On 5/16/2011 9:04 AM, Ryan Kaldari wrote:
On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 10:56 AM, Chris McKenna <cmcke...@sucs.org
<mailto:cmcke...@sucs.org>> wrote:
Am I alaone in completely failing to understand what the fuss is
about?
The image is not pornographic, exploitative, illegal or otherwise
inapropriate for featured picture status.
The image is also not artistically, historically, or culturally
significant, unlike all the other examples you cited. The only reason
it's featured is because it's sexually arousing to anime fanboys who
happen to dominate the culture of Wikimedia Commons. I don't need to
crawl into a semantic rabbit-hole to defend this observation. I think
its obvious to any reasonable person. If the image would be
embarrassing to pull up in front of a classful of students, it
shouldn't be on the Commons Main Page.
As with a number of us - this is a big concern. While I had originally
posted this to the mailing list for gender gap discussion, this is
another of the reasons.
Like I said, which I'm having a feeling wasn't even read by many - you
cannot pull THAT front page of Commons up in a classroom or educational
environment and have it celebrated by a middle school teacher. Some of
her kids might think it's "cool" or "hot", but, if I'd be one pissed
parent. All it takes is one pissed parent, who overreacts, to report to
the news that "my kid was shown porn at school/museum/church/camp/after
school workshops/whatever' and all hell will break lose.
#wikilove,
Sarah
--
Wikipedia Regional Ambassador, D.C. Region
Wikipedian-in-Residence, Archives of American Art
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:SarahStierch>
--
Sarah Stierch Consulting
Historical, cultural & artistic research, advising & event planning.
------------------------------------------------------
http://www.sarahstierch.com/
_______________________________________________
Commons-l mailing list
Commons-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
