Pussy Talk - Censored

From: (Anonymous) Date: March 14th, 2005 06:08 am (UTC) (Link)

I'm surprised you're not fighting this at all DTG.
Modigliani's works were recently on display at a major Canadian art gallery, which was not censored to an 18-and-up crowd, and in fact, they even had youth prices listed on advertisements.
I can understand that your blog is entirely based around sex and therefore the image was chosen because it was sexual.
But the source is art.
If a male LJ user had Michaelangelo's David as his default image, with flaccid penis and testicles in clear view, albeit very small, would it be objectionable?
Should we not allow children to see that historic statue until they reach the age of adulthood?
I understand that your blog is not for children. You yourself have made that very clear, but is the image itself that objectionable? Or does your blog subject make it so?
- Outburst.
http://listening2yourself.blogspot.com

(Reply) (Thread)

From: nicebluejournal Date: March 14th, 2005 06:37 am (UTC) (Link)

Excellent point about David.

My surmise is that someone---it only takes one---complained to the Abuse Team, who had no choice but to follow the protocols and enforce the LJ userpic rules. Just doing their job.

Renee does point out that the picture content itself is not the issue. The fact that I was using it as my default icon is the problem. Splitting hairs, I suppose. Like saying, Yeah, you can wear that T shirt. Just don't wear it in public.

I had the bad luck to get spotted and picked on by some narrow-minded fuckwit. There are thousands of LJs out there whose default pics are far more offensive than mine, in my view, at least. Whether they get censored or not depends on who sees them and who complains.

Btw, I don't fight. I prefer subversion.

;)

DTG xxoo

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

From: (Anonymous) Date: March 18th, 2005 09:36 am (UTC) On the topic os subversion.... (Link)

How about we start mailing the abuse team with complaints about almost any default image we see. The messages could go something like this:

Dear Abuse Team,

I am offended by the default image used by user [   username   ] located at
[   image url   ]. I feel that this picture of [bunnies/cats/clocks/etc.]
excites my carnal interest, and as such should not be visible by the
impressionable, underage readers of LJ. Please do the moral thing and
ask this user to remove this image as soon as possible.

Thank you for your time.

[   My Name   ]

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

From: nicebluejournal Date: March 18th, 2005 09:59 am (UTC) Re: On the topic os subversion.... (Link)

To be fair to LJ, they do specify in the TOS that "nudity" is not acceptable in default pics. My default image was nude. I have no defence. I think this case is closed.

;)

DTG xxoo

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

From: (Anonymous) Date: August 13th, 2005 11:27 pm (UTC) Re: On the topic os subversion.... (Link)

i like your pussy

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

From: (Anonymous) Date: March 14th, 2005 06:20 am (UTC) The world is full of fuckwits... (Link)

Why? Just, why? The naked form, particularly in a non-photographic representation, is a beautiful thing. That Modigliani is wonderful.

Are they going to cover Michaelangelo's David in case some child walks by and sees it at the Galleria dell'Accademia? What about the Venus di Milo's breasts - the Louvre is open to the public after all?

I just want to scream...

Salvatori
Money Factory (http://moneyfactory.blogspot.com/)

(Reply) (Thread)

From: nicebluejournal Date: March 14th, 2005 06:59 am (UTC) Re: The world is full of fuckwits... (Link)

Whoever complained has no concept of art.

They just saw "tits" and "cunt" and went into full-anal-berserk mode.

After all, nothing is more dangerous to children than tits and cunts. So
let's make the world safe for kids! Let's get rid of all the breasts and vaginas on that filthy internet!

To quote one of my favourite philosophers (who had occasional anal issues of his own), "It's pathetic. That's what it is. Pathetic."

DTG xxoo

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

From: deessedusoleil Date: March 14th, 2005 07:00 am (UTC) (Link)

As everyone seems to be aware, the overlying absurdity of this action is that it was a piece of artwork.

It was a painting, and although a good one, it was someone's artistic interpretation of reality rather than the actual picture of reality (like my icon, per se -although, again, it's not my default).

You were simply at the wrong place at the wrong time.

(Reply) (Thread)

From: nicebluejournal Date: March 14th, 2005 07:02 am (UTC) (Link)

Exactly. It was the luck of the draw that I got targeted.

