Attached Link: http://www.renderosity.com/viewed.ez?galleryid=720831

why was my "between men" image censored, and not this one? Is it perhaps because the TOS don't apply when dealing with images that suggest lesbianism and bondage, which are titillating to most hetero male's mentality? Don't get me wrong, I'm not suggesting censorship of this image, and in fact, its creator should thank me for drawing viewers to it (not that he needs my help, with content like that, I'm sure there are many guys who will find it of their own volition!) Just curious...especially since my image contained no nudity. Perhaps those who decided to censor it were uncomfortable?

I didn't see your pulled image but I think many get taken down because they get a complaint from someone. I had one of mine pulled a couple of months ago - naked male solo just in a sexy pose. The reason being that somebody decided it looked like he had an erection, even though he didn't and I sent screenshots to Shoshanna to prove. It simply looked that way due to the pose of the model and the camera angle. But somebody complained so it was pulled. Have you taken this matter up with the forum mods? It can maybe help to sort out issues better than any of us 'mere artists' might ;-) Now, if I were to be bothered, in my opinion, the image you link to here DOES violate the TOS on 2 counts depending how far into it you read - No Torture [defined as: the infliction of intense pain (as from burning, crushing, wounding, crucifixion) to punish, coerce, or afford sadistic pleasure] and No Explicit sexual content [No manipulation of breasts/nipples/ no sexual situations/ no implied sexual acts/ no extreme or explicit S&M bondage situations/ no lewd or obscene sexual references] which is exactly why I didn't post another of my renders here that I did after testing Invidia's 'Derriere' poses which had a girl bending down and a guy standing by her with a whip in his hand - even though I hadn't put any markings on the girls' butt. Gill

Gill

       

Thanks, Gill for your response. Yes, I have brought my issue up with two moderators, yet to hear back from them. They are, I believe, unpaid volunteers who have been invested with authority, and I'm not sure there is any "screening" process regarding who gets to interpret TOS. The notion that an image gets yanked on the basis of a complaint is ludicrous. I think it's appropriate to bring this topic to the attention to the "mere artists" since we are the ones this forum is supposed to serve. I don't see how yanking an image on the basis of a "complaint" serves the community.

You're not the person I thought you were! Linking your whine to someone's gallery is way over the line! Both my pulls involved girl/girl scenes! Nowhere near as suggestive as yours... Just take the hit!

Yes, I think that picture contravenes the TOS. It isn't very good either. Is that tomato ketchup on the girl's bottom? The chain on her right hand is poorly posed, as is the hand itself. Amongst other things.

This is an extremely vile thing what you just did. You are nothing but a tattletale, a Judas, a betrayer, a traitor and you merit to be banned from the Internet for the rest of your life. You really think (no you obviously don't) that posting that link would help to bring your pic back???

I have tried prudent planning long enough. From now I'll be mad. (Rumi)

It's not selective at all. If they get a complaint and tos is involed, down it comes. I had one of a wee Fairy, and she had on a bodysuit. I was not made to pull it down. But I wanted to see who thought what, so I put up another with her dressed in winter clothes. :O) Then another with the bodysuit, but a differeant pose. It was very interesting to see the comments. Ps, I did have to take down a cat, that was condsider tos, I did. It was suppose to be a joke, but you can't joke about cruelity to animals. You win some and lose some. Thats just life.

Love is Grandchildren.

I don't believe in censorship and have been fairly disappointed recently to find it runs rampant on R'osity. If you don't like something, just don't look at it. That is my motto. As far as I am concerned, Americans (and I am one, BTW) are way to embarrassed by our own sexuality, our own bodies and anything relating to those two subjects. We teach our children to be ashamed of their bodies. Masturbation, bondage and sado-maschism is "evil" according to most Americans. I've always had a major huge problem with this. I'm going to end this post now before I carry it too far.

richardson, I do apologize, and I do so publicly because I didn't realize that it was your post and you have been quite decent and supportive throughout all of our interactions. It was not my intent to defame the creator of that image--I was merely pointing out the discrepancy in applying a TOS standard. I stand by my remark, and will take the consequences. As far as Aeneas's remark above goes...I think I will let it stand on its own merit, as I hardly think it justifies a response. Kristta, it is honesty like yours that gives me hope that Renderosity can right itself somehow, through people speaking up and speaking honestly.Nowhere in my expressions have I vilified another indivudal here, and I find it sad that others need to do so. Fortunately, I'm a big boy, and can take it.

