Offensive or Not - Butch Cock Images? -Your thoughts here [Archive]

BuzzBoi

01-18-2006, 12:17 PM

“Erotic poses are welcomed and appreciated, but please refrain from posting any hardcore nudity in your profile or in our gallery. Breasts and suggestive poses are acceptable but hardcore shots of genitalia, Butch cock, open buttocks, or sex acts are not. We do not pay to use age verification services, and we are not interested in hosting a porn site. Our hosting company sets these rules and defines what is and isn't allowed.”

-from the Gallery Intro page

I posted a gallery pic entitled ‘goodies basket’ that was pulled by the Webmaster. I was wearing a black jockstrap & soft packing, hands on my hips. The only ‘flesh’ exposed, prosthetic or otherwise, was my legs. The pic frankly looks like a jockstrap advertisement.

Considering I was only pictured with a flaccid bulge, I don’t necessarily find that falling under the classification of ‘hardcore’ or ‘pornographic’. Heck, I’ve seen bigger packages in the jockey section of the Sears & Roebuck catalogue. Hundreds of clothing & sports retailers sell underwear on the net with pics identical to mine (with the exception that bio men are the models) and it’s not considered lewd. However, I have seen gallery shots of erect cock under clothing that even I would deem as rather, eh hem, of questionable taste and in violation of TOS. IMO there is a huge difference in the level of provocativeness between erect and flaccid (lol, no pun intended). To view the pic in question, ON ANOTHER SERVER SITE, check the homepage link in my profile.

On the B-F site, I can view all the femme (& sometimes butch) T&A galore.… lingerie, bras, cleavage, breasts, nipples, arses, oh-so-suggestive poses, partial nudes, etc. and that’s all allowed. Why is there bias against butch crotch shots? Nothing was exposed in my pic. For all anyone knew, I could have been packing a lunch in my jock. Granted, it wasn’t a sandwich in there, but still…can the *suggestiveness*, the very *idea* of what *might be* be enough to consider a picture unacceptable? We can write erotica (where expletives abound in posts), write poems & odes to butch cock, we can discuss butch cocks & packing, we can even *define it* in the ‘About’ (http://www.butch-femme.com/faq)section, under ‘Gender Terms’ (http://www.butch-femme.com/Faq/terms.htm), but we’re not allowed to *see* it?? What is it about an unexposed, lax piece of latex under clothing that is so offensive or threatening? I hardly find it pornographic, or in violation of TOS.

We’re talking butch cock here. Not het cock. And we’re talking about butches and femmes and our dynamics. Even in our little microcosm, we are a community as diverse & complex as the rest of the world. Class, gender, identity, and a plethora of other social characteristics define us, but yet we find common ground here in our safe space. We tout and trumpet our proud femininities and masculinities. IMO, butch cock is about as basic an instrument as owning a snappy suit or a good tool belt.

When I visit the galleries, I see thumbnails of pics that I don’t necessarily want to see. I’m a bit squeamish around play piercing needles or outright meat hooks, blood, top surgery drainage, brandings, etc., but I would *never ever* suggest that those pictures should be censored in any way, shape or form. And it’s as simple as this….I don’t click on them. The end. As popular as the pic might be, I choose not to look.

But people on this site wanted to view my pic. In the mere 18 hrs it was posted, it had more than 200 hits, all positive comments, & was by far the most popular pic of the day. Maybe I’m missing something here. Maybe the posting terms need further clarification to say ‘simulated, unexposed, or otherwise’. Since no butch cock was exposed in my pic, I figured it was allowed. Nonetheless, the removal of my particular pic smacks of butch bias and pure censorship to me.

I’m not starting this thread out of hostility or anger, but coming from a place of wanting honest dialogue & opinions. I certainly understand that Daddy Rhon & Miz Chris have site host guidelines to follow, but who draws that line between what is considered pornographic and erotic? Or are pics simply pulled to appease the *complaints* from a few uptight tea drinking members who simply have ‘body issues’ and their fingers poised on the ‘report photo’ button? The absolute last thing I want is any invocation of ‘gallery police’ censors because I’m a huge believer in 1st Amendment rights, regardless of whether or not I agree with something. That’s the beauty of America. It’s fairly easy to be your own self-censor without ruining it for everyone else.

The butch/femme ‘goodies pic’ exchange has been harmless fun & entertaining to say the least. So when did the old adage of “what’s good for the goose is good for the gander” stop? Or was I silly to think that a non-flagrant bulge in a jock might just fall into the category of butch ‘erotic poses’? No one ever said life is fair and I get that, but do you think butches get the short end of the stick <<cough>> when it comes to erotic gallery pics versus what the femmes are allowed to post? Why can’t we artistically show the true *L’essence du Butch*? Would love to hear opinions from both butches & femmes on this.