DTG xxoo

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

From: jonathan_quince Date: March 14th, 2005 07:22 am (UTC) Ironic Over-Compliance (Link)

My idea:

Edit the painting (or enlist a reader with keen Photoshop skills). Put Modigliani's delightful nude in a burqua. Place very fine/light red letters saying "CENSORED" diagonally across the image.

Use that as your "default user icon", and the real one elsewhere. Make sure to link to an explanation from your sidebar, from your userinfo page, and in other appropriate places.

Make a statement. After all, if human female skin is offensive, then why should her face be seen, either? Certain people and certain societies do consider the female offensive in totality; this, after all, is why the burqua was invented. So why not comply with LJ's policy to the extent that nobody anywhere in any culture[1] could ever take offense at your user icon?

(I'd volunteer to help, except that my Photoshop skills are thus far limited to adjusting histograms and doing other photo tweaking.)

[1] Any major culture, I should say: I, for example, am offended by burquas, but I am not a very large society at present.

(Reply) (Thread)

From: (Anonymous) Date: March 14th, 2005 09:37 am (UTC) Re: Ironic Over-Compliance (Link)

Brilliant idea.
I could do it depending on DTG's wishes.
- Outburst.

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

From: nicebluejournal Date: March 14th, 2005 10:01 am (UTC) Re: Ironic Over-Compliance (Link)

It is a brilliant idea, to modify the image itself.

Thanks to you both for your support and your offers of techie assistance on this, and do stand by--I may be screaming for help if my klutzy attempts at photo-editing go awry.

One thing I do know: I've got the best readers in the whole damn blogosphere.

DTG xxoo

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

From: (Anonymous) Date: March 14th, 2005 07:45 am (UTC) LJ Pansies (Link)

DTG, I have to say - 'Get Off Live Journal' they are a group of pansies, obviously. If one complaint causes a letter of reprimand...well, that's very sad. I had the same trouble with Flickr. I was reprimanded by Flickr because of one complaint, and told to clean up my content or they would remove my account. I cancelled my account and wrote them a letter saying I was embarrassed for Flickr that one complaint about perfectly legal content would cause them to threaten me with account deletion. Especially considering others on Flickr have naked content, which is okay because no one has complained about them.
Too bad all around.
Cheers to you Sweets,:-)
Lili-G

(Reply) (Thread)

From: thegoddessfreya Date: March 14th, 2005 10:09 am (UTC) (Link)

Sigh. Really, the nude form of a woman is so objectionable and horrifying isn't it? She's reclining and beautiful, but we can't have that!

The fact is that if one has children, one needs to parent them. Further, perhaps one might teach their children that a reclining nude portrait is not the worst thing in the world, although you may have to fit the lesson in between games of Doom where they are impaling demons.

I know someone here who recently got harassed for her icons which feature pinup art. It's a sad world when people can't just click the "x" and close a window with something they don't want to see and instead rush off to whine about it.

(Reply) (Thread)

From: jonathan_quince Date: March 14th, 2005 12:28 pm (UTC) Complaint-Mongers (ed: really, really this time!) (Link)

It's a sad world when people can't just click the "x" and close a window with something they don't want to see and instead rush off to whine about it.

Fact: People are lazy.
Fact: Complaining takes effort.

The worst people in this regard are those who intentionally seek something salacious about which to complain. And in light of Murphy's Corollary of Human Laziness, I rather suspect that most complaints originate with exactly this type of scumbag.

I am sure that there are people who cruise places like LiveJournal with this very intent; I know for a fact that such exists in some Internet fora. They see themselves as righteous crusaders for "cleaning things up", "promoting morality over vice", and "protecting the children", which is why in this morning's Sopef post on the subject, I called them "Twits With No Lives And Small Souls".

C.f. the organization (parentstv dot org -- don't want to link them from here) that filed 99.8% of all indecency complaints with the FCC in the year 2003 (source: MediaWeek.com). These people spend time and money and organizational resources on this stuff!

I know this must come as a revelation to those here who do useful things with their lives, but some people think this is God's work and will spare no expense for their cause. (God told me that He did not respond to their requests for comment.)