I didn't see your pic that was pulled but I don't think the linked example violates the TOS. There's nothing extreme or explicit, IMO. Mild sub/dom roleplay is just another form of foreplay for some. Like kissing and petting is for others. Complaining to the teacher that "Little Johnny did it too!" doesn't help your cause.

Hi, By definition all censorship is selective. Someone looks at each image and decides if IN THEIR OPINION it violates the TOS for this site. Renderosity is a private web site which requires membership for certain activities it provides. As such the owners are free to do whatever they feel appropriate at the time. If you don't like it start your own site. Personally from description of your image posted on the forums I would have assumed the picture represented an act of sodomy. I would prefer a website that I could refer teenagers in the 14-17 year age group to who are interested in art and computer graphics. There are not very many sites that I would consider suitable. If you want to post your picture there is another website for erotic art that lets you post almost anything (except beastiality) - go over there. Pelease accept the fact that your image was deemed unsuited TO THIS SITE and move on. I have a nice picture of a seven foot rabbit hugging a girl in bikini. I can not post it because SOMEONE is going to say - beastiality.

Y'know, Gary Larson, one of the most innoffensive artists I know of, had a cartoon pulled because one person thought it was sexual in content. It was a dog on top of an overturned car, howling its success at the capture of the car, and one viewer thought the dog was doing rude things to the car. Objectivity and subjectivity are dangerous double-edged swords. J.D. Salinger's "Catcher in the Rye" has been banned in many schools because of purported "innappropriate sexual content" but, as a teacher of English and literature, I've yet to find it. But then again, I taught in a school two years ago where "To Kill a Mockingbird" was banned because it was supposedly a text for racist doctrine. I've been smacked by the moderators for violations of the TOS myself, and I had to print the darned thing out and go over it carefully to try to understand what was wrong with my image, but it all comes down to this: They own the site, they can make whatever decisions they want because they provide the service for free. The "new golden rule: The person with the gold makes the rules." Always good to remember along with the saying that goes "anything that is free is worth exactly what you pay for it."

I'm always fighting the "reactionary" button! Usually is bright red until 11am... Poohah, your strengths are in your amazing storytelling abilities...obviously your stories are real ones. As disturbing as they seem, you've brought great power from them. My odd take on an old saying; artist, lawyer, politician. Choose one. As one destroys the others. And I know you can take it. Why do you want it? Just mho, R

Quite frankly Richardson's image is crude and implies the sexual act of Bondage and as such is in violation of the TOS. I didn't see Pookah's image but the TOS is explicit about implied sexual acts and bondage I assure you is just that "A Sexual Act". [EDITED to state that the link above appears to be another authors and not Richardson's unless Richardson has multiple login's. If it's not yours Richardson I appologise but the link Pookah uses as example should be pulled for TOS violations]

Message edited on: 07/20/2004 11:19

See how this works, now Pookah?

there's a site where it could be put, sounds much like Renderosity, but 'nuff said..;)

I wish I'd said that.. The Staircase Wit

anahl nathrak uth vas betude doth yel dyenvey..;)

Attached Link: Paypal TOS

My understanding is they also have to abide by Paypal's TOS as to what kind of content appears here...otherwise they could lose their Paypal account. **See Paypal Link

"Quite frankly Richardson's image is crude and implies the sexual act of Bondage and as such is in violation of the TOS." Richardson's image? If you're referring to the link Pookah posted at the top of this thread, then that's not one of richardson's images. The thing that troubles me most about all this is that it seems just ONE complaint will be enough to get an image pulled. I've heard the mods claim that there's a "vote", but then how do you explain the scenerio CedarWolf mentioned above?? A dog howling on an overturned car has sexual connotations? Only to a severely troubled mind! Yet, such an image was allegedly pulled because of one complaint? I'd have to see the image for myself, but there's really no chance of that ever happening now. This is what censorship does effectively... it takes away your right to make a choice. However, this website is not OUR website, so THEY can do whatever the hell they want. It's their right, and ultimately YOUR choice to decide if you want to continue coming here or not based on the way they run things. And sooner or later that's what it will come down to for a lot of people.

