DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register
 

DPChallenge Forums >> General Discussion >> Is DPC a "Family Site"?
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 25 of 109, (reverse)
AuthorThread
12/28/2006 01:20:49 AM · #1
I noticed that when photos on DPC contain adult content that people often leave comments to remind the photographer that "this content does not belong on DPC" and that it is a "family site." Many people remind the photographer that young children view the site and reprimand the photographer for having bad taste for including nudity or adult content in a "family site." People leave forum threads bemoaning their young children who were subjected to some vulgar image and how DPC should put a stop to it. My question is: Is DPC a family site?

If so, why are there rules allowing nudity at all and why are adult content photos allowed at all? As a photographer why should a voter be allowed to score a 1 because my photo doesn't belong on DPC when I have violated no rules whatsoever? If my suggestive photo truly does not belong on this "family site" then why not write the rules so that all adult content, sexual suggestions, and or nudity is banned because children could be looking at it?

And, if the site creators didn't intend the site to be a "family site" then what if anything should be done about those who vote on photos with 1's and 2's because they think the photographer has violated the "spirit" of DPC and broken some rule which they actually did not break? Should it be that even though nudes and adult content are allowed that the truth of the matter is that this is a family site and we, the photographers, should avoid anything not suitble for kids say age 5 or younger? It still seems to me that there is not a good answer to the nudity issue on DPC.

During the nudecast I asked why someone who choses not to view adult content still has to view adult images during voting and whether or not this can be changed. Someone recently complained that their 11 year old saw an offensive photo and was upset because they had the nudity filter turned on and STILL saw it. I wonder how many people who chose not to see nudity or adult content are shocked to find out they still see it during voting? I know this gentlemen who wrote did not understand that he'd still see it in voting. Can and should the rule be changed?

Just thoughts.

Message edited by author 2006-12-28 01:22:51.
12/28/2006 01:26:53 AM · #2
I believe that the option to block nude shots should have affect on all images wether or not they are in the voting process. If I don't want to see them I certainly won't be the best person to inquire to vote!
12/28/2006 01:30:36 AM · #3
There are a million different excuses for things that offend people other than saying 'your choice of subject offends me.' It's easier to pass off an excuse than coming out and saying you are the spawn of satan.
12/28/2006 01:31:04 AM · #4
The short answer to your question is no, in the sense that we allow and support (tasteful) nude photography, and require parents of children under 13 to submit written permission (waiver) for their kids to become members. We also provide flags to hide nude photos (except during voting).

During most previous discussions of this, those who expressed the most concern were those without children (here) themselves -- the vast majority of parental comments (including mine) were to the effect that it is up to the family members to decide how much use the kids make of the site, and the level of "protection" (if any) they needed.

The answer is also yes in that, since photography is a family-friendly activity in which kids can compete as equals with adults, we encourage parent members to include their kids in their DPC activities (and many do).

We define what photos are acceptable here in the rules and the TOS -- no one has to obey any other standard except their own.
12/28/2006 01:31:09 AM · #5
And that's my point. I do understand that if you don't allow the general public to see the nude photos that might offend them then you possibly skew the voting in favor of nude photography since only people who aren't offended by it will be voting on it but really, how much could that effect the vote and wouldn't people who are not offended by nudity still no how to score a good nude photo vs a bad nude photo? It's not like suddenly nude photos would always ribbon or something. I just think the site should make a stand. If its family friendly then make the filter for nudity and adult content count in voting too or make it very clear this site is not family friendly so people stop thinking photographers have violated the rules by shooting something adult oriented.
12/28/2006 01:31:50 AM · #6
DPC is a photography site. As long as photography has been an art, it has included nudity. I don't have a problem with it. For those with kids, my own personal feelings are that a responsible parent that has issues with their child seeing the naked body, should go through the section (in this case entries) of the site they intend to share with their child first.
What I really find interesting is that no one screams foul if the images are showing violence or drug useage, but yet are offended by the human body.
12/28/2006 01:32:40 AM · #7
This is a photographers...and those learning to become photographers...site. Nothing more...nothing less. There is no lifeguard on duty...swim at your own risk.
12/28/2006 01:33:36 AM · #8
GeneralE, it sounds as if you basically said "yes, this is a family site" and if so, why not change the rules to reflect it by making any sexual content whatsoever unacceptable? I don't know of any parents who think "some" sexual content is ok for children so if it's a family site shouldn't we just make it official?