“Any test that turns on what is offensive to the community's standards is too loose, too capricious, too destructive of freedom of expression to be squared with the First Amendment. Under that test, juries can censor, suppress, and punish what they don't like, provided the matter relates to "sexual impurity" or has a tendency "to excite lustful thoughts." This is community censorship in one of its worst forms.”
-William Orville Douglas, Associate Justice, United States Supreme Court

Sthrnnyer

01-18-2006, 12:33 PM

Wow... that pic was pulled? I remember seeing it in the gallery, but thought it looked very much how you said - like an underwear ad. I have seen much more exposure in the galleries before and am shocked to hear that your pic was pulled. Something is indeed fishy there. I agree with you... there are some things I prefer not to see and don't click (then there are those pics I don't want to see, but click just to appease the voyeur in me), but I would never police it that way and censor it. If I don't like it it is my choice and my choice alone in the end not to look.

justaboi*

01-18-2006, 12:44 PM

Buzz

it was a great pic btw
and i agree with all your comments. There are some really nasty pics in the gallery here and i dont clearly understand why yours was deleted.
keep your head up dude, life is too short to sweat the small stuff

TeaPartyTart

01-18-2006, 12:44 PM

Hey I drink TEA! :@

But I do agree your pic, the one in question, does not fall under any 'violation', in my opinion.

I do think femme pics are treated differently. Heck I've even had a few pics that were pretty 'boobylicious' but the only one who took them down was me.

I respect the fact we are not an age verification site and keeping pics within a respectable guidelines is a necessary mission. It also means it is highly subjective act. I am curious why your pic was pulled and why others remain posted (no need to further stir the pot with posting links but you know the pics I'm talking about).

I see lots of pics that aren't appealing to me for one reason or another. I just move on.

A tisket, a tasket, I don't see nothin' wrong with your basket;-)

MNkitten

01-18-2006, 12:52 PM

Partly it's due to US laws on anything the current US government deems pornographic: there's now a requirement that site owners be able to produce large amounts of age documentation for anyone appearing in "pornographic" photos/videos. And since there's no system on this site for age verification before posting photos (plus for porn, you have to provide more documentation than just simply clicking a "Yes, I am 18" button; you'd have to send the site owners copies of your driver's license, birth certificate, and/or other legal documentation.)

DallasLesbian

01-18-2006, 12:55 PM

Words

01-18-2006, 12:58 PM

[QUOTE=BuzzBoi] Why can’t we artistically show the true *L’essence du Butch*? Would love to hear opinions from both butches & femmes on this.

And what would *L'essence du (de?) Femme* be exactly? I can understand your frustration, but don't you think it's going just a wee bit far to reduce the essence of a butch to what hy has between hys legs?

Words

Bo Dacious

01-18-2006, 12:59 PM

I thought the pic was fine. I had a pic of myself in a pair of briefs with my package clearly showing and that was never removed from the gallery.

And there's one in someone's gallery where he's in briefs and holding his cock and that one is still up, I think.

Maybe someone reported yours, bro. :(

rainbowsoul

01-18-2006, 01:04 PM

there is no age limit specified on sale adds found in all local sunday newspapers........
matter of fact children under 18 are probably the majority paper "handlers"
inserting adds and such........on a weekly basis
in these sale adds.....there are pictures of......
woman in bras and panties.......and men in boxers, boxer briefs. briefs.......
what about the BARE baby butts in diaper adds?
does the fact that buzzboi is NOT a boi male make it more a pornography issue?
i can see no other obvious reason it should......
my opinion.......ty for reading
(f) rainy

BuzzBoi

01-18-2006, 01:07 PM

words - I think it's an important part of what makes butches, butches if they're comfortable with that and I think a pic can be erotic without being considered pornographic.

MNkitten - so retailers selling jocks on the net will have to require age verification now?

Ms. Tart - LOL, I said uptight tea drinkers...the way too over caffeinated ones!;)

justaboi* - if no one sweated the little things, there would be no Annie Leibovitz's, no Robert Maplethorpe's, no Herb Ritts.....

dirty_gidget

01-18-2006, 01:09 PM

Well put *clapping*, but maybe don't you think that M A Y B E it was deleted by mistake? Did you get any kind of notice telling you that they were going to remove your picture? Because in my search of "sexual impurity’s" over butch pictures I have seen some with huge HUGE cock crotch pictures *cleaning drool from chin* and they are still up... I mean the pictures NO PUN intended. lol

I have nothing against femme pic's BUT I'm here to see sexy, HOT.... and lust over butch pictures. So I would hope that they would not censor them, because then where would I to see and lust over pictures like yours *evil wink *.

when it comes to erotic gallery pics versus what the femmes are allowed to post? Why can’t we artistically show the true *L’essence du Butch*? Would love to hear opinions from both butches & femmes on this.[/color]

“Any test that turns on what is offensive to the community's standards is too loose, too capricious, too destructive of freedom of expression to be squared with the First Amendment. Under that test, juries can censor, suppress, and punish what they don't like, provided the matter relates to "sexual impurity" or has a tendency "to excite lustful thoughts." This is community censorship in one of its worst forms.”
-William Orville Douglas, Associate Justice, United States Supreme Court[/QUOTE]

BuzzBoi

01-18-2006, 01:12 PM

d_g, yep, I got an email notification from the B-F Webmasters that it had been removed.....

scubadyke

01-18-2006, 01:13 PM

Buzz...not sure why you pic was singled out!? It was actually sexy AND Tasteful. I agree with you that there seems to be a standard applied to you that is not being applied to others on the site.