---

Tools :  3dsmax 2015, Daz Studio 4.6, PoserPro 2012, Blender v2.74

System: Pentium QuadCore i7, under Win 8, GeForce GTX 780 / 2GB GPU.

"Personally from description of your image posted on the forums I would have assumed the picture represented an act of sodomy." markschum, my point is you are left with nothing but an assumption, because the image itself was pulled. Additionally I'm bored by this blathering about "it's a private site, if you don't like it start your own." If it's a private site, they should charge membership, and screen their members first, so that they enroll people who think just like them.

Pookah69
I'm a hetero male, I saw your pic, I wasn't offended.
I knew it was going to get pulled though, it seemed to depict a sexual act or "potential" sexual act.
The mods don't seem to go by Bill Clinton's definition here.

There are many images in the gallery here that are a bit too racy for the atmosphere that Renderosity seems to be going for.
Don't take offense, I thought it was a good piece.
Someone just felt it was just the wrong place to display.

this thread will be locked as they all are...all this is pointless any topic they can't give a true explanation for they just lock the thread Also this is a business not just a FREE SITE, they'll pull the wrong persons pic one day and someone will fight back with an attorney, that'll sure perk the forums up

I would never go so far as to hire an attorney, as that would be counterproductive to all the good that is generated through this web-site. I have benefited tremendously from the wealth of expertise, critique (though I still think people are lazy about commenting on images beyond "wow!" and "this is excellent!"), and free models. Vive la difference. And if they lock the thread, well screw 'em.

Maxx must have been posting as I was editing because I did go back to the link and figure out that the link was not to Richardson's Gallery and edited my post to state as much.

"Vive la difference. And if they lock the thread, well screw 'em." LOL @pookah EXACTLY!! :)

pookah69, I support your work, respect you as an artist and consider you a friend. As a friend, I wish I could offer some advice here but I can't. I don't know what I would do in this situation. I'm sure I'd be pissed about it, though. The linked image doesn't offend me and neither did yours. I'll admit that I have somewhat more "liberal" views than others, but even allowing for that, I would say your image is somewhat more innocuous of the two. I think it was a mistake for the powers that be to pull your image. I strongly believe that it was within the TOS, as are a good many FF and FM images where a couple are in a passionate embrace.

Coppula eam se non posit acceptera jocularum.

My Store

My Gallery

"they'll pull the wrong persons pic one day and someone will fight back with an attorney." And that person who tries to fight back with an attorney will loose every time. There's no such thing as a free site. somebody, somewhere is paying for it. if you want to report an image the fastest and easiest way possible just go up to that "whos online" link and IM one of the Admins, moderators or coordinators. As i understand all images are reviewed by more than one person (mod, admin etc) before being pulled. wait for a response before you post about "unfair" enforcement.

My Homepage - Free stuff and Galleries

If you dislike the tos here then start your own site. Sorry, there are a lot of unfair things that happen here, but bottom line is all the complaints in the world aren't going to change it, they run the site as they see fit, and they have a tos for you to read before you even sign up. I'm so tired of all the complaints and the rest of the drivel that follows. I am not for one embarrassed by anything in the list below, please don't make such blanket statements Kristta, I for one find it offensive to have you tell others that as an American I feel or what I teach my children. "As far as I am concerned, Americans (and I am one, BTW) are way to embarrassed by our own sexuality, our own bodies and anything relating to those two subjects. We teach our children to be ashamed of their bodies. Masturbation, bondage and sado-maschism is "evil" according to most Americans. " Marque

Marque, it's not a blanket statement. I said "according to most Americans". That does not in any way mean all Americans. As an American myself (also stated), I do not teach my children and will never teach my children that masturbation or anything else is evil. I will teach them that there are things you do not do in polite company and that would be one of the things. As stated above, "MOST" Americans find things to be offensive that just don't seem to be offensive to me. Again, I say "most" because anything greater than 50% is "most". I never said all. I take offense at what you said about a blanket statement because I never implied that all Americans found things offensive. I did say that, it would mean that I find those things offensive. As I've stated, I never said that.

