Pornography for you! since my blogging activity began, today for the first time a comment from Miss Welby was censored on another blog - a "liberal" ATHEIST blog - on the grounds of nudity in my avatar, described as pornographic and distasteful. the picture is actually a work of art by great photographer Helmut Newton, used as a cover of his poetry collection by great poet Piero Welby, and it has nothing to deal with pornography: it's art. to the bigot atheist moralists criticising my avatar, take this: it's the Venus by Lucas Cranach the Elder on display at the Royal Academy of Arts in London. Transport for London initially refused to display the poster on the tube because of its nudity, then they had to realize how ludicrous their decision was, and forced to give their OK. pretty well waxed, isn't she? perhaps the problem with me is that my pussy's too hairy.Pornography for you! since my blogging activity began, today for the first time a comment from Miss Welby was censored on another blog - a "liberal" ATHEIST blog - on the grounds of nudity in my avatar, described as pornographic and distasteful. the picture is actually a work of art by great photographer Helmut Newton, used as a cover of his poetry collection by great poet Piero Welby, and it has nothing to deal with pornography: it's art. to the bigot atheist moralists criticising my avatar, take this: it's the Venus by Lucas Cranach the Elder on display at the Royal Academy of Arts in London. Transport for London initially refused to display the poster on the tube because of its nudity, then they had to realize how ludicrous their decision was, and forced to give their OK. pretty well waxed, isn't she? perhaps the problem with me is that my pussy's too hairy.
Iscriviti a:
Commenti sul post (Atom)
29 commenti:
So just because someone doesn't want your avatar on their blog you say 'fuck them'? It's her blog, she has the right to say what goes there and what doesn't, just as you have the right to do so on your blog. Yeesh, are you just trolling or attention whoring??
1. I rather said "fuck the atheist moralists". if you coward anonymous think of yourself belonging to the category, then get it in Italian as well: VAFFANCULO. my pleasure.
2. seriously, of course it's someone else's blog and I already made it clear that I won't annoy anymore. trust me, I have no interest in wasting time where I'm not welcome.
3. be so kind to return the favour or the next time you enter here as anonymous expect another... VAFFANCULO, or you enter with a real account and I'll be prepared to discuss the issue between civilized people. in the meantime, sorry but... VAFFANCULO :)
You're also leaving out the full reason for P-Momma deleting your comment. As she explained:
Mrs. Welby,
Kids read this blog. Putting porn in your avatar is unacceptable. Directly fishing for people to come vote in your blog, when you've never commented here before? Fish somewhere else.
If you had read her commenting policy, it's labeled No anonymous comment! on the top left of her blog, you'd have known not to just leave a fishing link in your first post there. Her preference is that you email her with such, and then she can post about it if she likes it.
Further, you waited until this post to tell us the artist's name. Your assertions that he was "well known" and that he was "AMERICAN" did nothing to prove your opinion that it was art.
Also, it wasn't the blog owner who described your avatar as "distasteful", it was a commenter. Even he pointed out that the definition of porn is "in the eye of the beholder" (e.g. subjective). So, you can't even say that is the reason your comment was deleted.
Last but not least, you calling P-Momma an "atheist bigot" was not only uncalled for, but categorically wrong (as I pointed out in my comment to you). At best, you could have called her a prude, but the fact that you felt the need to use her godlessness as an adjective tells me that you want to feel persecuted. You didn't even give P-Momma the chance to respond to respond to your "apology" before you ran away crying "I've been banned".
Art and pornography are subjective. Personally, the pubic hair on your avatar doesn't bother me, but I still don't consider it "art". All I see is gratuitous nudity while smoking a cigarette, in black and white.
m welby...
Don't fret, but most Americans are somewhat sexually repressed, it is a cultural stigma that has been around for some time (after all, the dominate culture of north America is derived from the Puritan descendants..the social revolutions of the 60's barely put a dent in their passed down mores & tenants)
I was watching the discovery channel the other day, they were filming some tribal dance of the village matriarchs of some South Pacific island. It was a supposedly anthropological perspective, the women were in ceremonial dress, but had breasts somewhat exposed. The pixels in and around the breast areas were "blurred" out so they were not presentable to the viewer...that's America. Kind of weird, sort of creepy, but naked bodies are still very taboo, espicially in these pseudo reformist Christianist times we now live in.
BTW, from my point of view, your avatar is as good of an artistic representation as any other...after all, art is truly the most subjective of calls anyway, and it is each to his own. Also, it was someone else's blog, of course it is their prerogative... you complied, so it is not worth being upset over. No one is going to change four centuries of repression over night, and all the kiddies will sleep tight.