It is fully within the rights of others to complain about a persons gallery or their pictures, however, each photo, despite complaints, should be evaluated fairly amongst other photos posted...e.g...in your case other butch cock photos. I think if this had been done, yours would not have been the only one pulled or not pulled at all.

I also am not into the meat hooks and needles but I also understand that we have a diverse crowd here. Appreciation for all mutually consenting activities, gender identification, lifestyles and art must be respected.

However, Rhon and Chris have an obligation to fulfill with their ISP and this must also be respected. Pictures posted for the implicite purpose of promoting pornography (your own or someone elses) should be removed. There is a BIG difference between EROTICA and PORNOGRAPHY; both of which I like BTW ;) AND perception is a individual thing. What one person may consider pornographic others may not.

I, for one, donate my money to B-F simply because it is a community of diverse people with diverse interests. I love the beauty of the butch-femme people here and their lifestyles; erotic pictures included.

For Rhon and Chris, maybe a small blurb on what the ISP considers pornographic is required. Complaintants and Pic Posters then have a resource in determining whether or not a picture is pornographic. Otherwise, I fear the only other solution is to have each pic evaluated by some mediater (name me one person who can be objective enough for a job of this type especially at this site), prior to posting. This is truly censorship and should be avoided at ALL costs.

My final word on this topic...if you don't like the picture...don't look at!! If a pic is TRULY offensive, then let the numbers speak for themselves (if more than 10 complaints are submitted then pull the pic.) The Gallery is filled with a plethera of pictures. No doubt there is something for everyone so seek out those folks and add them to your favorites!

Let's not turn this into a who you know or squeaky wheel site. I agree with Buzz 100%, let's not spend time discriminating when we could spend time appreciating and having fun!!

Scoobs :(

NlightNed_butch

01-18-2006, 01:15 PM

I had a "butch goodies" pic pulled once. Mine was posted just like yours... everything covered, nothing exposed except my leg skin. It didn't last as long as yours, I don't think, but i was highly upset that others were posting theirs and mine got the axe. And I'm STILL seeing butch cock in the galleries that aren't being pulled.

I'm thinking that there were some who felt offended and reported it, so they appeased them and jacked my pic. Otherwise, if there are no complaints, then the light is A-OK and green.

I don't know. Can't figure it out either, but Rhon & Miz Chris have every right to do as they please with their site and there's nothing we can say or do. Out of respect, I've not posted any further butch-tease-cock pics, and for fear of getting them yanked.

I say, be glad that we have this space for free, and if you want to post naughty pics, then do so somewhere else.

So ladies.. LOL, if ya wanna see some nice butch-cock, PM me. (6)

dirty_gidget

01-18-2006, 01:17 PM

Then I'm sorry, I'm sorry that BF is going to censor something WE all want in our lifes.....and that is freedom to BE who we are and want to be.

*bowing head and giving all my respect to BuzzBoi*

d_g, yep, I got an email notification from the B-F Webmasters that it had been removed.....

BuzzBoi

01-18-2006, 01:30 PM

Scoob - thanks for your insightful words, but yer makin' me a little nervous there bro, thinkin' my pic was sexy! LOL;)

Ned - I don't want to incite a riot or a gallery pic witch hunt. Just the opposite. What's there is there. But I do think butches get gypped on what they can post compared to femmes, artisically speaking, of course.

BuzzBoi

01-18-2006, 02:10 PM

d_g - to fully answer your question about the email notice, of all the reasons listed for pic removals, the only one I can assume applied to mine is this:

"-Images that did not conform to our published site contribution
and usage guidelines such as offensive images"

I dunno, I didn't think the pic was necessarily offensive.

Jens44

01-18-2006, 02:14 PM

Hey, yanno... I had my right breast up as an avatar very briefly on a dare... sadly nobody seemed to notice, but I digress... I know of another breast avatar too. Wonder why that's OK, but covered cock isn't... hmmmm... Wouldn't covered cock be considered a "suggestive pose?"

Jen

blackboot

01-18-2006, 02:16 PM

celebrating my butch cock in the galleries. ;)

femmeextreme

01-18-2006, 02:28 PM

[QUOTE=dirty_gidget]Well put *clapping*, but maybe don't you think that M A Y B E it was deleted by mistake? Did you get any kind of notice telling you that they were going to remove your picture? Because in my search of "sexual impurity’s" over butch pictures I have seen some with huge HUGE cock crotch pictures *cleaning drool from chin* and they are still up... I mean the pictures NO PUN intended. lol

Dayum, I missed the pic in question, my very own citybluebutch has a similar pic in her gallery, and that was not pulled ( no pun intended either;) )

dirty_gidget

01-18-2006, 02:33 PM

it was not at all, *sigh* anyway there are other pictures in here that are....well lets just say THEY ROCK as much as yours do and did. I hope that DaddyRhon...knows that NOT all pictures are offensive to everyone and if this is going to become a huge issue hy should maybe designate a separate area where you can see certain kind of pictures.