Actually Kristta, you did make a blanket statement when you said: "As far as I am concerned, Americans (and I am one, BTW) are way to embarrassed by our own sexuality, our own bodies and anything relating to those two subjects. We teach our children to be ashamed of their bodies." Although you couched it with "As far as I am concerned...," you did say "Americans," not most Americans. And further you said: "Masturbation, bondage and sado-maschism is "evil" according to most Americans." Here you did say most Americans. But you state it as a fact, not opinion. Have you taken an acurate poll? Me? I say we all need to lighten up. Grow thicker skins, whatever. What floats one person's boat is "crude" to another. Eh. I'll say it again: I wouldn't be a mod here for any amount of money.

Terms of service quote "Additionally, any post, image or writings can be removed at the discretion of staff if it is deemed unsuitable for this community. Conversely there may be some images which, whilst in apparent violation of the rules, will be permitted to stay in the interests of free speech and religious tolerance." Here from the TOS is the catchall phrase that ,in my opinion, makes any legal challange moot. Whether the owner chooses to charge for site access or makes it free the fact that you are required to register emphasises the fact it is NOT a public forum. And NO, I have not seen the picture in question. Post it on the other site and I will give you my opinion, but you probably would not like it. I have seen some wonderful artwork done with Poser and I have seen some stuff that makes me wonder why the person has even bothered. I agree with the comment on taking this as a challange and rework it. This site is remarkably lenient in the images it does allow. If it adopted the standards of some American communities I have delt with there would be No nipples shown, no unclothed buttocks, no demeaning postures etc. The continuation of this , again in my opinion, does you no service and will probably work against you. The trend of this forum thread seems to support the position of Renderosity. best wishes in your future endevours and may the grace of God be upon your soul. [not neccessarily my beliefs but a nice sentiment anyway]

...to see how long before this thread is locked. The last time I wanted to put my 2 cents worth in, it was locked by the time I was finished. The 'sity reacts to complaints. If they get a complaint, the examine the work and then decide to take it down or not. A gay pic is more likely (IMHO), to get a complaint from someone. Not nessasarily because of homophobia, but because many non-gay people assume the worst (we all think of nothing but sex). There is no solution to this. The mods don't examine every picture posted, so it'll always be an uneven enforcement. They'll always err on the side of caution. And they don't have the time or the resources to really censor evenly. Now, did I make it in time to post?

The problem with discussion of this nature is they fast cease to be intellectual and quickly become emotional banter. Us against them, with folks lining up on whichever side of the argument they support. This rarely resolves anything, but I suppose it is fun. It must be, for we as a people seem to delight in it.

I see two issues here. The first is that we do have a TOS, and ideally it should be applied fairly and equally to all. Rarely is that truly the case, here or in real life, because what a TOS is really about is a collective opinion of the majority point of view.

This cry against "censorship" that always gets pulled out and waved about like a banner. I really do not get it. What do you think laws, guidelines, and yes even TOS are in reality. They are rules meant to censor behavior. We make a law against robbing banks because we would censor the behavior of those individuals in socieity who think it okay to go rob a bank. Collective we as a people have decided that robbing banks is wrong, so we made those people who do it outlaws. That is all right and wrong, good and evil, is about. Individually, or even as a minority group, we may think things are okay, not evil, but good. But if society as a whole has a problem with them, than rest assure those who feel they have the right to engage in that "anti-social" behavior will indeed find themselves censored.

All this protest of censorship amounts to is the individual protesting against the masses, how dare they tell me no! I do not have to conform if I don't want to. After all, I am more important than they are, and what I want and think right is all that really matters.

Sadly, I think the world is fast coming to believe that, thus we are openly accepting everything and anything for fear that if we do not we might be labeled the dreaded "censor" Dirty word. Or even worse, intolerant. (shudder).

Well, what is really wrong is for people not to stand up for what they think is right, and to go against it out of fear that they migh offend someone who does not agree with them. This sort of wish-washiness is just the kind of thinking that historically has brought more than one society crumbling to its knees.

I personally do not have a problem letting consenting adults do as they please. But some individuals, no matter how open and seemingly tolerant and liberal a society becomes, will invariably chose to engage in some activity that the rest of the people find shocking, offensive, undesirable, etc., and some form of censorship will occur.

In a fairly tolerant society, people are content to let be, and this is why when something is not held to be acceptable as mainstream thinking, there is a subculture develope so that the folks who chose this way of life can do so.

