Rachel Cook — Bellazon

s

sdstealth

Posts: 241

#1481

1 hour ago, dman52 said:

I always assume that when someone says "nudity," they mean full frontal nudity. When it's used like this, I hate it.

I agree. Nudity should at a minimum be bare breasts; this isn’t much more skin than would be seen in a thong.

P

Playboyuniverse

Posts: 165

#1482

there is no nudity it's just the ass , we can see this in beach , even with bikini !

d

dman52

Posts: 435

#1483

2 hours ago, Playboyuniverse said:

there is no nudity it's just the ass , we can see this in beach , even with bikini !

Then why is it labeled "nudity"?

Franko

Posts: 296

#1484

3 hours ago, dman52 said:

Then why is it labeled "nudity"?

Forum Rules I imagine. Just because people are supposedly disappointed that it isn't outright graphic nudity doesn't mean it's labeled wrong...

d

dman52

Posts: 435

#1485

2 hours ago, Franko said:

Forum Rules I imagine. Just because people are supposedly disappointed that it isn't outright graphic nudity doesn't mean it's labeled wrong...

There are websites like Mr. Skin and Nudography that have different levels of nudity: see through, T&A, full frontal, or something along those lines.

Just sayin', something like that would be a little more honest.

Franko

Posts: 296

#1486

36 minutes ago, dman52 said:

There are websites like Mr. Skin and Nudography that have different levels of nudity: see through, T&A, full frontal, or something along those lines.

Just sayin', something like that would be a little more honest.

As you said "Different Levels of Nudity" it's all the same thing. The spoiler tag says "Nudity" not "FULL FRONTAL!!" so nothing dishonest about it. Anyway. Just saying. It's a model forum with a diverse audience and level of what people consider appropriate to post publicly so airing on the side of caution makes sense.

Joe'sCat

Posts: 35

#1487

4 hours ago, Franko said:

As you said "Different Levels of Nudity" it's all the same thing. The spoiler tag says "Nudity" not "FULL FRONTAL!!" so nothing dishonest about it. Anyway. Just saying. It's a model forum with a diverse audience and level of what people consider appropriate to post publicly so airing on the side of caution makes sense.

Indeed. Better to ere on the side of caution and have someone waste a click only to see Rachel Cook's butt, than someone be offended that her butt appeared and they weren't warned and required to take a tiny action first. Sad but out litigious reality now-a-days.

It just seems so . . . out of sync with other places in the world, and other topics here and everywhere. So many places don't have such a 😮 attitude towards tasteful, natural nudity. Well, somewhat natural in many cases 🤫. We long ago adopted a rating system for TV, movies Etc., "those magazines" are kept on a different shelf and wrapped in plastic to prevent perusing . . . yet extreme violence is a-okay everywhere - and doesn't even merit an "R" rating unless it's severe enough and usually accompanied by strong language and more.

But, you'll always find someone who pretty much seeks it all out, then complains when they find it. Keep in mind, we need "flammable" stickers on lighters . . .

Good choice by the site as a whole, and the posters in general when if it isn't absolutely certain, might as well opt for the "Adult Content" flag and minor inconvenience to some, than don't and have a website onslaught because they didn't flag it.

d

dman52

Posts: 435

#1488

I didn't say we shouldn't have "Adult Content" flags, though.