And then there's the fact that the U.S. "Justice" Department has full-time porn surfers looking for prosecutable "obscenity". (Tax dollars at work. Yes, this is for obscenity specifically, not for child porn.) I saw one interviewed on the news once; he complained about how his job of viewing and documenting Internet porn 8 hours per day was very stressful, demoralizing, and psychologically degrading, and it was hard to come home and face his family each day after being exposed to so much filth. (I guess he's a real hero for making such sacrifices in the name of a clean Internet.)

I propose a law: If you seek it out, you are responsible for seeing it, and therefore you are disallowed from being offended. Complaints must be made under affidavit that the "offensive" content was seen accidentally and not sought intentionally for the purpose of complaining. Violators will be forced to watch one hour of Japanese eel porn for each violation.

Just wait 'til I'm dictator of the world.

-Jonathan Quince

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

From: nicebluejournal Date: March 14th, 2005 12:45 pm (UTC) Re: Complaint-Mongers (ed: really, really this time!) (Link)

According to my Statcounter, the US Dept of Justice keeps a regular eye on me. So does the Canadian Ministry of National Defense.

Just so you know how dangerous I am.

Grrrowwwwllll!

;)

DTG xxoo

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

From: thegoddessfreya Date: March 14th, 2005 01:15 pm (UTC) Re: Complaint-Mongers (ed: really, really this time!) (Link)

Lovely DTG, might I suggest that it's just some horndog at the Department of Justice who loves your words? This is what I tell myself when I get the dot gov visits at my site.

I do love that growl

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

From: nicebluejournal Date: March 14th, 2005 02:07 pm (UTC) Re: Complaint-Mongers (ed: really, really this time!) (Link)

When he was there, I liked to think it was Ashcroft reading PT and....um.....well, it wasn't that pretty a picture, actually.

;)

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

From: thegoddessfreya Date: March 14th, 2005 03:03 pm (UTC) Re: Complaint-Mongers (ed: really, really this time!) (Link)

Eww. There isn't a lot out there that I'd be horrified by, Ashcroft reading my sexual fantasies and, er, doing whatever he does, would do it. And we know he did, because you're irresistible.

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

From: jonathan_quince Date: March 14th, 2005 01:51 pm (UTC) Stats Tangent (Link)

I get .gov and .mil traffic, but I figure most of it is the same as traffic coming from major corporations: Someone having, er, a lunch-break diversion. (I'm certain it's on their lunch breaks! Right?)

What actually amazes me is the small but steady stream of traffic I get from .sa (Saudi Arabia). I get random search traffic from almost every country I've ever heard of (and some I haven't), but I seem to have regular readership from a land where -- well, let me just note that Barbie dolls are banned there for being "shameful" and "Jewish" (!), such judgment being handed down by their Ministry for the Prevention of Virtue and Promotion of Vice (or is it the other way around?). Of course, given the rate of female literacy there (particularly in English), I somehow doubt that those readers are women becoming sexually liberated through my writings.

However bad it is here, it is well to remember that it could be much worse -- and that there are people who want to actually bring us down to similar levels of repressive oppression. And where principles are concerned, sometimes irony strikes like a lightning bolt close to home.

But yes, DTG, we're all being watched. Take comfort in the thought that Big Brother probably takes a quick jerk-break in the bathroom after catching up on the latest Pussy Talk for his "state of Internet obscenity" report. ;-)

-JQ

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

From: nicebluejournal Date: March 14th, 2005 02:05 pm (UTC) Re: Stats Tangent (Link)

See my Ashcroft comment, above. Hehe.

DTG xxoo

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

From: thegoddessfreya Date: March 14th, 2005 01:17 pm (UTC) Re: Complaint-Mongers (ed: really, really this time!) (Link)

If one didn't intentionally seek to be offended, what on earth would they be able to talk about on faux news every night? They must search for the handbasket to further incite the masses toward the idea that we are all on the fast road to hell with our sex talking and our gay marriage...

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

From: jonathan_quince Date: March 14th, 2005 02:33 pm (UTC) Young Child Scarred, Turned to Crime by Internet Obscenity (Link)

Young Child Scarred, Turned to Crime by Internet Obscenity

COWFUCK, OH (700C) - Seven-year-old Jennifer Rhymes was arrested early this morning after a girlhunt that lasted for almost a week. Police say that little Miss Rhymes slaughtered her whole family and engaged in drug use, prostitution, and homosexuality after being exposed to an obscene painting on the Internet.