Often, however, this is not enough. Those who find themselves as members of this subculture find a need for greater validation. Thus a push to have their belief be made mainstream ensues. This almost always leads to shows of emotional outrage, on both sides, and eventually passion gives way to violent reaction in some form. In the end, some compromise is reached.

Not saying that this is good or bad, right or wrong. Just stating the dynamics involved. I can tell you this, I have spent many years dealing with the bad people of society. I can tell you that while some of them felt some remorse or regret for the "evil" they did, most did not. In fact, many saw nothing at all wrong or evil in what they did (and we are talking about some rather horrible and shocking acts at times). It was okay to them. It was good to them. The people they hurt. Those people did not matter. So, obviously you can not allow the individual alone to dictate for society what is right and what is wrong. There will always be some who no not where to draw the line. Thus society does censor. Like it or not.

If "most" Americans don't think that masturbation is evil, why is the old tale about furry palms and the other one about going blind persisting in these modern times? If "most Amercans" don't think these things are evil, then why censor TV and put these age labels on everything? If "most Americans" are open minded, then why do kids react the way they do when a parent wants to have "the talk" with them and why do we insist on calling it "the talk"? I sincerely don't believe an accurate poll is needed in this case. Actually, I feel very lucky. I've got a 13 year old daughter and an 11 year old son. In the past year, I've been lucky enough to have my children really talk to me about stuff they've seen or heard from other kids. The reason I feel lucky is that they are at an age when they (generally speaking, of course) stop talking to their mom. I feel lucky that my kids are willing to listen to me. I guess my biggest problem is that this forum takes everything as is and grants no one any lee way. I did not know that it would take a million descriptive words to make you all understand that I just meant a majority. Maybe, I should cancel my membership and slink off to start my own website.

Excelent statement Shadownet!!! Bravo!!! Kristta, there's a huge difference between what is allowed to air on TV and what is considered "evil." And I don't know of any kid who's heard of the furry palms or blindness fairytales. My point is this: people from many other countries visit this site regularly and you have no right to speak for Americans or even "most" Americans. Most of all, I found your statement, "We teach our children to be ashamed of their bodies" especially offensive and highly inaccurate. Who is "We?" I'm an American and a parent. I never taught my children to be ashamed of anything. In other words, speak for yourself, not 'Americans' or even "most Americans" unless you have some facts to back it up. And then, site your sources.

pookah69, Your image was pulled after I posted it in the staffroom and other mods commented unanimously that it had to go. The reasons for pulling it were given to you, and the TOS is quite clear. If you do not agree with a decision, you are always free to write to Spike (or another Admin) and request a review. It wasn't a matter of singling out an act of sodomy because other images of sexual activity between male/female and female/female were also questioned and pulled when they have gone over the line of what is acceptable for this Forum. For confidentiality reasons, we do not publicly expose an artist whose work we have pulled. Your IM to me of "whatever--yawn" did not seem to call for a response. However, if you wish to dispute this further, please contact Spike. As to the image referred to above... Tuesday is my regular gallery day, and it has been posted in the back room for regular review. Contrary to what might be believed, we do not sit for 24 hours at a time with our trousers nailed to the chair, and it takes a while to get feedback, so an image apparently violating the TOS might not get pulled immediately. Review is important because it mitigates individual bias. We do not lightly remove images, because as artists we realize that effort and time went into their creation. However, this site does have standards which must be adhered to... and we try to apply those standards evenly. When we do remove an image, we give the reason/s for that removal. hauksdottir Poser Coordinator

...(stifling a yawn)...(thinks: but my image was NOT a depiction of sodomy)....(thinks: but I better not say that, since I really just want the conversation to end, and to go back to my life, which is after all, a pretty nice one.)...

oh, my....i remember way, way back when, here, when we had this discussion in reverse, over in c&d, about a prepubescent girl child and a popsicle. this place has done a 180, not only in tos, but in member attitudes. :*)

