Up Front by Emma Hart

Read Post

Up Front: NSFW

96 Responses

First ←Older Page 1 2 3 4 Newer→ Last

  • Andrew Stevenson,

    a basic assumption that you're all adults and you can make your own decisions. That you have functioning fingers and eyelids and can choose not to look at something you find disturbing or offensive.

    I recall from the hinterlands of my upbringing something along the lines of "if your eye offends you, pluck it out"
    I think I prefer Emma's version.

    Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 195 posts Report Reply

  • Rich of Observationz,

    New South Fuckin Wales?

    Back in Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 4421 posts Report Reply

  • Tom Beard,

    Often the truly "NSFW" sites are those that attract attention to the fact that you're looking at something not work-related. For instance, the Snorg T-shirt ads on Bloglines don't show a lot of flesh, but they are, ahem, eye-catching. The fact that I use Bloglines to keep track of work-related feeds (Treehugger, BLDGBLG, Eye of the Fish, and never anything frivolous like Public Address, no never) wouldn't be apparent to anyone who glanced over and saw models in tight T-shirts and teeny pants.

    Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 1039 posts Report Reply

  • giovanni tiso,

    Rich, I thought I had come up with a delightful little joke a while back with that one and then googled it - we were beaten soundly to that particular punch.

    Wellington • Since Jun 2007 • 7351 posts Report Reply

  • Emma Hart,

    Often the truly "NSFW" sites are those that attract attention to the fact that you're looking at something not work-related.

    Yeah, the one thing I really can't use NSFW for is predicting what is and isn't safe for your work-place. Except for the blindingly obvious. I could describe the links in advance, but where would the fun be in that? And then you end up with those detailed warnings like the ones in front of The Sopranos and Outrageous Fortune , that act like promos. We try to predict the plot on the basis of whether we've been warned about sexual content, or violence, or both.

    Christchurch • Since Nov 2006 • 4340 posts Report Reply

  • Tom Beard,

    And then you end up with those detailed warnings like the ones in front of The Sopranos and Outrageous Fortune, that act like promos. We try to predict the plot on the basis of whether we've been warned about sexual content, or violence, or both.

    But do they warn you about the truly dangerous stuff? Such as "Supernatural themes"?

    Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 1039 posts Report Reply

  • Russell Brown,

    (Whether it's porn or not, according to some people, depends entirely on whether that standing figure is male or female.)

    I thought it was pretty, either way.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 18709 posts Report Reply

  • Russell Brown,

    I do sometimes wonder about to the extent to which the rules on YouTube ("OMG! Boobies! Ban!") have come to define a more general NSFW standard. It tends to be very conservative about human bodies, and very liberal about the most vile and hateful material.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 18709 posts Report Reply

  • Jackie Clark,

    I'd never heard of NSFW, Emma. Thanks for the enlightenment. Oh, and also for the rabbits not vomiting thing. I'm afraid I find myself deeply unoffended by any of the links, so, like, could you link to the blood engorged love truncheon again? ;)

    Mt Eden, Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 3123 posts Report Reply

  • Emma Hart,

    could you link to the blood engorged love truncheon again? ;)

    If you could just wait until my daughter isn't sitting next to me...

    I thought it was pretty, either way.

    It's interesting you say that. No, it is. All those pics came off my hard drive - most of them, ironically, from my work folder. I have a bunch that are 'worse' (ie more explicit) that I think are beautiful, in an artistic sense, as well as being sexual. There's supposed to be this very clear line between porn and art and I've never been able to see it. In fact, the word I'd use is 'sensual', which surely combines an erotic sensibility and an artistic one?

    It tends to be very conservative about human bodies, and very liberal about the most vile and hateful material.

    I think the US religious right (with, I have to say, the help of some branches of feminism) have done a sterling job in making 'immoral' synonymous with 'sexual'. Violence, hate speech, generally treating people like shit, that's fine, but boobies? Out of the question.

    Which is a crying shame, because boobies are lovely.

    Christchurch • Since Nov 2006 • 4340 posts Report Reply

  • giovanni tiso,

    So long as you've blogrolled me (thank you! when did that happen?!) I think I need my own label, MBTW - more boring than work.

    but boobies? Out of the question.

    I would mention Janet Jackson, but then I fear that even just typing her name would curve my spine.

    Ops, too late.

    I'm afraid I'm going to have to quote Carlin again, the bit in Seven Words (about halfway through the recording) where he suggests we substitute the word kill with the word fuck in all those movie cliches.

    Wellington • Since Jun 2007 • 7351 posts Report Reply

  • Emma Hart,

    Just popping back to drop off Jackie's penis. (Totally NSFW)

    I'm not sure why that particular photo got pulled out of the gallery, but I think she just likes his smile. He has a lovely smile.

    Christchurch • Since Nov 2006 • 4340 posts Report Reply

  • Islander,

    Sensual
    "which surely combines an erotic sensibility and an artistic one?"
    No, Emma, it doesnt: it literally means 'of sense and sensation.'
    It includes 'of depending of the senses only & not of the intellect or spirit...'
    This is a beginner's dictionary, which I always keep close by (COD.)

    I am a sensualist - because I have very good sensing equipment (taste, hearing, touch et al.) But I would say I include 'intellect' in what I am & what I do.

    And I do have an artistic sensibilty/ability.

    I have no erotic sensibility whatso ever.

    The dictionary definitions - and your definition- are rather limiting but
    'sensual' - depending of the senses only - is adequate. It just doesnt include, per se, artistic-

    Big O, Mahitahi, Te Wahi … • Since Feb 2007 • 5643 posts Report Reply

  • Emma Hart,

    No, Emma, it doesnt: it literally means 'of sense and sensation.'
    It includes 'of depending of the senses only & not of the intellect or spirit...'
    This is a beginner's dictionary, which I always keep close by (COD.)