And for clarification, nudity is not always sexaul. I'm talking sexual content either an adult theme like a man and a woman shot in bed with a box of condoms next to them or something like that. Nudity doesn't have to be sexual but the real issue for me is sexual content. If sexual content is inappropriate than shouldn't that be clarified in the rules?

Message edited by author 2006-12-28 01:37:57.
12/28/2006 01:43:12 AM · #9
Originally posted by lkn4truth:

GeneralE, it sounds as if you basically said "yes, this is a family site" and if so, why not change the rules to reflect it by making any sexual content whatsoever unacceptable? I don't know of any parents who think some sexual content is ok for children so if it's a family site shouldn't we just make it official?

No, I basically said "no" in the sense that we do not intend to limit the submissions to that which is "suitable for children of all ages."

Parents may, at their discretion, allow their kids to participate, but it is with the understanding that this site hosts photos depicting nudity, and making the parents responsible for that.

If you don't want your kids to see nude photos, then set their filter to "ON" and pre-screen the challenge thumbs for nudes before you let them vote. It's not that complicated to protect your kids, even within an "adult" site.
Originally posted by GeneralE:

Parents/Guardians,

To register your kids here, you can print and fill out this text, then either email the admins a scan/photo, or contact them for the fax number to which you can send it -- use the menu item Help > Contact. Be aware it may take them some time to process the request.

=============== DPC Waiver Text for Minors =============
I authorize my daughter/son, _________________________, to participate on the web site //www.dpchallenge.com. I am agreeing to the Terms of Use (found at //dpchallenge.com/terms.php) for her/him, since s/he is underage. I will be held liable for any actions that s/he takes on the web site.

s/___________________
(Parent/Guardian Name)

======================================================================
Here are some other threads (in no particular order) which discuss the participation of kids:
//www.dpchallenge.com/forum.php?action=read&FORUM_THREAD_ID=158089
//www.dpchallenge.com/forum.php?action=read&FORUM_THREAD_ID=141703
//www.dpchallenge.com/forum.php?action=read&FORUM_THREAD_ID=86345
//www.dpchallenge.com/forum.php?action=read&FORUM_THREAD_ID=67509
//www.dpchallenge.com/forum.php?action=read&FORUM_THREAD_ID=18288
12/28/2006 01:51:31 AM · #10
Even though I am against seeing nudity on this site I do not agree that you should restrict those that want it here. But what is wrong with hiding those photos from those of us that don't want to see them even durring voting?
12/28/2006 02:02:14 AM · #11
This may come as a shock, but I see DPC as a microcosm of U.S.-style Society. The driving principle behind each is GRACE. It is nearly impossible to create uniformity of conduct & belief in a system of GRACE.

Therefore, the burden of civility lies squarely on the shoulders of the Mature. (This, of course, allows for great abuses to be performed by the immature.)

Bottom Line: DPC is an adult photography forum/on-line university that PG-13's children's right to view. If there are concerns about voting, two options remain. First, preview the entire challenge before allowing children to be present. Secondly, Do what I do...Scan the thumbnails to see if there is a section safe enough to get in my 20% block. If there is something I don't want to see, I can count my votes up to that one. :}
12/28/2006 02:39:55 AM · #12
I always thought that DPC was a photography competition site and not a place for general entertainment of the whole family. I've been wondering why we haven't hade a nude challenge for a long time, but if these "family" considerations are the reason I would be very disappointed.


12/28/2006 02:48:55 AM · #13
People are lazy. They don’t want to take the time to check out what their kids might or might not be seeing ahead of time. If you are worried about what your “child” may see then screen it yourself instead of asking someone else to do your job as a parent.

On this site it is all about the eye of the beholder. I may see a picture and give it an 8 and someone would look at the same picture and give it a 2. People should post their pics as they see fit in the context of the rules given. The same rules we all agreed to when we signed up.

Seeing nudity or things of an "adult nature" will not kill anyone, and can be check for ahead of time.
12/28/2006 02:54:54 AM · #14
Being a European I have to say that I don't get this discussion at all...

What is it about the human body tha scare you Americans this way? I mean - we are only talking about tasteful nude photos nothing more and nothing less. The human body has always been a favourite subject to artists, but for some reason in these "modern times" this has become a major issue...

Those of you who find the nudity here offending and not "Family Safe": Do you also find Michelangelo's statures offending? Or the classic statue "Venus de Milo"? Or Goya's painting of the nude Maja? Or all the other classic nude art?