"...Additionally I'm bored by this blathering about "it's a private site, if you don't like it start your own." If it's a private site, they should charge membership, and screen their members first, so that they enroll people who think just like them. ...(stifling a yawn)...(thinks: but my image was NOT a depiction of sodomy)....(thinks: but I better not say that, since I really just want the conversation to end, and to go back to my life, which is after all, a pretty nice one.)... " ( pookah69 ) No comment beyond the following: The above statements display a lack of understanding about the the nature of the relationship between Renderosity as an entity and the members of the site, the nature of membership and private organizations, and an utter disregard for the reasoned statements of other individuals that don't fall in line with the hurt feelings of the author. This entire thread stems from a need to "share the pain" of a percieved wrong -- a lashing out. It's very common, and the only reason I scanned it is that I like hauksdottir and know quite well that she wouldn't pull an image just because she didn't like it or had soemthing to prove. Now me, on the other hand, I'm totally reactionary. Hell, I'd pull 3/4 of the galleries down. But I'm crazy and evil and never liked picasso, either...

thou and I, my friend, can, in the most flunkey world, make, each of us, one non-flunkey, one hero, if we like: that will be two heroes to begin with. (Carlyle)

om. Pookah (I believe the word means "peace.")

Message edited on: 07/20/2004 16:49

Okay but what's the "69" for? ;) And to proove I don't always disagree with ynsaen, I agree with everything she said above. Especially the parts about 'crazy' and 'evil.' And I don't like picasso either.

Ok, I propose a new forum: Adult Content. Any T&A, B&D, S&M, overt nudity, sexual content or context of any sort would be put there and then those who don't want to see it would be able to avoid it. If an artist posted "naughty" content and didn't post to that forum I'd say two warnings with removal of content and then removal from community. Ok, bring it on...I know someone is going to scream about encroachment of freedom of expression! Or, just take that content to Renderotica, a community dedicated to that stuff... Let's get real, folks.

While I object to the notion of posting adult content at Renderotica, since I feel it ghettoizes my work (which I still insist is NOT sexual in content), I think Cedarwolf's suggestion is a good compromise. Interesting how people assumed this thread would be locked, or that they would be attacked for speaking their mind. (The thread remains open, and while several people, have been subjected to words spoken in anger, I think it's good to talk this stuff through.)

Actually that's a great idea Cedar, then anything could pretty much be posted and you would have a warning before you enter that it is risque. Pretty much if you don't like this type of content then don't enter. Maybe the powers that be will take your suggestion to heart and we can end the hurt/angry feelings that happen when stuffage gets pulled. I feel bad for folks who don't get to do their renders even though they sell poses and such that they are banning in the galleries. But rules is rules so there it is. Marque

Yipe, enter key got stuck...lol Just in case you were wondering what that large empty space was meant to be. Marque

I have often thought of an "R-Rated" gallery or forum but never proposed it for two reasons: 1. How could Rosity keep the kids out? 2. People would still try to push the envelope. Members here can't follow or don't accept the TOS now, why should it be any different with a new line to cross? People will always try to cross the line, no matter where it is. But hey, don't mind me. I'm just thinking of the community as a whole. Personally, I don't care if they create an X-Rated Gallery! The stuff I do still wouldn't be accepted there.

There was one once, but it was moved out of Renderosity and became Renderotica. There will not be a new one now becuase it is too great a risk for the store side of things and the potential for loss of paypal status -- not to mention other issues related to it. In the end, it doesn't matter if it's censorship or not. This is not a "free country", this is a website, owned and operated by people who choose not to display certain works when and if these works are brought to their attention. It's not a democratic place, either. It's simply a place. hmmm... Jackson, we're starting to really agree too much. We're going to have to find somethign to disagree about before folks start suspecting something....

thou and I, my friend, can, in the most flunkey world, make, each of us, one non-flunkey, one hero, if we like: that will be two heroes to begin with. (Carlyle)

"...(stifling a yawn)...(thinks: but my image was NOT a depiction of sodomy)....(thinks: but I better not say that, since I really just want the conversation to end, and to go back to my life, which is after all, a pretty nice one.)..." ^ Kids.

Oh heck, ynsaen, why continue with this charade? The people may as well know. Sure, you're P5 and I'm P4/PP, but so what? The time for these petty differences are over I say! True love conquers all!

"^ Kids." (giggles) you make me feel so young, ScottA!