This is a tuff issue really......because then that would cause separating and nobody wants that. BuzzBoi.....*blushing* I enjoy your pictures.... this FEMME really enjoys your pictures a lot....SO thank you for posting them.
*laying it on thick so maybe BuzzBoi can send me one just for ME* lol

d_g - to fully answer your question about the email notice, of all the reasons listed for pic removals, the only one I can assume applied to mine is this:

"-Images that did not conform to our published site contribution
and usage guidelines such as offensive images"

I dunno, I didn't think the pic was necessarily offensive.

BuzzBoi

01-18-2006, 02:42 PM

...yeah, but no. Sometimes what happens in Vegas, should just stay in Vegas....
(*)

Keeping on track here - the differences between what's deemed pornographic and erotic?
Anyone?

Thinker

01-18-2006, 02:48 PM

I say, be glad that we have this space for free, and if you want to post naughty pics, then do so somewhere else.

And there's your bottom line.

Thinker...*not uptight...and not a tea drinker...just a careful battle-picker* ;)

Thinker

01-18-2006, 02:55 PM

I thought I'd go ahead and add...

If we were paying members of this site then I could get behind folks questioning and challenging certain decisions/changes/etc... But Rhon has always asked us to view this site as his living room and to consider ourselves guests there. He's asked us to conduct ourselves here as we would as guests in his home.

If he lays down an objection to what occurs in his home and asks someone to stop/leave/change/etc..., you talk to *him* about it. You don't rally his guests as to how unfair it is or ask them to start shooting their objections at him.

I'm not intending to ride you or anything, buzz........really. I've just got a real soft spot for what Rhon and Chris do here.....what they've done for years....at no cost to members. There are few things that happen here that seem more important *to me* than that.

That's all I'm tryin' to say...

Thinker

BuzzBoi

01-18-2006, 03:28 PM

msdemeanor

01-18-2006, 03:31 PM

Rhon and Chris don't have time to read every thread, so they may not see your question. If you want to know why they removed it, contact them and ask.

Annie

01-18-2006, 04:04 PM

Obviously I am in the minority in this thread.

Personally, I don't like it.

I've never quite gotten the point about taking pics of yourself in your undies with your dick in your pants.

It sure doesn't necessarily mean ANYTHING butch to me, cos dicks/cocks/strapons/penises are not synonymous with butch for me - I could just as easily put on my femme panties and take a pic of *me* strapping. Not that I would, cos as I already said - I don't like pics of it (me strapping or anyone else for that matter), I don't find it sexy, I think it's gross.

Of course, in real time, real life, real sex - well that's a different story...

Now that I think of it - I wonder if pics of FEMMES strapping it on under the panties would be as popular as apparently are the butch cock pics. Or as acceptable to those who seem to love the butch cock pics.

Have a nice day. :)

honeybarbara

01-18-2006, 04:07 PM

Rhon and Chris don't have time to read every thread, so they may not see your question. If you want to know why they removed it, contact them and ask.

best to ask the web masters why than to ponder, guesstulate, run down the wrong road...

And I'm STILL seeing butch cock in the galleries that aren't being pulled

because no one has reported them yet. Rhon and Chris count on the community to tell them when a picture passes the mark of what their ISP providers tell them is allowable.

ISP providers say boobies is okay and not porn (eyeball rolling contest. If it wasn't how come I can't walk around with my shirt off, not wearing a bra, all over north america?) dingle dangles is a no no. anyone want this place to get shut down over it?

you want to show off yer big ol rod? then make a personal website and put it in a section saying "adult content" and show off all the big ol butch cock you want. wear em all at the same time! Put a link to your personal page on your profile.

If you have a problem with something that's been done, contact the webmaster/webmistress and ASK

I wonder if pics of FEMMES strapping it on under the panties would be as popular as apparently are the butch cock pics. Or as acceptable to those who seem to love the butch cock pics.

well I'm sure people would run screaming from the monster I own. other femmes would faint (leaving them vunerable) and butches would squeal (and possibly bend over)...

but I'm afraid my brachiosaur-sized dick will not be photographed on this site.
1) it breaks the rules
2) it would cause far too much jelousy...

BuzzBoi

01-18-2006, 04:11 PM

Peach

01-18-2006, 04:12 PM

Rhon and Chris don't have time to read every thread, so they may not see your question. If you want to know why they removed it, contact them and ask.

Nor do they have time to view every picture that goes up. Many of the butch cocks shots that were taken down, were probably reported, some werent, and thus are still up.
They have rules about what can and cannot go up, and it SAYS,

"Breasts and suggestive poses are acceptable but hardcore shots of genitalia, Butch cock, open buttocks, or sex acts are not. We do not pay to use age verification services, and we are not interested in hosting a porn site. Our hosting company sets these rules and defines what is and isn't allowed.”

Instead of taking it up to Rhon and Chris, perhaps take it up with the hosting company, as it is THEIR rules, And Rhon and Chris are tyring to abide by them. some shots were missed, some werent, try to stay up on stuff, but busy lives do prevail sometimes. If you have questions about whether a pic can be posted, send them a question and ask, then you dont have to worry about it being removed.

