Baldur

I recently got on my high horse and reported a slew of what I took to be offensive drawings to Rachel. Having done that I would like to hear other people's take on this subject.

The images were of Swastikas, which I know.. I know.. predate Nazi Germany and had religious significance for thousands of years before Hitler got involved in graphic design.
Howeverr it was my feeling that these were dropped in for the sole purpose of being offensive.
It may be my reading into things but I'm guessing that someone using the moniker of peckerw00d is more likely to enjoy being insulting rather than be showing the emblem to assert his strong Hindu beliefs.

We all know that I myself stretch the limits of good taste often enough but even with my debauched morals there are times when I do need to say 'NO'.

I'm not Jewish but I think the Swastika can only be offensive in the postNazi era
I no longer consider myself a Christian but I did take offense at the art installation the featured a Crucifix submerged in urine.
I'm not a member of any of the minority groups here in the USA yet I'm offended by discriminatory treatment towards any of them.

Neither do I like censorship and am not particularly proud of reporting the drawings, but at the moment it seemed correct

How do you all view this?

Baldur

-e +at

gwinnyb

thank you I agree there are limits with civilized people and those limits should be to avoid offending others deeply held beliefs whether shared or not. this particularly when done simply to offend and shock others not because of any defensive need or harm sustained. In other words why harm others when they have done nothing to harm us? this simply proves we are not a humane and compassionate people. Again, thank you baldur for helping make this a welcoming forum rather than an alienating one

autumn

I have reported several that I found offensive I missed the swastikas or I probably would have reported it. there was one this morning that was just beyond bad taste.
not much offends me but I will continue to report what does, it won't go away if no one agrees with me so no harm...

anotherronism

(this space intentionally left blank)

Luna

I saw them and thought they were offensive. I didn't report them but should have. I thought maybe I was being to sensitive.

Baldur

and a -r in my first comment

Qsilv

I saw them... to me it looked like the work of a quite young kid doing that nyah-nyah shoving-his-pelvis-forward thing.

Mere minutes later they'd offended enough people (it takes 3) that they were made available to view only if you go to the person's profile.

Personally, (and especially with youngsters and horses) I like firm, calm Cause & Effect lessons.

Such simple "fixes" don't reward with the shock the perp hoped for, and they can be repeated indefinitely with very little strain on our time budgets or adrenaline. Verrrrrrry few attention-seekers have much perseverance.

; >

Kugusch

I'm German, but left my heart in Florida. I'm not offended by the Swastica in general, it all depends on the setting/situations. If sprayers randomly place it on housewals because they are neonazis, yes, it offends. If someone wants to do a seriously meant piece of art with it, I not only am not offended, but I think we NEED to see things. We NEED to be reminded of what happened, because when we forget, something like that will/might happen again. So the facts need to be refreshed with all of us from time to time so we'll never forget.
That being said, from your post I gather this was the TD version of a neonazi graffity smear, in that case, get it gone and move on, give them no attention.

Login

Autumn, I think I know the drawing you are referring to and, considering that children use this site, it had to go. I didn't see the swastikas but I agree with Kugusch on this. If they are used in an offensive way they should be reported. Having said that, Baldur is right in saying the swastika goes way back in history ... in various forms and without the sinister significance that it represented in the 20th century.
Baldur poses the question of whether or not we should report the pictures that offend us. I think we should. If we don't react and deal with offensive stuff, it will become the norm. Apart from the voting system and the gamesmanship that has been going on recently, I like this site the way it is.

kmkagle

Baldur - I am with you 1000%. I found (swasticas) it highly offensive. I am Christian, the freedom on this site is impressive. But on opening TD yesterday and seeing that "disgusting" group of pictures was more than I cared to deal with. From the pics I've seen, there are very few that warrant censoring, some definitely do, dare I mention the gingerbread man again? More than anything that exceeded the bounds of being appropriate, and feel that expression on this site needs to be limited to tasteful. I dislike, guns or pictures depicting violence (although, few, if any appear). There might some questionable submittals with a "need to censor" thought. As far as religious submittals, I have nothing against that. Religious art is beautiful. Each pic needs to be judged individually. You sound like a very fair, open-minded individual and have likely expressed the feelings of the TD group. I had to say what I felt. I should have known as soon as I saw the name of the person submitting....trouble. It may stop it but at least we're watching. Thanks.

kmkagle

P.S. And the Pole Dancer should not have been censored. There is a Pole Dancing School here in Pgh. that went to court to receive the right to operate and won. It is an art form!

Baldur

Kugusch, I found the examples posted not to be an attempt at education but really just an offensive act. One of the good things about this site is that I could not censor the images on my own, it required 3 people to report the images.

Kmkagle, I agree. The Pole dancer images are not offensive to me at all. It seems unlikely that I will ever be in an audience watching this art form, but I see nothing there that is worse than what is shown nightly on broadcast television.

Some kid did a drawing the other day of a poodle defecating which I thought was fairly disgusting. In that instance I just scrolled the page forward and buried it.

kmkagle

I noticed 2(?) drawings of and another of a bird, that's disgusting to me. I have a higher opinion of participants on this site! Humor can be expressed in so many other ways than that. I thought the pole dancer was a beautiful piece of work, it was a silhouette, nothing wrong with it, yet, I see a Gingerbread picture and bingo! I think censorship is good to a point. You have to address each situation as it arises then deal with it. You cannot say all gingerbread cookies are forbidden, right? Of course, children know more than we do sometimes! Want to know something, ask a kid! I see some borderline pictures but wait and see what the overall consensus is. It may offend me, but not someone else. You understand what I mean?

kmkagle

Baldur, also, I was going to report that one, but as you said, scroll forward, bury it.

Baldur

I agree with you, and found the gingerbread man picture offensive yet I wouldn't have been offended by just a nude study, male or female.
I wonder if it was just the 'in your face' quality that colored my opinion.

Qsilv

Hm, yes, "in your face" is the term I was looking for --and it's pretty easy to distinguish that from artistic intent, isn't it.

What's a bit trickier is figuring out if it's a little kid showing off, a teen pushing the limits, or an adult who has some sort of issue going on.

And then what? It's still, imo, most effective to just make it private and move along. Kudos to Rachel for setting that up.

kmkagle

Baldur and Qsilv: To use an analagy - you might like pie but you don't want it thrown in your face? The kind of art you are speaking is beautiful, we see it in Sistine Chapel paintings, sculptures, etc. You are sooo right! I think there's several adults with issues. I might be mistaken, but I see work done by "so-called" children, I don't think so. I don't care too much for "pretend" on some things. Maybe it's me.

kmkagle

Correction: To use an analogy...

Dragon

I missed both both the swastika's and what ever gingerbread man you guys are talking about (though from the sounds of it I'm glad I did). I do think the question of offensive comes down to the spirit the picture was done in.
If it was meant to be a serious art piece meant to make people think or pass a message along then it's art. If it's some loser trying to get attention (as it sounds like the case here) then it's offensive.

I have to say I saw the Poodle poop picture too and thought it very low brow, I assumed a child did it thinking it funny. Not offensive, just not something I want to see. (I work in a Vet clinic and I get enough dog poop there!)