Interesting Shares

828 readers

3 users here now

Companion community of [email protected] to share interesting articles, projects and research that doesn't fit the definition of news.

Icon attribution

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

‘Guess what? Mummy is a sex worker’: the sexologist who wants to build a ‘slutopia’ for women (www.theguardian.com)

submitted 3 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

22 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Dr Hilary Caldwell’s new book Slutdom looks at how women navigate sex and shame, and at all ages. She shares what she’s learned as both a sex worker and as an academic.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 25 points 3 months ago (12 children)

This is the exact headline of an established newspaper. Wherever you're allowed to have your phone or for reading at work then this should be just as fine.

Please be consience on what NSFW should be and don't call for censorship in its name.

Ironically fitting to the article itself.

[–] [email protected] -3 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (11 children)

apologies but I don't understand,

marking a post as NSFW would mean that users who've enabled to view/blur NSFW posts would have their choices be respected

the post is still viewable

maybe the norm has changed for what's NSFW and what's not NSFW?

edit:
after thinking about this some more I feel like I need more thoughts from people to figure out what's the right decision, trying to figure out content moderation is hard as I'm not perfect at this (I'm just a volunteer with no formal training)

just trying to respect people's autonomy at the end of the day

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 months ago (1 children)

As stated, images are reasonable to blur, because having them in your screen would Not be Safe For Work. Text generally doesn't really make sense to blur, especially an article published by a major news source. If it could be seen in print sitting on a lobby coffee table, it probably doesn't qualify as NSFW.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

As stated, images are reasonable to blur, because having them in your screen would Not be Safe For Work. Text generally doesn't really make sense to blur, especially an article published by a major news source. If it could be seen in print sitting on a lobby coffee table, it probably doesn't qualify as NSFW.

yup, I agree with all of your points

Text generally doesn't really make sense to blur, especially an article published by a major news source.

also while rereading this I realized that I'm not really sure what the mainstream concensus decision is when it comes to NSFW text-based content

I know Fifty Shades was referenced/used in an episode of The Office

so maybe it's fine?🤔? not too sure

load more comments (9 replies)