the nudity/sex needs to be gone from signatures (i.e. Reef and Noluv's signatures). They're great but it sucks when I'm at work and the Executive Director can walk in my office at any minute.

True Believer wrote:

REEF aka Luke Cage wrote:

ah the great boob debate continues.......

im pro nudity, but also pro spoiler, its courtesy to those usin the ARA on the job

What he said. And pretty much what I've been saying.

I wouldn't say I'm pro-nudity, but I'm anti-censorship. I think spoilers are a reasonable level of restraint that we can all practice without chaffing too much. And it's respectful since, as Jim said, people get on here at work.

A simple "NSFW" and a spoiler should be simple enough.

I wouldn't use the tag anti-censorship because that only applies to government intervention. If a host has a rule, say no nudity, and your post gets pulled because it violated its guidelines, then that is not censorship, that is editorial descretion.

But in this case my concern is this: when I joined this site I agreed to abide by the conditions of the host and I think one of the conditions was no nudity - although in all honesty I can't remember if that was in the conditions or if was something Red had posted. In any case I accepted those terms. How do I now go back on my word? To me it's not a question whether your pro-nudity or if you are offend by it. It's we accepted the terms and now some want to change the rules because the Host Police hasn't stepped them. What would your position be if Red asked you not to? is it really that important to you all to paste a picture or movie of a pair of tits?

i already think this group is not very respectful toward women and some cases down right hostile. this is a reason, I believe, we only have 2 female members and only 1 who is active. I would not invite or recommend to my daughter to join the ARA.

Jim! wrote:

True Believer wrote:

REEF aka Luke Cage wrote:

ah the great boob debate continues.......

im pro nudity, but also pro spoiler, its courtesy to those usin the ARA on the job

What he said. And pretty much what I've been saying.

I wouldn't say I'm pro-nudity, but I'm anti-censorship. I think spoilers are a reasonable level of restraint that we can all practice without chaffing too much. And it's respectful since, as Jim said, people get on here at work.

A simple "NSFW" and a spoiler should be simple enough.

I wouldn't use the tag anti-censorship because that only applies to government intervention. If a host has a rule, say no nudity, and your post gets pulled because it violated its guidelines, then that is not censorship, that is editorial descretion.

But in this case my concern is this: when I joined this site I agreed to abide by the conditions of the host and I think one of the conditions was no nudity - although in all honesty I can't remember if that was in the conditions or if was something Red had posted. In any case I accepted those terms. How do I now go back on my word? To me it's not a question whether your pro-nudity or if you are offend by it. It's we accepted the terms and now some want to change the rules because the Host Police hasn't stepped them. What would your position be if Red asked you not to? is it really that important to you all to paste a picture or movie of a pair of tits?

i already think this group is not very respectful toward women and some cases down right hostile. this is a reason, I believe, we only have 2 female members and only 1 who is active. I would not invite or recommend to my daughter to join the ARA.

Don't think the last paragraph's true, but otherwise, I agree.

I think it's a little misleading to cite the members' behavior as a reason for having few female members when there are very few women who visit western comic book internet forums to begin with. Even if everyone on here was a perfect gentleman and there were no gratuitous boob, etc. threads, we wouldn't see a big increase in female membership.

True Believer wrote:

Jim! wrote:

True Believer wrote:

REEF aka Luke Cage wrote:

ah the great boob debate continues.......

im pro nudity, but also pro spoiler, its courtesy to those usin the ARA on the job

What he said. And pretty much what I've been saying.

I wouldn't say I'm pro-nudity, but I'm anti-censorship. I think spoilers are a reasonable level of restraint that we can all practice without chaffing too much. And it's respectful since, as Jim said, people get on here at work.

A simple "NSFW" and a spoiler should be simple enough.

I wouldn't use the tag anti-censorship because that only applies to government intervention. If a host has a rule, say no nudity, and your post gets pulled because it violated its guidelines, then that is not censorship, that is editorial descretion.

