(June 30, 2016 at 8:19 pm)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:(June 30, 2016 at 8:02 pm)Cthulhu Dreaming Wrote: @Thump
The issue here is that there is more in play here than just the inequity in standards of what is and is not considered pornographic with respect to gender differences.
No matter what we do, we are going to have to compromise on deeply held coconvictions or expose ourselves to liability. To me the ad revenue is much lesser concern - I'm not the one who pays the bills however.
It isn't and never has just been about just what is strictly legal - and in that regard, you have to consider that some overzealous prosecutor or busybody in the most conservative corner of this country could cause serious problems.
What liability might you have that is not legal? I'm not privy to information about ad revenue, but I'm also not sure how not posting male nipples mught affect that adversely.
Perhaps you could elucidate?
It doesn't have a damn thing to do with not posting male nipples. Not wishing to unnecessarily restrict posts informed that part of the decision.
The liability comes from some busybody suing or prosecuting because their little Johnny saw some boobs here.
I personally am not interested in censoring posts of the sort that don't create that sort of liability.
Not to mention that I do not own the site, so I kind of have a responsibility to give greater weight to what the owner wants.