Is cartoon nudity allowed on boards.ie?

Tallon

This is a serious question!

Is nudity (And specifically child nudity) Allowed on boards as long as it is in Cartoon form?

I posted a photo from the Broadsheet.ie earlier in 'You laugh you lose' thread of a family portrait where they were all posing nude (But completely covered private areas) and it was promptly deleted, yet a cartoon image of a young girl nude with her private area slighly blurred is still there.

I pm'd the mod who removed my post for clarification and he responded with "It's a cartoon image. "

I did not know such things were ok?! Can someone please clarify!

GAAman

Definitely need to be careful there when you think of this case it might leave boards.ie wide open to legal issues

LoLth

I'll have to check that with the staff and admins as I dont know offhand.

I would suspect not, and that would be my personal opinion but it would depend on the nature and content of the image.

An Australian judge did rule recently that cartoon pictures of the simpson children engaging in sexual acts did indeed constitute child pornography and gave his rulign on the case with that in mind. I honestly dont know what the Irish law standpoint is and its not something that I've seen come up for discussion among the admins so far.

Feedback from users on this is more than welcome and would certianly be taken into account in any discussion that arises among the admins.

Tallon

For clarity, this is the post that the mod deems fine to leave on the thread:
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=73193052&postcount=17153

I don't have a link to mine as I deleted it (If my post is edited in that thread, I always delete it as to allow free flowing images)
But this is the photo and the link i got it from
http://www.broadsheet.ie/2011/07/08/a-thing-of-considerable-awe/

Now, I want people to be honest and tell me which one is more or less acceptable, or are they both not allowed on Boards.ie

Insect Overlord

I actually find the cartoon one worse!

Wolfe Tone

The cartoon one is worse tbh


The family one is funny, why would they want a picture like that? lol

seamus

LoLth wrote: »

An Australian judge did rule recently that cartoon pictures of the simpson children engaging in sexual acts did indeed constitute child pornography and gave his rulign on the case with that in mind. I honestly dont know what the Irish law standpoint is and its not something that I've seen come up for discussion among the admins so far.

It's the same in Irish law. Anything which depicts child sexual activity constitutes child pornography under irish law. Quite unbelievably this extends to written text, recordings and theatre, even where there are no actual children having ever been involved.

Thankfully this law is applied in a reasonable manner in this country so books like Game of Thrones have not been declared child pornography on the basis of depicting sexual acts with children.

Imagery would be the main concern, whether photographic or drawn, and whether or not the people involved are over or under-age. The important thing is whether a sexual act involving a child is being depicted.

Nudity of children in and of itself isn't specifically illegal (otherwise all our attics are chock full of child porn), though I imagine it needs to be contextualised.

My name is URL

The family picture is hardly of a sexual nature.. It's a weird image, but not obscene imo.

I guess it's down to what people see in it as much as what it actually contains.

Bottle_of_Smoke

I don't think the cartoon one is meant to be depicting a child

LoLth

after a brief and pretty much all on the same page discussion with the admins the response is:

Context is king.

The family portrait is not nudity in the sense of pornographic imagery or being gratuitous. (think womens deoderant ads for example) though it is embarrassing for those poor kids!

The cartoon image however, is. Almost precisely *because* of the pixellated genitalia. It could easily have been drawn without any reference to sexuality much like the characters in those annoying "love is" sketches.

I've deleted the cartoon.

One thing though, if any useer sees anything on the site that they think could be classified as pornography involving a minor do not post a link to it here or anywhere else on the site. Report the post to a mod or PM a cmod or admin with a link to the thread and the number of the post (top right hand corner). that is the reporting chain for issues and when it comes to issues involving minors, you can *never* be too careful (a user could conceivably take offense to the image and then argue that they never would have seen it if it hadnt been linked from another thread opening the possibility of the user posting th ereport in public being responsible for the exposure. all very iffy-butty-maybe but better safe than sorry imho.)

Above all though, we cant create rules to cover every eventuality. Users will have to use common sense when posting and when reporting posts just as mods will have to use common sense when deciding whether or not to act on a report.

@Tallon: thanks for the heads up on this. If might not have been obvious child porn but it was certainly distasteful even if it was only a drawing.

Also a quick thanks to all for the feedback without drama it really is appreciated.

Tallon

Thanks Loth, very much appreciated!

Just again for clarity, was my post a bit over the line, or was it's comedic embarrassment enough to justify posting it?

I didn't directly post the photo, I posted a link to it with the words NSFW in bold above it

Overheal

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iLDmogj0KtI

WindSock

LoLth wrote: »

after a brief and pretty much all on the same page discussion with the admins the response is:

Context is king.

The family portrait is not nudity in the sense of pornographic imagery or being gratuitous. (think womens deoderant ads for example) though it is embarrassing for those poor kids!

The cartoon image however, is. Almost precisely *because* of the pixellated genitalia. It could easily have been drawn without any reference to sexuality much like the characters in those annoying "love is" sketches.

I've deleted the cartoon.

One thing though, if any useer sees anything on the site that they think could be classified as pornography involving a minor do not post a link to it here or anywhere else on the site. Report the post to a mod or PM a cmod or admin with a link to the thread and the number of the post (top right hand corner). that is the reporting chain for issues and when it comes to issues involving minors, you can *never* be too careful (a user could conceivably take offense to the image and then argue that they never would have seen it if it hadnt been linked from another thread opening the possibility of the user posting th ereport in public being responsible for the exposure. all very iffy-butty-maybe but better safe than sorry imho.)

Above all though, we cant create rules to cover every eventuality. Users will have to use common sense when posting and when reporting posts just as mods will have to use common sense when deciding whether or not to act on a report.

@Tallon: thanks for the heads up on this. If might not have been obvious child porn but it was certainly distasteful even if it was only a drawing.

Also a quick thanks to all for the feedback without drama it really is appreciated.

That's a decent tip top explanation, thanks LoLth.

Penn

Bottle_of_Smoke wrote: »

I don't think the cartoon one is meant to be depicting a child

That was my opinion too, which is why I left it up. Appreciate the clarification on the matter though, and agreed with the deletion of the real picture.