Quote:
|
Originally Posted by thenfreedom
Think about what your saying,its a forum,as you say and everyone is entitled to their view,i agree,as you must agree
that everyone is entitled to post and view photos on subjects they have
an interest in.Its about respect and co operation.
|
I (sort of) agree... I'm not suggesting banning it, but if you took your idea to its logical conclusion, we wouldn't have the 4 photo categories on here that we already do! I totally agree that anyone that doesn't like a topic can just skip over it, but the way the forum is set up, it does encourage a "go to newest post then click 'previous' to step through" kind of methodology. It would work better if you could know that there was a better than even chance of hitting a topic that appealed to you, rather than having a distinct possibility of something that didn't.
Let me elaborate. If someone found a picture or pictures of "scat" based ENF's or even blood/period type stuff, they would be able to post with impunity. Alex *may* choose to zap the pictures as soon as he saw them, but maybe not as *some* people may find such pictures highly appealing. I have absolutely no idea why myself, but I accept that there are different strokes for different folks. Now someone surfing through the topics would come across these pictures and may be somewhat repulsed by them as the subject matter is a little, er, 'specialist'. I would argue that if people want to see these things and Alex is happy to host them, then they should be in a separate category where people who are made nauseous by such things don't stand a chance of tripping over them.
I'm not suggesting that upskirts/pantsed/etc... fall into quite such extreme categories, but where does one draw the line? There are distinct precedents for sub-categorising pictures on many other internet sites and I don't see that there is too much extra effort in doing so here. Many sexual preferences follow certain distinct "lines" (yes, I know there are exceptions...) such that you get "breast men", "leg men" & "bum/butt men" (apologies for the term - but you know what I mean!). Not having done an advanced thesis in it, I can't be definite, but I wouldn't be surprised to find that lovers of "pantsed", "upskirt" and "buttcrack" shots are the same people as like toilet shots. (I just don't get it... most of the time the girl is seated on the loo with nothing "sexual" visual at all - so what does it do for you toilet shot lovers? - I'm genuinely curious about what you find erotic in such pictures!). I think it would be extremely valid to separate out those categories I've just mentioned - I'm not suggesting a category for downblouse on its own, rather a category for pantsed/wedgie/buttcrack/upskirt/toilet as most of those focus on the butt.
Furthermore, I think there is a distinct difference between voyeur, nude in public and flashing shots. The "NIP" bunch are just flagrant exhibitionists and don't trigger the same reaction as Voyeur shots and, to a lesser extent, flashing (ie Mardi Gras type things where there is also a hint of ENF - albeit hidden by drunken behaviour.) Igor at the Voyeurweb once had a long and detailed survey/forum discussion on this a couple of years back (just before removing all the genuine voyeur shots).
Anyhow - this probably isn't the place to discuss this, but it would be interesting to hear opinions somewhere...