"Couple" on dribbble is being debated (NSFW?)(dribbble.com)

almost 5 years ago from David Barker

  • Chase GiuntaChase Giunta, almost 5 years ago

    "If you are going on a social network dedicated to art (especially one which you curate for yourself by actually following this artist), you should be prepared to see depictions of nudity."

    No, you shouldn't, if the network has terms against nudity or depictions of nudity. That is why the terms are there in the first place. To protect those of who are viewing the content. His argument is based on the expectation that Dribbble sets... Also, the shot was being displayed on the Popular page, for anyone to stumble upon- not just those who follow the designer.

    Mine (and his) whole argument would be void if Dribbble didn't have these terms in place, and instead, he was just trying to censor the content with no grounds to go on. THEN and only then would he be imposing his beliefs on others, which I would agree, isn't needed nor wanted.

    But if a website sets the expectation and says they're not going to show inappropriate content, such as nudity or sexualized content, (so it's cool for you to browse in front of kids, or in a strict office environment) then they should adhere to that for the viewers that care, and the community should strive to maintain that standard. Fortunately, you nor I get to dictate what's deemed acceptable for anyone we choose to view.

    0 points
    • Cory DymondCory Dymond, over 4 years ago

      That was not his argument though. His argument was entirely predicated on the moral aspect of hiding this content from his child.

      I don't believe that a majority of the Dribbble community believes that line drawings which barely depict nudity constitute a violation of those rules because those rules are meant to prevent posts that are pornographic in nature. It's why both rules relating to this type of content specifically make it clear that it is about mature and pornographic material. That it says nudity seems to be something they don't particularly enforce and if that's the route they want to go, I'm certain that a lot of the community would be against that level of censorship.

      "Fortunately, you nor I get to dictate what's deemed acceptable for anyone we choose to view."

      Except that that is precisely what is being done with something like this. The rule is obviously meant to prevent posts that are pornographic in nature which is something I would certainly not want to see on Dribbble. I wouldn't call Michaelangelo's Statue of David or the Man and God section at the Sistine Chapel pornographic even though both feature more nudity and are far more graphic and realistic depictions of the human form than this. Would those important pieces of art not be acceptable to you?

      2 points