Or, is it just because we are talking photography here that it's offending?

I totally agree with ShutterPug below - and her last sentence in particular:

Originally posted by ShutterPug:

DPC is a photography site. As long as photography has been an art, it has included nudity. I don't have a problem with it. For those with kids, my own personal feelings are that a responsible parent that has issues with their child seeing the naked body, should go through the section (in this case entries) of the site they intend to share with their child first.
What I really find interesting is that no one screams foul if the images are showing violence or drug useage, but yet are offended by the human body.



12/28/2006 02:56:22 AM · #15
But isn't it a little naive to expect parents to parent their children?

Won't somebody please think of the children!!!!
12/28/2006 03:31:43 AM · #16
Originally posted by lkn4truth:

GeneralE, it sounds as if you basically said "yes, this is a family site" and if so, why not change the rules to reflect it by making any sexual content whatsoever unacceptable? I don't know of any parents who think "some" sexual content is ok for children so if it's a family site shouldn't we just make it official?


I can say that I wouldn't have had any qualms if my children (now 15 and 17) had viewed this site when they were 5 - there is nothing on it that goes beyond what you see walking by a newsstand in Munich, Germany. There is even a rather low quality newspaper (Bild) which seems to have the rule to publish a photo of a naked woman on page one every day. And we didn't even mention TV after 22:00 yet ...

While one can hardly avoid walking by a newsstand, it's a different matter with DPC. If someone finds what he could see objectionable he does not have to vote or even visit the site at all. However there are those who do not find the pictures objectionable (including me) and I disagree with rules that would limit me just because someone else has some (in my eyes) strange worries about plain nudity.

As for the protection that children allegedly need - I don't think that someone will be able to get me to understand what harm could be done by seeing a picture of a naked woman or man. After all, it shouldn't be fundamentally different from what their parents look like, or what they see in the mirror in the bathroom.
12/28/2006 03:40:53 AM · #17
when I was in Taiwan we get 2 channels that airs porn 24 hours a day (it gets boring after the novelty wears off)
OK, point is, you're the one with the remote. DPC is about photography, and human body can be a beautiful subject. It's kinda hard to avoid nudity, I suppose.
12/28/2006 05:15:50 AM · #18
Riddle me this Batman:

How can DPC not be considered as a "family" site if HOOTERS, a "family restaurant with it's busty waitresses and itty bitty hot pants, is? If people have no issue with taking their kids to Hooters for lunch, how can DPC be an issue where you can regulate the "inapropriate" content????

Food for thought :-)

Chris

Message edited by author 2006-12-28 05:17:10.
12/28/2006 05:32:40 AM · #19
I find this post rather hypocritical when the poster has entered a photo for The Year You Were Born, with a bare male butt! taken to illustrate Gay March.

Or am I missing the whole point? I didn't find that picture offensive nor do I find nudity offensive. My 4 children were raised quite successfully despite all the nudity surrounding them on TV, films, newspapers and magazines. This was because we believed in being open minded, nudity and sex were never a taboo in our family.

Maybe it's time chill out and loosen those corsets.
12/28/2006 05:51:06 AM · #20
Originally posted by silverscreen:

Being a European I have to say that I don't get this discussion at all...

What is it about the human body tha scare you Americans this way? I mean - we are only talking about tasteful nude photos nothing more and nothing less. The human body has always been a favourite subject to artists, but for some reason in these "modern times" this has become a major issue...

Those of you who find the nudity here offending and not "Family Safe": Do you also find Michelangelo's statures offending? Or the classic statue "Venus de Milo"? Or Goya's painting of the nude Maja? Or all the other classic nude art?

Or, is it just because we are talking photography here that it's offending?...


Your question of why Americans are scared by the human body is pretty much answered by bjoern...cause we hide it.

I truly believe there should be some level of control over what kids see but I believe even stronger that it is up to the parents (of which I am one) to do this...not the public, it is after all your kid.

I think too many people believe that the best way to protect their children from harmful things is to totally shelter them from it. While sheltering is good, you also have to teach them WHY you are sheltering them and from what. I worked with a person that did not believe in having a TV in their house because of what was on it, so instead of helping their children understand what is right and what is wrong on tv (and in the world)and what they should avoid, they just basically said "you'll be safe cause you don't see it". Just cause it's not seen doesn't mean it doesn't happen. It's the same with drugs, violence, racism, etc, if the kids don't understand why it is bad they are gonna find out the hard way.