So far I have enjoyed your blog, I think it is exceptional you have gone out of the way to communicate with other cultures...good for you, keep up the effort, it will be an eye opener for all !
benmerc
well, thank you for devoting your time in an articulated explanation. I really appreciate, I'm not being ironic. on the opposite, I may have been too sensitive and sarcastic in my reaction.
perhaps we learnt something about cultural differences by this incident (which I hope is over): American atheists are more prudent and conservative than European believers? unbelievable! :)
let's take it easy and be friends on both sides of the pond. sorry for the angry hard language, I was really upset
You seem insistant it has something to do with her being an atheist, otherwise you wouldn't keep bringing it up. It doesn't. You were fishing her board and posted something she deemed inappropriate considering her own children visit her blog. You keep saying it's "art" by some well known american artist, as if being american matters. It's porn to me, and I'd get a rather hearty chuckle if you say I'm repressed or prudish.
I'd never say you are repressed or prudish (how could I know?), I simply say that what you find porn I DON'T.
am I entitled to this agnostic stance or do I have to abide to your religious one?
and haven't I made it clear that I'll never ever comment again on American atheist blogs, in order not to cause offence?
isn't this enough or are we going to prolong this forever? go on if you like: you'll find many more fellow American atheist moralists who think it's porn, but that won't change my mind, for my avatar isn't porn and it stays as it is, like it or not.
First of all, I'm an American atheist who's a fan of Luis Royo. As anonymous pointed out above, I like his work but I wouldn't just take it to someone elses house, if I didn't know they wouldn't appreciate it.
I don't consider your avatar porn, but I would say it's NSFW (Not Safe For Work), at least in the U.S. However, your avatar is only half the reason that your comment was deleted, and the reason why so many of us came to P-Momma's defense was you calling her an "atheist bigot".
Think of it this way, take out the "porn" part of her reasons for deleting your comment. Would you have a reason to complain, then?
"and haven't I made it clear that I'll never ever comment again on American atheist blogs, in order not to cause offence?"
I would request that you reconsider, since I posted about this. Oh, and it takes a great deal to offend me.
non sequitor. I commented "atheist bigot" AFTER my previous post was deleted. mind you: I do not complain (how could I?, it's not my blog) for my comment being deleted: I obviously recognize the perfect right for a blog owner to delete whatever they deem inappropriate.
I think I have apologised more than enough about my strong language (although I'll never apologise on my avatar), and yes, I'll be happy to occasionally peruse American atheists' bloggers again.
hope it's OK now. it was a sad incident because, "believe me" (!) I have a great sympathy for you but accusing me of "fishing", well, you deserve my most friendly, I underline friendly, VAFFANCULO! :)
Miss Welby:
I do not know which blog you were at. Not necessary that I do. I did not know that was a Helmut Newton image. I would consider the photo erotic, not pornographic. It is actually a quite enigmatic image. I find it interesting, to say the least.
democommie
Miss Welby:
I do not know which blog you were at. Not necessary that I do. I did not know that was a Helmut Newton image. I would consider the photo erotic, not pornographic. It is actually a quite enigmatic image. I find it interesting, to say the least.
democommie
I read your blog. I think you're in the wrong. Your avatar never bothered me, but it might if I had small children like that blogger does. As an ex-patriot, I know that that avatar could've been seen by American employers as a fireable offense. That blog looks like it has a large audience so I see no issue with a mother's instinct attempting to keep it clean. Reading back a bit, I see she's taken her children to museums and she posts about sexuality being very open and natural. I am thinking that Berzelbub is correct in his thought that your avatar was least of the worry. Atheist bigot is a harsh cry. Religious belief has no place. To be a bigot, you have to believe that your views are the only appropriate views and treat those opposed to you with hatred. She hasn't been hateful toward nudity or you. Reading her blog makes it clear that she's open to new opinions. I wish I could take your side on this one.
Ce que tu as fait hier soir m'a décu--ce n'était pas très classe
I've seen her comment on other blogs as well. The blog where I saw the other comment didn't contain the avatar, but it was basically just a way for Miss Welby to try and get free advertisement. Basically, a "You're blog is interesting, come and see mine... followed by a gratuitous link to her blog". No response that attempts to engage you with the subject that the post was submitted on. So yes, I would say that she's an attention whore. (not that there's anything wrong with that) :-P
Are you saying that my comment was a Non sequitur? Let's look at that shall we?