Again, the HOSTING COMPANY sets rules about the pics.

DrBombay

01-18-2006, 04:24 PM

[QUOTE=Annie]Obviously I am in the minority in this thread.QUOTE]

Then I am in the minority with you, Annie; finally able to exhale-- Thanks for writing what I was thinking.

OBB Orginal BadBoi

01-18-2006, 04:38 PM

I remember getting a good laugh when my cock shot was pulled--being that it was tucked under my BVDS & goodness knows I have more then a few 1/2 naked T&A butch goodies flesh pics posted up.

However I totally understand that the b-f.com had it's agreement with it's web server & if that means no butch cock on the site then soo be it. There are always ways to work with the guidelines which I did self censoring it when I reposted it adding that if anyone wants a copy of the orginal they could contact me. Hell the webmasters pulling it actaully worked in my favor*

It's not just b-f.com that has those guidelines infact you will find most photo host won't allow butch cock or any cock in your galleries-unless you pay & you have viewers sign in with a password in most cases.

I suggest you keep that in consideration as yeah it does suck & it's baised that porn for masculinity is so limiting & kept so strict like any hit of dick is rated X while a female nudity is so vast you almost have to see her lunch for it to be considered pornographic. However it's not b-f.com rules that make it that way & you can't take it personal like they have a problem with it or butch cock as we all know they are fully supportive of this community beyound even thier own means & that has to be credited & mean something to you as a butch on b-f.com.

Annie

01-18-2006, 04:40 PM

It's not so much about *my* picture and it being taken down as it was hopefully getting a genuine conversation started about the differences in femme erotica & butch erotica and the differences between that and pornography....

Perhaps you could put some more thought into making your INTENT clear when beginning a thread - cos to me Offensive or Not - Butch Cock? Censorship & Bias? -Your thoughts here definitely sounds like a complaint about YOUR cock pic being pulled. Pardon the pun. ;)

Edited to add:

Can you give us some kind of definition of where you see the differences between what you call "femme erotica" and "butch erotica", cos I am assuming you are talking about the galleries here, and I haven't personally seen any threads recently that have been what I would called the femme version of "butch cock", which would most likely be a very closeup shot of a crotch shot of a femme.

I don't see pictures of women in revealing clothing with breasts exposed to be on the same level as butch (or femme) cock pictures, but I would say that for me, the pics of a femme crotch shot (between the open legs with perhaps a piece of fabric - like panties) covering her vulva, especially if you can see the general bulge/outline of her vulva would be a fair comparison.

Would you mind offering some clarification of whre you see the differences between the two different types of "erotica" you referenced earlier? That way, some of the discussion you have said you wish to have might begin.

Thanks.

Thinker

01-18-2006, 04:41 PM

I hear what you say Thinker, my respect to you, but you quoted the "naughty" post. You say potato, I say potahtoe.... I've been told the pic was tasteful, fine, etc.

It's kinda hard not to notice all the other supposed 'naughty' pics when the one deleted is yours. Anyhow, I don't consider my picture 'naughty'. Maybe you do?

*snip*

...man, they must have the biggest livingroom ever! ;)

...appreciate the response, Buzz! (y)

Nah...I selected that part of NlightNed's quote because of the comment about this space being free...not so much about the possible insinuation that yours was a "naughty" pic. Although, I do agree that folks should just set up their own sites for pics like that.

Like Annie, I've never really understood the need or inclination to post such pics.....and for (at least) one of the same reasons she gave: because it really isn't specific/unique to butches--particularly at a big ol' queer site like this. ;)

Quite honestly, I'm not committed to one side or the other on the issue of porn vs. erotica; it's not anything I feel passionate about. I do, however, feel passionate about this site and the work Rhon and Chris do for this community. That was really *my* purpose in speaking up.

No harm, no foul, Buzz........take it easy!

Thinker

P.S. When I think about it, they really *do* have the biggest living room ever!

msdemeanor

01-18-2006, 04:44 PM

Obviously I am in the minority in this thread.

Personally, I don't like it.

I've never quite gotten the point about taking pics of yourself in your undies with your dick in your pants.
*Raising hand* Another member of the minority.

Peach - Thank you for explaining the source of the posting rule. I wasn't suggesting "taking it up" with anyone, as in complaining, just that if they wanted to know "why", they could ask the people who made the decision. Your response answered the question :)

fancyfreckle

01-18-2006, 04:58 PM

Heya Buzz -

My own disclaimer is no real opinion or interest in this topic. However, just to contradict myself I went searching on philosophical literature and articles relating to cultural viewpoints and studies of erotica versus pornography.

This broadcast and information expanded my thoughts on the topic...

http://www.philosophytalk.org/pastShows/eroticpornographic.htm

As did this...

http://www.zetetics.com/mac/freeinqu.htm

and I'm still reading this...

http://www.susiebright.com/stories/nbtg_intro.html

Learning more everyday...thanks b/f community and friends for opening my mind and propelling me to explore and learn.