But in this case my concern is this: when I joined this site I agreed to abide by the conditions of the host and I think one of the conditions was no nudity - although in all honesty I can't remember if that was in the conditions or if was something Red had posted. In any case I accepted those terms. How do I now go back on my word? To me it's not a question whether your pro-nudity or if you are offend by it. It's we accepted the terms and now some want to change the rules because the Host Police hasn't stepped them. What would your position be if Red asked you not to? is it really that important to you all to paste a picture or movie of a pair of tits?

i already think this group is not very respectful toward women and some cases down right hostile. this is a reason, I believe, we only have 2 female members and only 1 who is active. I would not invite or recommend to my daughter to join the ARA.

Don't think the last paragraph's true, but otherwise, I agree.

I think it's a little misleading to cite the members' behavior as a reason for having few female members when there are very few women who visit western comic book internet forums to begin with. Even if everyone on here was a perfect gentleman and there were no gratuitous boob, etc. threads, we wouldn't see a big increase in female membership.

eh idk you're both kinda right but lets be real how many girls out there would be cool with some of the shit we lay down on the ARA lol so were pretty much getting slim pickin's out of an already small demographic

NoLuv4Hoes wrote:

True Believer wrote:

Don't think the last paragraph's true, but otherwise, I agree.

I think it's a little misleading to cite the members' behavior as a reason for having few female members when there are very few women who visit western comic book internet forums to begin with. Even if everyone on here was a perfect gentleman and there were no gratuitous boob, etc. threads, we wouldn't see a big increase in female membership.

eh idk you're both kinda right but lets be real how many girls out there would be cool with some of the shit we lay down on the ARA lol so were pretty much getting slim pickin's out of an already small demographic

Well I don't disagree with you, two. You're both are right in that the demographics for comic book fans are primary male and on MySpace comic book forum, there were more guys to girls. what I'm saying is that just because there are few women here it doesn't allow us the right to disrespect them as much as I think we do. The gratuitous boob page is not an affront (pun intended) just like the "I like to hurt women" or I like to hurt animal" page, they reflect what is happening in the comic book world. However adding nudity to these pages is not about anything more then titilation. I don't expect the guys here to be perfect gentlemen, hell I can't ask people to hold to a standard that I can't live too. What I ask is that we not turn this place into the He-man wimmen hatin club.

My two cents.

See Jims sig.



aka

Spoiler:

I never thought the nudity was needed. It was more fun when the pictures were still a little tame.

That being said, I think it's ridiculous to think that anyone on the ARA shows signs of being a woman hater. For starters there are several active members who are either in a relationship, or married. Several of them even have kids. I never once saw a post that was down right degrading towards women. And any comments I saw that had to do with insulting women were in yellow text. I've seen the convos we've had about women in a serious sense, and it's always been pretty respectful unless it's about a break-up.

The main problem with getting female members to join is the same problem we have with getting male members to join. The ARA is kind of like a family forum, for lack of a better term. It's hard to just start posting on this forum. Besides the comic discussion thread, and the versus thread, our forum is hard to fit in to. On top of that, our forum isn't really ideal for casual comics fans, or anyone without a sense of humor. Most girls are going to be a little more casual in that department (comics). And since they are only casual fans of the most accessible thread on our forum, you can see how it might be hard to keep a girl interested on this sight.

I mean hell, we have well over 800 none active members, who are probably a majority of guys rather than women. And none of that has to do with our gratuitous boob thread.

eh i dont really see the ARA being more that sexist really, to me its kinda like what u get when u mix Wizard (for lack of a better choice in mind right now) with something like Maxim (ARA's a lil more tame...kinda...) so i dont think its so much any particular subject matter i think (and mind u this is my own opinion) jim means that we pretty much have a dont give a fuck attitude and our sense of humor tends to teeter towards taboos (racism, sexism, LC beating tigers etc,) thats not typically shit ur average joe thinks is funny and esp. not ur average jane doe. i dont think hes saying its so much a problem as just putting it out there like "hey, were not for everyone and here's why..." which is fine and dandy(yeah i said dandy eat my ass if u got a prob w/ it), in fact i wouldnt change that for a thing.

as per the nudity issue i've already said i just think someone should do their homework on the nudity policy (instead of just inferring and assuming, two always useless resources) so in case shit were ever to go down we wouldnt get blindsided and ppl wont have to worry if theyll be the straw that breaks the camels back while posting stuff.