You take P-Momma's response that your comment contained porn and nudity, and then make the hasty induction that she's an atheist bigot. However, that was your first attempt at giving any evidence whatsoever that your avatar was art and not porn.
Now, let's look at the word bigot:
: a person obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices; especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group (as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance
If you had pointed out why your avatar could be considered art, but P-Momma still said it was porn, then you could possibly have considered her a bigot. However, as others have pointed out, she takes her children to museums and she's been very open about sexually related topics.
So, you calling her a bigot, based on her one response is a non sequitur, a straw man (you completely ignored her other, and more important reason for deleting your comment), ad hominem, a red herring (you used the "porn" reason as a smokescreen), and a hasty generalization (referring to "atheist moralists" from a sample of one).
Now, all of that said, "fishing" is coming to someone else's blog and leaving a link that is completely off-topic, especially when you haven't commented there before, in an effort to get more traffic on your blog. It's a subset of those annoying comments (and emails) that Americans call SPAM. It's very possible that P-Momma considered your comment one of those, because a) she'd never seen you comment on her blog before, b) the poll you referenced was off-topic, and c) many of those "fishing" comments reference pornography in some way. Often the name or avatar is a giveaway, and we usually delete those without looking. It's bad form, and even less effective when you attack the blogger for deleting your comment.
Now, all that being said, feel free to stop by, and comment if you feel like, on my blog.
[friendly smile]VAFFANCULO![/friendly smile] ;)
English is not my first language. I am on your links to the left. This is case of convenire di non essere d'accordo. She is the mother. This matters not on porn or art. It matters that it was non invitato on you to place a nude woman in the blog space with no consideration. To call names is like a child. You are bigger bigot compared to she. You gave hatred to respond to the request. As we say, cresci!
move on people...miss Welby has APOLOGIZED for EVERYTHING that apparently concerns you (she never made the argument that even if it is art to her, she was correct in posting it...she also apologized for her hasty and contentious reaction...what do you people want...blood?)...just read the comment section, it is over.
benmerc
mi sto perdendo il meglio del dibbbattito (dannato inglese e benedetto esperanto!) mi sembra di aver capito che l'avatar con donnina nuda scandalizza i bambini di qualche genitore che si collega a leggere il tuo blog :
1) ma l'avviso di protezione compare solo a me?
la finestrella che dice "La pagina contiene oggetti protetti e non protetti. Visualizzare gli oggetti non protetti?" e da la possibilità di scegliere fra tre opzioni :
1.Sì 2. NO 3. ULTERIORI INFORMAZIONI
cliccando sul Sì vedo gli avatar di tutti
cliccando sul NO non compaiono
la terza opzione non l'ho mai cliccata
2) ma perchè se non gli è gradito non lo cancella dai suoi preferiti?
se non ci ho azzeccato una cippa chiedo scusa, colpa della lingua
:P
Hallo miss
thanks for your help and also for the visit, you made me realize some mistakes on the blog.
That picture is not so pornographic it looks like a doll or something,
If it was so I could have closed my eyea and not send any comment.
Renecca
Yeah, your avatar is so very offensive. Pffffft. Was the blogger who censored you American?
My fellow Ameircans are so freakin' uptight about...gasp...nudity.
Rock on Miss Welby, and Cheers!!
@ benmerc:
move on people...miss Welby has APOLOGIZED for EVERYTHING that apparently concerns you (she never made the argument that even if it is art to her, she was correct in posting it...she also apologized for her hasty and contentious reaction...what do you people want...blood?)...just read the comment section, it is over.
Let's see...
She called the blogger, the post is here for those interested, an atheist bigot after she violated the commenting policy on that blog. How did she violate it? She advertised her own blog on her very first comment there, which was completely off topic.
Then, after the blogger deletes the comment, and explains why, Miss Welby decides she needs to comment once more. She opens with, " obviously respect your opinion as this is your home and I don't want to disturb." However, she ends it with, "now delete this comment as well, please, it was just a personal communication to let you know that you are an atheist bigot." Of course, her reason for calling the blogger a bigot was "it is a well known photograph by a well-known photographer who was NOT a pornographer. yes it's nudity but NOT porn, as it does not involve any sexual intercourse. also, being b/w, it should be clear that the aim is erotic art, not pornography."
Well, another blogger and I respond to her comment, explaining that her reasoning is subjective, she decides to pick her avatar up and come back to her own blog. All this, without waiting for the blogger herself to respond to Miss Welby's accusations and slander (libel?).