Woodie69

01-18-2006, 05:05 PM

I think that this being a FREE and PUBLIC website, and with folks coming on this site and posting pics, threads, etc. on other websites, and God knows where else (and for whatever desire they have)...I think using common sense would come into play. Personally, I am offended when someone's avatar is a picture of a woman holding her hips and looking off in the distance (with no shirt or bra on). So I can understand how someone straping, packing, etc. can be offensive to someone as well. And not paying for age verification...another issue all together.

I also have had only two people in my ENTIRE life (all 42+ years) make rude, crude, and nasty remarks and comments to me about my packing (and it so happens that they are members of this site as well). They told me that I grabbed myself in front of them. I explained that I was wearing a jock strap, and that being heavy, sometimes the strap would readjust itself on it's own, and I tried to correct the problem descreetly. But then again, these are two individuals who find something wrong with just about everything. Sheesh.

Daddy Rhon

01-18-2006, 05:52 PM

Buzz asks "who draws that line between what is considered pornographic and erotic?"

Here? I do. I don't single anyone out, Buzz, but since you asked...

If someone makes me aware of a photo that needs to be deleted because it goes against the rules, I delete it. I am sure there are some pics in the galleries that shouldn't be there, but I am not going to scroll through 46,000 photos.

There are many reasons I can't have anyone's genitalia on my web site, silicone or not, neither soft nor supersized. The guidelines for the galleries have always been posted and have never changed, but I will again list the reasons why we cannot host crotch shots.

1) We don't use age verification services because I am not going to pay for it. I'm already paying HEAVILY out of pocket for the $1200 a month service fees.

2) As required by law, I would also need a copy of your birth certificate, driver’s license, and address. In my opinion, that violates your privacy and it's nothing something I am interested in handling anyway since this is not a money-churning porn site. I would also need an office with regular hours so that this documentation could be available if the FBI needed access. I don't make this shit up -- this a law that was passed just recently and several community sites have already been shut down. What do you think some FBI guy in a tie is going to understand about "butch cock" or "Daddy/Grrl" stuff?

3) Crotch shots attract pervs, stupid boys, and other trolling assholes that I have to deal with on my end, and other members have to deal with dumbshits who wander in as well.

4) Believe it or not, there *are* some folks who don't want to see your dick. People report the picture because it violates the TOS, and I have to take my time to hunt down and delete your photo... which clearly should not have been posted in the first place.

5) Folks visit this site at work, or at home in front of children or family members. Do you think folks should then refrain from using the site in front of others or at work, or do you think you should maybe not post your crotch? It's a *community* site.

6) The company that hosts our servers doesn't allow it. Period.

7) When you try to challenge the TOS, which is well thought out and a result of me having done this for nearly 10 years, I have to come here and address your rally call and remind you that your first amendment rights do not extend across the planet to all inches of the WWW. Some people here aren't even American, and this is a privately owned web site on a private server.

I don't have anything against cocks on the internet, or even hardcore stuff. I don't have a problem if you make a free web page full of your cock/crotch shots and post the link in your profile for the ladies.

Simply put, you cannot post those kinds of photos of yourself HERE due to the very sensible reasons listed above.

That should answer most of the questions you raised. I don't know you, Buzz, but I am sure you are a good guy. Hope you understand my position and realize it is nothing personal against you. Not at all.

BuzzBoi

01-18-2006, 06:02 PM

For those interested, I just sent this to Daddy Rhon & Miz Chris:

Dear Daddy Rhon and Miz Chris,

Please remove my thread entitled Offensive or Not - Butch Cock? Censorship & Bias? -Your thoughts here at your earliest convenience.

It was never meant as a personal attack on anyone, but I made the mistake of thinking a conversation would develop & might provoke some stimulating thoughts regarding erotica, pornography, identity differences and censorship in general.

Even though it was clearly stated in my initial post that “I certainly understand that Daddy Rhon & Miz Chris have site host guidelines to follow”, I had no intention of this response & frankly this thread has veered right off the shoulder into the ditch. I had no idea that people couldn’t get past the defensiveness & instead talk about identities, not an individual picture. In my opinion, due to the feathers I’ve unfortunately ruffled, it doesn’t look like it’s gonna happen now either.

With heartfelt apologies,

BuzzBoi

Daddy Rhon

01-18-2006, 06:51 PM

Hi Buzz

I do think the conversation is a valid one. With the clarification and justification addressed, now maybe we are open to move beyond basic/logical "why" questions regarding THIS particular site and actually join in on a interesting discussion around pornography vs. erotica.

If you meant to apologize to me, Buzz, no need. I didn't feel like your questions were meant as a "personal attack" on me at all. This question about Butch cock in the galleries has come up several times before... buried somewhere in the dusty archives... and I always give the same reply. As I said, listing the TOS clarification was not meant to be an attack on you either. It applies to everyone, and I was glad to offer the explanation again as it might answer similar questions others might have.

As far as deleting a thread that has taken a wrong turn… I avoid deleting entire threads unless it is dire to do so. Deleting a whole thread with this many replies deletes everyone’s posts as well, and that throws off everyone’s post count which can really screw up the database tables. However, I can change the title of the thread if you wanted to go in a different direction and others agree that it should be changed.

One last thing, Buzz… you said: “The removal of my particular pic smacks of butch bias and pure censorship to me.”

