No Genitals?

  • 1
  • Question
  • Updated 7 years ago
  • Answered
Archived and Closed

This conversation is no longer open for comments or replies and is no longer visible to community members. The community moderator provided the following reason for archiving: Answered

The instructions say no genitals, however there are female genitals all over the place. So you mean no male genitals or do you not consider them genitals if they are shaved? Please clarify. I am not a prude in any way, although I do have an issue with apparent exploitation and sexism.
Photo of Annette Osborn

Annette Osborn

  • 13 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes

Posted 7 years ago

  • 1
Photo of Sherry Andreason

Sherry Andreason

  • 4466 Posts
  • 218 Reply Likes
Annette essentially pornography is not allowed. Nudes are allowed in the Nudes and Boudoir category. Please report any images that you feel violates the rules using the Report button below the Duel images or in the large view of the image the report button is under the lower right corner.
Photo of Annette Osborn

Annette Osborn

  • 13 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Sorry, but you did NOT address my question. I am not arguing the merits of art/porn, I'm stating that the rules say NO GENITALS and there are indeed LOTS of genitals. Change the wording of the rules if this is the case. If females can be shown below the belt then where are all the guy below the belt artistic pics? A female reproductive organ is as much a genital as a guy's junk.
Photo of Annette Osborn

Annette Osborn

  • 13 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
I know all that and have read the rules extensively. The difference between art and pornography is a very blurred line. I am not a prude and have no major problem with pornography in its place, however I do read the rules. It says no genitals. I am addressing that written rule. I saw wall to wall vaginas in the nude section, which is fine, however, that is a genital. I would suggest Pixoto reword its rules and policies as there is a lot of wiggle room as to the definition of art/porn, but genitals are genitals.
Photo of Darrell Raw

Darrell Raw

  • 635 Posts
  • 200 Reply Likes
I went looking for the wall to wall vagina, and well - I was severely disappointed! You should not get peoples hopes up like this and then not deliver. Shame on you! Aside from some hints that vagina does in fact exist, and one or two distant and shadowy teasers, I could find no exotic flower shots. As a student of Nature up Close, this is a huge let down!
Photo of Annette Osborn

Annette Osborn

  • 13 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
lol Darrell, if you look in the nudes, you will see plenty of vajay jay. I'm not sure how far into the flower you are expecting to see, but even if the lawn is mowed I assure you you see the bush :) I am having issue related to Pixoto's explicit rules. It says no genitals. Now there is more kitty in the nude section than you can shake a stick at. I do think it is art and not porn, but that's not the point. I don't see one male, below the waste, nude, art or not. (not that I have much interest in seeing it as I assume that most manscaping is sub standard ). If no genitals are allowed (as states in the Pixoto rules) then no female organs. These ARE genitals, art or no. If female below the belt organs are allowed if done in a tasteful and artistic way (which just seems to be looking bored and completely shaved) that's fine too, just don't say no genitals. A male in the same position as one of these gals should be considered art as well. Just rewrite the darn rules Pixoto to represent what the rules really are, not so that no guys' junk is seen.
Photo of Jason Kiefer

Jason Kiefer, Official Rep

  • 3044 Posts
  • 414 Reply Likes
Annette. I can appreciate your point but I think our rules are fair. For females we draw the line at in-between the legs shots. If her legs are closed - we find that that is OK.

Two more points:
- we do not monitor the category so the image has to be reported by a member before we will delete it
- even before we had this rule female submissions outnumbered male submissions by over 200 to 1. There just aren't that many people taking, and posting, photos of nude men.
Photo of Annette Osborn

Annette Osborn

  • 13 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
I don't care about male vs female submissions. I could care less about nude pics or men or women. All I'm saying is that the wording needs to be changed in the wording of the rules. Very simply, I reported several shots that showed womens' below the waste because the rules state NO GENITALS. I was trying to be a good pixoto community member by reporting something that is clearly against the written rules. There was no mention of labia majora is ok but labia minora isn't. Womens genitals are ok as long as we don't see inside? Where is that written? I never said what is allowed isn't fair nor do I care. I'm pointing out that the WRITTEN RULES need to be changed if you are allowing genitals. I don't care about this subject, except only in that I wasted my time reporting pics that have genitals showing. I never said that any of the pics that I saw that showed female genitals were bad looking, evil, crude, porn, etc. I only pointed out that pics that show genitals are against THE RULES as they are written. Show all the nudity that you want, great, fine, no problem, BUT CHANGE THE WORDING so it doesn't cause members to report something that is allowed. I feel like I'm beating my head against a wall regarding a very simple subject. I don't care about what is shown, but change the rules so it is acceptable in the rules as well, not just where you draw some unwritten line.
Photo of Linda Hayes