Well, then she makes this post, which gives only her side of the story, and doesn't address the other reason for her comment being deleted. When she is called on her bigoted viewpoint ("my avatar isn't porn and it stays as it is, like it or not.") of the whole thing, she apologizes but refuses to apologize to the person she wronged. To do so, all she would have to do is (first, swallow her pride) submit a comment to the blogger, by clicking on the "Name/URL" button just below the "Leave your comment" box. Then, she could actually apologize for trying to make this about something that it was only partially about. Barring that, she could even leave an apology on my blog, on this post (I'll prove it can be done, with this comment).
So, no, benmerc. I do not want blood, but I would like to see Miss Welby apologize to the person somehwere it can be seen, rather than on a blog that she has to "fish" in order to get traffic to.
@Matt-Man:
This was not just about the nudity, it was about Miss Welby violating the commenting policy of another blogger, then calling said blogger an "atheist bigot". The views of the blogger are neither here nor there. Miss Welby broke the rules, and then got upset when she had to abide by them (as I've explained above, and in previous comments). If you want to read why said blogger made those rules, you can read here (note: she's deleted comments from her site that she agrees with, also.)
[smiles]VAFFANCULO![/smiles]
Welby ha usato la sua immagine nel internet blog della madre Americana. Decisione errata. I genitori protegge il bambino. La madre Americana nessun chiesto voi per cambiare la vostra immagine. Chiede di non usare l'immagine nel suo blog. Sono atheist. Di niente.
Per Orietta: l'avviso di protezione ogni tanto compare anche a me.
E' accaduto che Miss Welby è intervenuta in un blog di un ateo americano e il suo commento è stato cancellato perché tale blog è letto anche da bambini e un avatar con donna nuda e fumatrice poteva turbarli. In più non è stato gradito che Miss Welby intervenisse allo scopo di segnalare un post del suo blog. Miss Welby ci è rimasta male ed è nata una polemica.
La cosa curiosa è che mi hanno scambiato per Miss Welby:
http://possummomma.blogspot.com/2008/02/exciting.html
Il post successivo è tutto dedicato alla vicenda.
"tale blog è letto anche da bambini e un avatar con donna nuda e fumatrice poteva turbarli".
Naturalmente sto riportando un punto di vista altrui.
I'm not even going to try and speak Italian. I can read it, but I would flub the possessives and verbs so much that it would be painful to read.
My decision to delete the comment wasn't due to my objection to nudity or pornography. I have no problem with nudity or the smoking. It's not my taste, but that's a smaller issue. It was deleted because I know children read the blog (and some read it from libraries and computer labs and schools). In this country, for better or worse, that picture popping up on a child's computer would end up in the immediate suspension of the child. It's for that reason that the avatar was inappropriate. Also, knowing my audience, I know that there are people who read my blog at work. Again, for better or worse, that picture could result it a swift rebuke from an employer or a termination. I never asked Mrs. Welby to change. I simply expressed that I couldn't let it stay posted and, in fact, was irritated that she posted it AGAIN even after being told that it was inappropriate. In my opinion, not considering the possible ramifications of her avatar is short sighted when she's using it in blogs she is fishing.
I accept her apology that she spoke with venom and anger as a reaction. People screw up. That's okay. But, to go on an suggest that I was a prude or a bigot was, in my opinion, childish.
grazie Mildareveno, capito e vabbè ognuno è libero di fare quel che vuole a casa sua, mi sembra giusto che il proprietario del blog cancelli quello che non gli va e non deve aver bisogno di giustificazioni.
chi non mi vuole non mi merita, e amici come prima!
uah uah uah uah...
really amusing "querelle" among Mrs Welby and the Atheist-Bigot-liberal-American Blogger...
Oh my Miss Welby. Welcome to the insane world of the U.S. where a nude woman and nude art is considered porn and not to be seen by children! LOL!
And it's not just fundamentalists, it's even atheist/liberal Americans who are like this... sigh...
I did a post about this insanity one time for SuperFrenchie:
http://superfrenchie.com/?p=1404
Your avatar is not porn but its not the prettiest hairy pussy I have ever seen either.
Some blogs do have children on them and other people reading them may have employers who would not be sympathetic to nudity even in an avatar.
That's just the way the world is - so if you are going to use old "Hairy Pussy" as your avatar then some people are going to complain - whether right or wrong that's just a fact.
My guess is that you actually chose it because you wanted it to have a little shock value. It's hardly the most beautiful or inspiring nude I have ever seen. I can't say I am a great fan of hairy armpits either. :-)
Posta un commento