[IMAGE: Jennifer Rhymes, who by the way is an adorable and innocent cute little girl for whom you should feel terrible sympathy. (700C)]

Following an evaluation, forensic psychologist Richard Tsuck told police that Miss Rhymes was traumatized and turned to delinquency after seeing the obscene image in a LiveJournal default user icon. Miss Rhymes has been diagnosed with acute lesbianism and is being held at Robertson Federal Psychiatric Prison, where she is thrashing wildly in restraints and speaking in demonic tongues.

Police said the painting, an obscene work by infamous pornographer Amedeo Modigliani, was released on the Internet by underground fetishists and child molesters. According to the Nucular Family Union Committee, an organization that promotes child safety on the Internet, pornographers, homosexuals, and terrorists use the Internet to trade both “bibliophilic” writings and lewd photographs and videos. A recent Federal investigation netted 163 arrests from a criminal ring of homosexuals, bestialists, transsexuals, and drug dealers who used the Internet to distribute photographs of an obscene work known in street slang as “David”.

Rev. Quince contributed to this off-the-cuff story.

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

From: nicebluejournal Date: March 14th, 2005 06:22 pm (UTC) Re: Young Child Scarred, Turned to Crime by Internet Obscenity (Link)

You're bad to the bone, Quince.

;)

DTG xxoo

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

From: jonathan_quince Date: March 14th, 2005 07:18 pm (UTC) But "jerk" that I am, I forgot... (Link)

Not really. I forgot to work in mention of masturbation, an evil compulsion which your site is sure to induce.

And as everybody knows, masturbation causes homosexuality, anemia, blindness, convulsions, atrophy, paralysis, insanity, and death! (Plus thereafter, an eternity of gnawing one's tongue off in a lake of fire.)

You have no idea of the horrors inflicted on innocent souls by your written fantasies and this obscene "art" you post alongside them.

-Rev. Quince (Who never, ever masturbates — well, not in the past 30 minutes, anyway.)

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

From: (Anonymous) Date: March 14th, 2005 02:20 pm (UTC) (Link)

Just be a bit pragmatic, and rational. Take it down for a month, and then return it to its place. Part of the problem is that it is Modigliani, an artist with images not as well known as the David so it is not thought of as art by the unknowledgeable. Rosie

(Reply) (Thread)

From: nicebluejournal Date: March 14th, 2005 06:20 pm (UTC) (Link)

Rosie, shhh. Did you read my mind?

;)

DTG xxoo

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

From: (Anonymous) Date: March 14th, 2005 06:17 pm (UTC) Quick, cover your eyes (Link)

Heaven forbid we see a nude woman (or man) on your site!! It's obvious that Modigliani was a pervert.

The uptight priss who reported you (and the ass wipes who wrote the LJ policy) should take their morality and stick it up their oh-so-tight asses. Whoops, "asses" probably gets us in trouble, too. Perhaps "tushies" will pass muster.

Sex doesn't equal perversion and nudity doesn't equal obscenity. And God, if you believe in her, created tits, cunts, dicks, and asses. Man am I sick of the moralistic fuckwits.

United in the struggle DTG,
Infatuateur

(Reply) (Thread)

From: (Anonymous) Date: March 14th, 2005 09:26 pm (UTC) Nice (Link)

Too bad you got censored.

(Reply) (Thread)

From: (Anonymous) Date: March 15th, 2005 03:32 am (UTC) iconographic (Link)

I'm confused -- how can LJ complain about an icon featuring a painting of a nude on a site called "Pussy Talk"? Isn't there some chicken / egg thing going on, as far as what an innocent might be exposed to, should they wind up on this site?

(Reply) (Thread)

From: jonathan_quince Date: March 15th, 2005 06:44 am (UTC) Dual-Use Terminology (Link)

"Pussy" can refer to a furry little creature that says "meow" when touched. (C.f. a cuntal pussy, wherein it is the pussy's owner who says "meow" when the pussy is touched.)

It is a situation rather akin to that of http://www.nice-tits.org/ — a website owned by the Royal Tit-Watching (Ornithological) Society of Britain. They may employ puns and wet T-shirts to market themselves, but they are all about ornithology.

Yes, DTG is just a (mostly) harmless vestal who enjoys talking about cats. She's still a virgin, you know. ;-)

- Jonathan Quince, Chaste Sex Monk (and don't even get me started on the subject of eggs...)