I can't help but think about something. We have a TOS so of course we have to respect it since we agreed to do so. The conversations over TOS though, are really surreal... "Look at THAT picture! this naked male is SMILING as he looks at the other guy! This SUGGESTS hen is going to have an erection!" or "these two naked females with an oiled body on a couch are not having sex, they're just sitting there" (and why would they be sitting naked and oiled on a big couch?) My point is, this is all getting over the edge and whe it comes to defend a point of view on TOS, everybody becomes hypocritical. Nuf said.

simontemplar, your point suggests you are a conformist. There is nothing wrong with this, I am merely making an observation. The world needs conformists. I, on the other hand, believe rules were made to be, well, if not broken, at least tested. By testing rules, we learn how well they serve the population. In my opinion (and please, do not argue the fact that this is MY OPINION) Renderosity's TOS does not serve the population well, since it cannot be fairly applied with a small core of volunteer moderators. However, I now understand that the TOS has economic implications, as violations of the TOS can lead to the loss of Paypal. I would rather have Renderosity, even with its TOS, than not have it. I also understand that there are people here who embrace the TOS, don't want to see them broken. They are not the audience for my work. I pass by tons of images in the gallery that hold no interest to me. I encourage those of you who don't like my work or its subject matter to do the same. This conversation has been a useful lesson for me, and I thank you all for participating in the debate. I've met some sympatico members through the course of this conversation.

You people calling him a tattletale or any other related terms are being idiotic. He simply used an example of something obviously considered acceptable to illustrate his point. People do this EVERY DAY in life. Grow up. To say his image suggested there may be some "potential" sexual act is asinine. If thats the case, then pull every image of any people kissing, hugging, or a million other types of displays of affection, cause any one of those actions can be potentially sexual. Pookah, you were clearly discriminated against. However, the owners of this site have the right to pull any image they wish. Drop it, move on.. Dont feel bad, you are not alone. It has happened to other people before. If it really upsets you, there is nothing making you stay here and continue to post images.

A conformist? now that is amusing, Pookah... I was intently ironic about what people will accept or not. Also, I do claim that people will be hypocritical when it's about discussing such issues. Depending on what they like or not, they will always find a way to "show they are right". I am myself well versed in the powers of the words, being a PHD in comparative litterature, and I've seen it countless times: when one wants to kill his dog he'll say the dog has rabies. When one wants to save his rabidious dog, he'll say the dog simply ate a soap bar, hence that foam on its mouth. Conformist? No. I don't condone either of the attitudes displayed in this thread, nor the "pro" nor the "anti". Now if you want to call me a cynical, I'll see it as fair enough and well, in some ways it's even a compliment.

"You people calling him a tattletale or any other related terms are being idiotic. He simply used an example of something obviously considered acceptable to illustrate his point. People do this EVERY DAY in life." Yes, mostly children and people who are guilty of something and want to turn the spotlight away from themselves. A mature person who has a vaild beef argues his/her point on its own merits...they don't point fingers at other people. As far as "tattletale" being idiotic, check the link in the original post. The pic was obviously not acceptable and has been deleted. Gee, wonder why that happened? Hope everyone's happy now, another pic deleted. Guess it's only fair, let's keep going!

"Yes, mostly children and people who are guilty of something and want to turn the spotlight away from themselves" I tend to agree: my students did that all along the schloar year. You catch one playing Tetris on his cellphone? babbling with his deskmate? "But Sir, I wasn't the only one!" Ahhh doesn't that bring back some memories...

"Yes, mostly children and people who are guilty of something and want to turn the spotlight away from themselves." But, claims of discrimination can only be assessed and judged by comparison with other very similar situations in which the alleged discriminated characteristic was not present. Or to put it another way, for the sake of clarity, a simple example: a Black woman is fired from her job for failing to attend work on time over a period of a month. If she sues for racial discrimination, the case can only be judged by comparison to a white woman at the same company who had the same level of lateness, and whether or not she was also fired. --- In this situation, the thought occurs to me that perhaps the discrimination in this - and in all honesty, it's far, far more common for pictures with a homoerotic edge to be pulled than hetero or lesbian - is not on the part of R'osity, but its member base. We know that the mods can't possibly view every single pic uploaded, so they mostly rely on complaints from viewers. A pic with two women or a woman and man embracing in a sexual manner is far less likely to generate a complaint than a pic with two men. Sad, but true.

---

"you are terrifying
and strange and beautiful
something not everyone knows how to love." - Warsan Shire