I reported your post. You posted it in
my topic. In work-from-home-year-2020 it's more of a Not Safe For Wife but worse than that, I have kids walking around here too. And even though we don't raise them to be snowflakes, they don't need to see all hairy details either.
Who knew that you are married to a cartoon character.
Titled, “In which nullius does some research, and learns to communicate in pop-culture terms that everybody else here will understand.”Your concern for your children may be more credible if you weren’t essentially stating that you ban them from museums, art history textbooks (things evidently unfamiliar to you), libraries (oh dear me, what may they find there!?), etc. As it is, you come off as
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Think_of_the_children.
At that, if you expose your children to this forum, do you have a problem with them seeing people
call others a “cunt”? Or watching you promote gambling (which I don’t dislike in itself—but it is not appropriate for children)? What about a forum post which
claims that tripping on LSD is an experience like taking a trip to France?
I also wonder if you
protect your children from listening to the radio. I would. There is trashy stuff broadcast over the airwaves that you should be much more concerned about than famous paintings.
Ordinarily, as a gentleman, I would not speak ill of a man’s wife in an Internet argument. But if you want to hide behind her, and she is a classless harridan who disrespects fine art, then she is fair game.
But I admit, my feelings are hurt: I am shocked, outraged, and indignant!
Great! All this helps you grow a thicker skin.
LoyceV cherrypicks quotes out of context to strip obvious sarcasm from a satirical statement, and cast me in a false light as a fool. Noted.
I didn't remove it but ask yourself this: would that artwork or something like it belong in the workplace, or would you feel comfortable looking at a picture like that at work? I doubt it. Just because something is 'art' or in a museum doesn't mean it's SFW.
Thank you for your reply. No, I would not mind being seen at work or otherwise publicly looking at a Courbet painting. Neither would the employees at the museum where it is on public display. Neither would anyone else who is not an ignorant rube. Indeed, it is hilariously ridiculous to suggest that this forum has higher standards than this workplace:
Interior of the Musée d’OrsayA workplace beyond the ken of LoyceV and his wife..jpg/1280px-オルセー美術館_-_panoramio_-_mayatomo_(4).jpg)
In professional and social contexts, what I would want to avoid is to be associated with the massive amount of mass-mind, low-class cheap trash that gets posted here, such as non-nude “sexy” pics of tarts who look like streetwalkers—and also, all the photos of marijuana and cocaine that oft get posted to the Wall Observer.
In my professional life, and socially for me, it has also always been unacceptable to call someone “a cunt”.
My standards are higher: If you really want to enforce my “safe for work” standard, then you need to delete at least half of the graphical content of the forum. At least. Plus many of the textual posts.
—Let’s not go that way. I will defend others’ posting of non-pornographic images, whether or not they are to my taste; and I find it regrettable that I even need to ask if forum policy prohibits the following image, which depicts male genitalia, and is hereby hotlinked directly from the Vatican Museums at a .va Internet address. The whole of Vatican City is the Pope’s workplace, subject to Catholic law; thus, this is “SFW” for the Pope. Anybody who reports or deletes this is mentally ill, an enemy of mankind, and a despicable cretin whom I despise worse than anybody whom I have ever despised on this forum, including Craig Wright. Source page in English: Perseus Triumphant.
...the statue was bought by Pope Pius VII Chiaramonti (1800-1823)...

My intended context for posting this image: I am not a cunt, but a dick; and mythopoetically in the context of this forum, Perseus represents me, and the head of Medusa is suchmoon.
* My dick is bigger than a twitlib’s—where “dick” has a subtextual meaning of “supreme mastery of hermeneutics”, and its size is an allegory for my powers of mythological interpretation.
Laugh. It’s hilarious! 🙃☮
the forum's puritanical (and somewhat hypocritical) approach to moderation
I doubt that theymos himself is Puritanical. If he were, then he would not run GGB.
My hypothesis is that the primary reason for the forum’s policy is that if porn gets posted here, then the forum will wind up being blocked by numerous censorware filters. On pragmatic grounds, it would not be an unreasonable policy. Of course, only theymos could say for sure if my thus inferences are correct.
Whereas the images that I have posted cannot reasonably be described as “porn”. Not unless in substantial effect, one were to equate the Musée d’Orsay to a porno shop.
I did not expect for my posts to be deleted, because I did not expect that any of the staff here would go full John Ashcroft. Thus, it was not my intention to make a “test case” here—but it is inadvertently a good test case for the boundaries of forum policy:
It is not porn. It would be very foolish to claim that it is porn; this is not even a borderline, arguable question, such as with art-nude photography of a more or less sensual nature. I reasonably interpreted “NSFW” as a euphemism for porn, or almost-porn, or arguably-porn. —What does “NSFW” mean?
(NSFW version) (Hopefully Cloudflare's stopped being a bastard about these links.)
I tried to look, so as better to understand your objection to forum policy. Cloudflare threw me a Google CAPTCHA. I don’t do those anymore, especially not for read-only viewing of a web resource.
What an unexpected reaction to a predictable action

yourself:
- “Unexpected”? In one of the deleted posts, I had explicitly promised that if necessary, I would defend this in Meta. I am a man of my word.
Despite my political and aesthetic disagreements with Courbet, I will defend this in Meta if
- “Predictable”? I sincerely did not predict that I would need to defend it. I did predict that somebody, somewhere would complain about it; no doubt, there are many complaints about my posts, very few of which have ever been deleted by the moderators.
There is no better way to make nullius go nuclear than to attack culture.
Getting a bit more serious, yes, it is indeed art and that particular one displayed in museums. But this is a forum, not a museum;
Do you mean to suggest that this forum has higher standards than a museum?

<snip>
This whole situation would have been avoided with a simple tagged link instead of embedding the image.
Your value system is completely upside-down and inside-out. I take the same offence to your suggestion as I would to the notion that I should need to hide away my interests in music—q.v. for a different pop-cultural allegory in the context hereof.
Mood Musik for my friends to enjoy whilst reading my posts: Free download of a public domain project!Hotlinks to MP3s for all tracks (
now playing):
Aria;
Variation 1,
2,
3,
4,
5,
6,
7,
8,
9,
10,
11,
12,
13,
14,
15,
16,
17,
18,
19,
20,
21,
22,
23,
24,
25,
26,
27–28,
29,
30;
Aria da Capo è Fine.
24-bit FLAC is also available; see the above archive.org link for that, or for the handy in-browser Javascript musik player.