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

From: nicebluejournal Date: March 15th, 2005 06:51 am (UTC) Re: Dual-Use Terminology (Link)

*PURRRRRR*

I love tits. I love to eat 'em, if I can catch 'em.

;)

DTG xxoo

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

From: (Anonymous) Date: March 15th, 2005 06:45 am (UTC) (Link)

A right weary bunch of self-righteous gits and horses-asses. No disrespect to the equine anus... It's fucking Modigliani for christ sakes?????? A pox on all their houses. Jim

(Reply) (Thread)

From: nicebluejournal Date: March 15th, 2005 06:53 am (UTC) (Link)

That's what hurts me the most in this whole silly circus. It's Modigliani. Fine, lovely, mainstream art.

DTG xxoo

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

From: (Anonymous) Date: April 1st, 2005 11:48 am (UTC) (Link)

He/she without sin casts the first stone.

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

From: magicfirefly Date: March 15th, 2005 10:14 am (UTC) (Link)

And I so loved your elegant icon!
Elegance, grace, sensuality, poetry - it had it all.
mf

(Reply) (Thread)

From: ellinoz Date: March 15th, 2005 09:06 pm (UTC) (Link)

I'm saddened hon, really saddened. Soon I'll get cross. It can only be some kind of insanity.

Hugs,
Ell

(Reply) (Thread)

From: (Anonymous) Date: March 15th, 2005 09:50 pm (UTC) (Link)

I honestly can't believe that LJ deemed a work of Art by one of our greatests artists as objectionable. Perhaps they thought that it was an actual image of DTG.

No wonder the arts never get any funding.

VS
http://virgin-slut.blogspot.com/

(Reply) (Thread)

From: subtropic Date: March 17th, 2005 05:38 pm (UTC) (Link)

Damn these puritans! It's hard to read the Bible when you're waving it around: "if thy right eye offend thee, pluck it out.."

Hi, came across your journal via ljover40, very nice!

(Reply) (Thread)

From: daveman692 Date: March 18th, 2005 04:41 am (UTC) Since I'm Not on a Crusade (Link)

> So, to whoever complained: I hope you rest easier now, knowing that you've
> helped to take my depraved and corrupting image out of circulation. But
> you've got your work cut out for you here at LJLand. One down, and about
> a million to go? Good luck.

Not that I need to reply here, but figured I'd might as well. I saw your icon as you had replied with screened answers to a few Support Requests. Your icon was unapprovable in Support and I thought nothing beyond that in terms of a site abuse level. When I opened a request in regards to us contacting you about it for Support, it was transferred to the Abuse team. So those other million, as long as they don't use their icon in support I doubt I'll ever see them. ;)

(Reply) (Thread)

From: nicebluejournal Date: March 18th, 2005 05:02 am (UTC) Re: Since I'm Not on a Crusade (Link)

Thanks for clarifying how it happened.

It was my own stupid fault, of course. I was trying to be helpful in posting some replies to Support and forgot that my icon was "objectionable" according to LJ TOS. Just a case of being in the wrong place at the wrong time.

DTG xxoo

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

From: zalriva1 Date: March 18th, 2005 11:57 am (UTC) (Link)

ya made fleshbot this morning...
http://www.fleshbot.com/sex/straight/found/morning-wood-036437.php

(Reply) (Thread)

From: nicebluejournal Date: March 18th, 2005 01:59 pm (UTC) (Link)

Thanks for letting me know :)

DTG xxoo

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

From: (Anonymous) Date: March 18th, 2005 06:22 pm (UTC) oh dear!! (Link)

i took a break from your blog when you did, darling. good god and the hypocrites! please please move over red rover... they're cracking down.. see cdoa2.blogspot.com - monday, march 7th. darling.. come to blogspot while it still has a tad of freedom! i'll support anything you do. you're .. words fail. shaking my head. tragedy in blogdom!!!!! hey-zeus. do we need to start our own freedom seekers blogs? oh dear. oh dear. oh dear. much support, darlin. - lola.

(Reply) (Thread)

From: nicebluejournal Date: March 20th, 2005 11:38 am (UTC) Re: oh dear!! (Link)

Thanks, chick.

DTG xxoo

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)