My daughter was taught about the good and bad, she knows what music and tv programming is unacceptable in our house and why we feel it is. She respects that and does not challenge it. She has more than once found music or shows that she likes but as soon as she finds the unacceptable area she either stops participating in it or talks to us about it to see what our thoughts are. She knows why we don't allow boys upstairs, what sex is and why pre-marital is not right, the dangers of drugs and alcohol or even just cigarettes, she doesn't question this or try to get around it because it isn't hidden from her.

At first I was going to say that I do think there should be an option for hiding nudity during voting just because there are people who or enviroments where you don't want those shown, but I think if a kid is on here long enough he's gonna find that option in the preferences and turn it off...unless they are taught otherwise and it is reinforced. Parents have to step up and take control of their kids and their actions themselves, protect them from the bad but also TEACH them what the difference between good and bad is...it will go much farther.
12/28/2006 06:06:22 AM · #21
Originally posted by sabphoto:

Originally posted by silverscreen:


Those of you who find the nudity here offending and not "Family Safe": Do you also find Michelangelo's statures offending? Or the classic statue "Venus de Milo"? Or Goya's painting of the nude Maja? Or all the other classic nude art?

Or, is it just because we are talking photography here that it's offending?...


Your question of why Americans are scared by the human body is pretty much answered by bjoern...cause we hide it....


Thank you sabphoto for your answer to my post - or at least to part of it. One question remains though:

Would you consider the classic nudes listed above as "harmful" or "unacceptable" in your house?

If so - why?

...and if not - then why would you consider the nudes here at DPC "unacceptable" for kids?
12/28/2006 06:30:44 AM · #22
I have seen some well done nudes here, where the nuditiy is done artistically. I have seen more that seem almost soft porn. My only fear about nudes is that it would be easy to slip into porn, and while nudity can be part of art it is not my favorite part. (Some don't like cats, some don't like flowers, I don't like most nudes.)

I don't believe looking at a nude body will cause harm. Looking at a nude body ready/begging for sex might.
12/28/2006 06:34:35 AM · #23
Originally posted by lkn4truth:

I noticed that when photos on DPC contain adult content that people often leave comments to remind the photographer that "this content does not belong on DPC" and that it is a "family site."

Do have any examples?

Originally posted by lkn4truth:

People leave forum threads bemoaning their young children who were subjected to some vulgar image and how DPC should put a stop to it. ...

Where? When? Haven't seen any of those in a LONG time.

Hasn't this subject been beat to death already? With the exception of your last podcast this subject has been rather dormant. The forum changes (filters, etc...) have gone a long way towards keeping this site suitable for most, if not all viewers. The new filters were a result of much heated debate/forum "discussions" that took place a few months ago.

Found the "hot" button did you? Have fun (here we go again).
12/28/2006 06:49:09 AM · #24
I don't know how many others this applies to, but I could get fired on-the-spot if a single nude image appeared on my machine at work. And it won't necessarily have to be seen by anyone, they could check my internet cache for it as well. Therefore, I simply cannot vote (during downtime of course!) at work, because I cannot risk it.

I also prefer that my kids don't view any nudity. They're big enough to understand. It's just a preference. Nobody will get fired over it.

But in either case, simply honoring the "Do not display nude photos" preference would solve the problem for each of us. It wouldn't be hard to code, and I don't believe it will skew my voting pattern.

So my vote would be to honor the flag no matter where the image is found.


12/28/2006 06:52:19 AM · #25
Originally posted by dwterry:

I don't know how many others this applies to, but I could get fired on-the-spot if a single nude image appeared on my machine at work. And it won't necessarily have to be seen by anyone, they could check my internet cache for it as well. Therefore, I simply cannot vote (during downtime of course!) at work, because I cannot risk it.

I also prefer that my kids don't view any nudity. They're big enough to understand. It's just a preference. Nobody will get fired over it.

But in either case, simply honoring the "Do not display nude photos" preference would solve the problem for each of us. It wouldn't be hard to code, and I don't believe it will skew my voting pattern.

So my vote would be to honor the flag no matter where the image is found.


DITTO!

Message edited by author 2006-12-28 07:08:03.
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 03/28/2024 08:49:12 PM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Prints! - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2024 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 03/28/2024 08:49:12 PM EDT.