Linda Hayes

  • 235 Posts
  • 4 Reply Likes
200-1, huh?...Seems sadly one-sided...Maybe I am taking photos of the wrong subject matter!! :P

Pixoto...She has a VALID point!!
Photo of Darrell Raw

Darrell Raw

  • 635 Posts
  • 200 Reply Likes
Technically female genitalia is internal, so unless it's an exotic flower shot it's not really genital. Male genitalia is external and in your face, so I suspect few photographers will risk it. But I agree, the wording should be changed to no pornography rather than no genitals.
Photo of Annette Osborn

Annette Osborn

  • 13 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
hehe sorry Darrell but you're addressing my profession. (Nurse Practitioner not genital expert). The Labia majora, which is the outside of the vagina is as much a part of the female genitals as the foreskin is of the male. They comprise the same genetic skin, which differentiates during development in the womb. All of the reproductive organs are NOT internal, in male or female. So the pics of the shaved labia majoras IS genital shots. Love it, no problem, but pixoto needs to change the wording of the rules.
Photo of Jason Kiefer

Jason Kiefer, Official Rep

  • 3044 Posts
  • 414 Reply Likes
Any suggestions on wording we can use?
Photo of Annette Osborn

Annette Osborn

  • 13 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Sure. It's important to not confuse anatomy to morality. Just saying "no genitals" is addressing anatomy and not intent of the picture. Therefore using "no genitals" as a guideline is vilifying a body part when Pixoto should be monitoring intent of a photo. Honestly, making a body part "taboo" is very American (and yes I am American). Male or female genitals are often on tv and media in Europe with no protest as the purpose of these exposures is not pornography. Pornography is the explicit portrayal of sexual subject matter for the purpose of sexual gratification. No nudity as it stands is pornographic. It becomes pornography when those parts are used and exploited for the sole purpose of pornography.

I took the liberty of using the first 2 sentences from Pixoto rules. After that is addressing the art of nude photography instead of a carte blanche statement of "no genitals", which is not being followed as a rule anyway. BTW, I like nude art, I'm not against porn either. I just don't like seeing written rules broken day in and out and not addressed or changed. It causes confusion and frustration in the community. Anyway, here it is. I added the part about age because Pixoto can get in major trouble if they don't have proof every time (editorial use or not) that a nude subject is of age.

"Photos of that contain nudity or are provocative in nature should placed here. Nudity is NOT allowed in any other category. Any nude content that is deemed by the community to be pornographic, lewd, or exploitive will be reviewed and may be removed. ABSOLUTELY, no nude shots may be posted without a model contract showing the subject is over 18."
Photo of Darrell Raw

Darrell Raw

  • 635 Posts
  • 200 Reply Likes
Annette, medically the tissue may be the same but it's not perceived the same way. Full frontal female nudity is not viewed as pornographic in general, whereas opened vagina is.

Jason, how about "Nudes & Boudoir – Photos that contain nudity or are provocative in nature should placed here. Nudity is NOT allowed in any other category. Exposed genitals are permitted with the proviso they can not be deemed pornographic (open vagina or erect penis would be considered pornographic for example). Explicit sexual acts are forbidden. Models must be at least 18 years of age and you must be able to prove this if requested."

That covers almost any liability you may encounter, although you may wish to restrict certain phrases from tags, such as "teenager" "child" (depends what you're most concerned with legally?).
Photo of Darrell Raw

Darrell Raw

  • 635 Posts
  • 200 Reply Likes
Looks like we're on the same page here Annette :p
Photo of Annette Osborn

Annette Osborn

  • 13 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
hehe looks like we both thought on VERY similar lines. Wow that's creepy that we both thought of the age thing as well. My only caveat is not to try to describe too particularly types of body parts allowed. You mentioned "perception" of what a porno body part. Since we are dealing with so many cultures and social mores, and perception being very different for each person, not being too specific is required in a world wide community situation. Talking about an "open vag jay jay" is a personal (and widely accepted) indicator if someone is being explicit or pornographic, but many ppl think that any full frontal nudity of a man is porn, no matter what the environment. Other cultures have no problem seeing full frontal of men or women as long as no hair is showing. An erect phallus, ya that's probably an automatic no no as it indicates that the guy is aroused (or overdosing on viagara), but I'm not sure the the "open" thing. I guess it has to be presented which would certainly make me think of more sex than nude art. That's one of those grey areas I guess. (no wait, it's pink :)

As far as the nude age limit. New internet exploitation laws state that a company that shows nudes are required to have record that the models used are not under age. it's not enough to ask for it after the fact. I don't know about web access to some other countries, but in North American web, companies have to have proof since they are provding the internet storage space for the pics.

This conversation is no longer open for comments or replies.