    Ah, yes, fair point. I think I hear it used in a more sexual sense frequently. Whereas for a non-erotic sensibility I'd go for 'aesthetic', which probably isn't fair either.

    I have a very strong sensibility to beauty in non-sexual objects - the line of a vase, light on a flower - and the physical reaction to that is almost sexual in nature. I don't think I'd be able to draw a clear line there either. (There is a theory that bisexuality is rooted in an over-active libido. I couldn't possibly comment.)

    So, what word do we use for something that evokes both 'that is beautiful' and 'that is sexually arousing'?

    Christchurch • Since Nov 2006 • 4340 posts Report Reply

  • Emma Hart,

    So long as you've blogrolled me (thank you! when did that happen?!)

    Heh, I recently and sneakily updated my blogroll to include you, Megan and hexpletive, an Australian aboriginal non-neuro-typical sex worker. Apparently I just don't have any lines anywhere.

    Christchurch • Since Nov 2006 • 4340 posts Report Reply

  • Islander,

    "sensual' is one of those words subject to meaning drift: 'sexual' is often the implication (and corruption - 'a sensual dress' -the copywriter was referring to a lowcut bodice, not the fabric-feel).

    'aesthetic' - meh. Too confined by academics.

    "I have a very strong sensibility to beauty in non-sexual objects." Waves everything Me too! Me too!
    Simply, while young, I knew I loved 'things' very deeply (I fell in love - in the nearest way I think an asexual can fall in love- with colours! With rock shapes! With the way sea-anenomes swayed underwater (I was once taken away, howling my heart out, because my nearsighted eyes had looked on an anenome garden, and they were moving! Alive!)

    I am the wrong person to ask about the junction between 'beautiful' and 'sexually arousing' but I deeply suspect it include empathy-

    Big O, Mahitahi, Te Wahi … • Since Feb 2007 • 5643 posts Report Reply

  • Sacha,

    So, what word do we use for something that evokes both 'that is beautiful' and 'that is sexually arousing'?

    I know there's no right answer, but how about lush, as in luscious? Topical example influenced by tonight's television viewing: "Dawn Porter is lush". Not to be confused with the usage "is a lush".

    Ak • Since May 2008 • 16489 posts Report Reply

  • Islander,

    Nah,Sacha, not lush (thst is such a beautiful plentiful luscious term.)
    But - drinkers?
    Nope.
    "I kin flourish wit' you"?
    Dear goodness, an asexual is asked this kind of stuff?

    Empathy, good people, empathy!

    Big O, Mahitahi, Te Wahi … • Since Feb 2007 • 5643 posts Report Reply

  • steven crawford,

    'aesthetic' - meh. Too confined by academics.

    Sometimes its an overused word at art schools. Maybe there is know one word to describe the variety of reactions that an image can invoke. I like aesthetic as part of a --__combination__ of words for describing and defining the elements of visual art.

    Since Nov 2006 • 2587 posts Report Reply

  • Andrew Stevenson,

    So what Emma is saying is essentially "trust me, I know what I'm doing"; and by and large we, as PAS members, do trust* her. We also trust Russell and the rest of the blogging crew and, to various degrees, those who comment in the threads.
    Russell once talked about a gatekeeper role on the internet (I think it was a Kim Hill interview), and Emma recently discussed thread moderation (with worked examples). So by combining these themes with the full and frank discussion in the threads a community is being built/grown with its own rules and mores. Emma has explicitly states some of those rules; what are the others, to what extent do we as users shape them or are shaped by them? What are the limits of the collective trust we have here?

    *Trust is not equal to slavish devotion or falling into ideological lockstep - might not be the right term, but we already have a game of hunt the word running.

    Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 195 posts Report Reply

  • JackElder,

    I remember, back in the day (waves zimmer frame), around the mid 90s or so, back when teh internets was new and crisp and link farms like Metafilter weren't around yet. A bunch of my mates started a mailing list for unusual or funny web sites. One guy had a habit of just posting links with one-word descriptions. It took a while, but we finally managed to convince him to start putting NSFW on the appropriate postings, after one too many cases of other people clicking on a link marked "Hilarious" and getting goatse or similar.

    'Lush' is used by several Bristolian friends of mine as a synonym for "good" or "sexually appealing". I think we need some hard-hitting neologisms here.

    Wellington • Since Mar 2008 • 708 posts Report Reply

  • Bart Janssen,

    (Whether it's porn or not, according to some people, depends entirely on whether that standing figure is male or female.)

    I thought it was pretty, either way.

    Whereas as I just went ouch, without even considering the sex of the standing figure.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 3262 posts Report Reply

  • Bart Janssen,

    While you're hunting for a word, I find that the feel of the word in my mouth is important. Some words feel different as you say them and of course as you have said them many time just the thought of the word can evoke the same feeling.

    So luscious feels like soft ripe peach as you say it.
    Sensual feels good in the mouth as you say it.
    Aesthetic is not as luscious a word and hence feels more intellectual.

    Does that make sense?

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 3262 posts Report Reply

  • giovanni tiso,

    Can I just say that this NSFW of Emma's is most definitely SFW.

    Carry on.

    Wellington • Since Jun 2007 • 7351 posts Report Reply

  • Kebabette,

    In my mind NSFW stood for "not suitable for work" i.e. if the boss wanders past and you are looking at this you are going to be hard pressed to say if it is for any work related purpose ..

    Christchurch • Since Feb 2007 • 186 posts Report Reply

First ←Older Page 1 2 3 4 Newer→ Last

Post your response…

Please sign in using your Public Address credentials…

Login

You may also create an account or retrieve your password.