I will be honest here and say it does kinda irk me when people play the “censorship” card because it doesn’t make any sense. I have been devoted to providing a safe and welcoming space for Butches and Femmes to talk for a looooong while, so I have learned to shake it off. Sometimes it does feel rather pointed since Miz Chris and I do this alone. People just have to trust that I have everyone’s best interests in heart. Whether folks trust my intentions or not, it still doesn’t change the fact that I try to do the best I can for the right reasons. Get me? ;)

Let's get back to the discussion. Enjoy.

honeybarbara

01-18-2006, 07:00 PM

It was never meant as a personal attack on anyone, but I made the mistake of thinking a conversation would develop & might provoke some stimulating thoughts regarding erotica, pornography, identity differences and censorship in general.

that's ok. it was just framed wrongly. perhaps you should have talked about it *in general* rather than you cock specificly on this site and why others weren't removed? If you had framed as such:

why is porn "heavier" if it's a male or masculine conceived (and I say conceived cause my cock ain't male or masculine) so that internet providers will allow women to show their bodies but not men?

here, in the "sun," a newspaper, they have a page three girl every day. with her tits out and wearing a thong. at least one cheek showing. they are called "glamour shots," not porn.

so it's an interesting question.

femmegirrl

01-18-2006, 07:32 PM

femmegirrl <<< likes butchcock shots but like boobies better! *winks*

daddi has filled all my need for butchcock shots anyway, off the site :)

Sthrnnyer

01-18-2006, 07:54 PM

Wow, this thread has exploded a bit... uhm... too many puns recently, sorry.
I can see how the host rules that Rhon and Chris have to abide by works and I appreciate all they do. I guess I can equate the whole pics thing with a rated R movie... you will NEVER see a cock on a rated R film, but you will certainly find breasts and sometimes even frontal nudity of women in a R film. I guess society as a whole is still uptight and repressed about male or male identified parts... it suggests sex more so than a naked female body... good god, what would Michalangelo do with the statue of David? *gasp!* ;)

Daddy Rhon

01-18-2006, 08:05 PM

Heart

01-18-2006, 08:10 PM

The thread did get me wondering about male vs. female images when it comes to what is considered pornographic/erotic...

It seems that what is between our legs is the line that cannot be crossed, but everything else - meaning primarily women's tits and asses - is viewable w/o being considered pornographic.

Hmmmm...

I love me some butch tits and ass. ;)

Heart

spiritualrose29

01-18-2006, 08:17 PM

Yeh, I think it's the right-winger ol' guys who decide breasts can sliiiide right under scrutiny. Funny, in the time of Michelangelo, men were often the only art models (with breasts slapped on) because it was big taboo for women to be seen NEKKID. In our times, breasts sell everything from cars to toothpaste.

Heh, a nice bit o' cleavage can sell me just about anything. ;)

In this time of our country, with a whole slew of folks shutting down their sight because of the Indencency Act of 2004, I would rather Daddy Rhon and Mz. Chris weigh on the side of caution, than risk a hefty fine or investigation into this community.

If you don't think it can apply to you, or your site, don't delude yourself. It can, and it has. Several BDSM sites have voluntarily removed themselves due to forceable removal and legal action against other sites. If you think that this government is not going after the 'strange and different' (which would include us, folks) again you are deluding yourselves.

As Rhon mentioned, do we really think mainstream society will not think we are more harmful than they already do if they get in here and begin reading about Daddy/girl relationships, butch/femme dynamics, Stone butches and Femmes, Transgender folks, etc.? I'd rather not give them a whiff of our community.

When Daddy first mentioned this thread to me, my first thought was 'Wow, cause there are some skanky photos in that gallery', but after thinking about it and realizing that Daddy Rhon and Mz. Chris have a hosting site to contend with, it all makes sense.

I love erotica. I love porn. Hot, nasty, dirty, sexy, kinky, sensual. Give it all to me. But keep it safe here.

Thanks Daddy Rhon and Mz. Chris for all you do for us. Without you both and your love for our community, I would never have met the love of my life and that means more to me than I can ever say.

Sthrnnyer

01-18-2006, 08:23 PM

Heh, a nice bit o' cleavage can sell me just about anything. ;)

In this time of our country, with a whole slew of folks shutting down their sight because of the Indencency Act of 2004, I would rather Daddy Rhon and Mz. Chris weigh on the side of caution, than risk a hefty fine or investigation into this community.

If you don't think it can apply to you, or your site, don't delude yourself. It can, and it has. Several BDSM sites have voluntarily removed themselves due to forceable removal and legal action against other sites. If you think that this government is not going after the 'strange and different' (which would include us, folks) again you are deluding yourselves.

As Rhon mentioned, do we really think mainstream society will not think we are more harmful than they already do if they get in here and begin reading about Daddy/girl relationships, butch/femme dynamics, Stone butches and Femmes, Transgender folks, etc.? I'd rather not give them a whiff of our community.

When Daddy first mentioned this thread to me, my first thought was 'Wow, cause there are some skanky photos in that gallery', but after thinking about it and realizing that Daddy Rhon and Mz. Chris have a hosting site to contend with, it all makes sense.

I love erotica. I love porn. Hot, nasty, dirty, sexy, kinky, sensual. Give it all to me. But keep it safe here.

Thanks Daddy Rhon and Mz. Chris for all you do for us. Without you both and your love for our community, I would never have met the love of my life and that means more to me than I can ever say.

Baby, you're HOT! ;)
Yes, without this site I would never had met my love, and for that I am grateful.
Unfortunately things are not getting better thanks to good ol' Bush and the religous right agenda.

Daddy Rhon

01-18-2006, 08:40 PM

Annie

01-19-2006, 04:19 AM

I've found it very interesting from a sociological perspective that here in the USA, erotic shots of women's breasts are acceptable and encouraged, yet many (I know - NOT all) people balk at the idea of a woman showing her breasts when breastfeeding an infant.

Recently some non-community members came to this site and appropriated some images from the gallery (including one of butch cock) and ridiculed them elsewhere.

Both these examples show the "gaze" as the mediator. Whether we like it or not (or even if we are aghast at the thought, we all still do this), we apply our own form of censorship to images by relegating them to the "acceptable" or "not acceptable" categories. Depending on our particular identity/situation/beliefs our gaze may find an image worthy (and therefore aesthetically pleasing) or not worthy.

This country appears to be under a very strong "male gaze" influence, which oftentimes views women as commodities, and frequently also reduces women to the parts of the body that males find useful in a sexual context (ie breasts, ass, vagina). The only time (though there is more than likely many times where this occurs, and i have simply not come across it myself) this is challenged on a fundamental level, to the level of causing discomfort, is when a grown adult sees a nursing child at its mother's breast. This is clearly one of those times when the breasts move from the "object" categorization to the "functional" categorization - similar to a male penis (function rather than object). Men tend to see themselves as practical and active, rather than objectified and passive.

The ridicule of butch cock on another site reveals that straight men rather than butches were the recipients of the gaze in that situation, because the pic of butch cock as a functional object was rejected, and the owner of the cock then became the subject of considerable ridicule. This is a way of separating oneself from the object causing discomfort.

Since we live in this society we learn by osmosis what is acceptable and what is not. Therefore we can not avoid the type of assumptions about images that the dominant paradigm deems acceptable, without some serious work to break it down (much like racism).

I think it is entirely possible to break down the assumptions that we all (even presumably enlightened folks such as ourselves) have indoctrinated into us. Entirely possible. This is the type of thread that has the potential to help in that manner.

I hope the discussion does takes place. I think it's an important and interesting topic.

BuzzBoi

01-19-2006, 05:17 AM

Taking a moment to regroup…..

I so appreciate Daddy Rhon’s comments and clarifications. I personally want to thank you & MC for all that you do!

And thanks to everyone posting and trying to turn this into a genuine conversation.

Now, here we go…

I’m really trying to own my shite here and then hopefully we can move on.

I didn’t coin the term butch cock and as many have shared they don’t care for it. Fine. To each his/her own. There’s always a category of people who do. And that’s fine too. I get that ‘not everyone wants to see’ my dick, but there’s a lot of things I don’t care to see either, it just seemed kinda one-sided. The ‘oh we can see this but we can’t see that’ mentality…..

“Erotic poses are welcomed and appreciated, but please refrain from posting any hardcore nudity in your profile or in our gallery. Breasts and suggestive poses are acceptable but hardcore shots of genitalia, Butch cock, open buttocks, or sex acts are not….”

Maybe the wording itself in the gallery opener lead me to believe that as long as butch cock wasn’t exposed, it was alright and perhaps considered erotic, even artistic. Then again, maybe it was a case of too much monkey-see-monkey-do. Had the terms been a little more clear, I would have used a little more self scrutiny & discretion. Had I known that an unexposed bulge was considered unacceptable, I never would have posted the pic in the first place. And maybe it’s the awareness of all this for me and for those who stumble across this thread to try to do the same.

Can I suggest that the gallery opener should include ‘butch cock, baskets & bulges’, hence the very difference between what one sees as erotic or as hardcore. In my world, a pic of an exposed prosthetic might be considered hardcore, but having an uninflated basket just seems, well, natural. If more site members who post gallery pics were conscious that both exposed & unexposed are prohibited, then I think in good consciousness to this community, there’d be less photos to delete.

The bottom line for me is this - I like this space. I appreciate all the energy and effort Daddy Rhon & Miz Chris have dedicated to it. Like everyone else, I want to keep this site free and public and safe. It’s the system at large that I find unfair, not the webmaster’s obligations. I said earlier “It’s fairly easy to be your own self-censor without ruining it for everyone else.” And that's a two sided coin. I too want to do my part to be a responsible member of this community.

I am asking Daddy Rhon to remove “Censorship & Bias?” from the title of this thread. It’s too inflammatory. My apologies if my initial intent wasn’t clear, (the post was getting entirely too long) but at that moment I could have written volumes on the unfairness of what the system perceives as being erotic vs. pornographic. Feminine traits acceptable, masculine traits unacceptable. (Gee, wonder who made that rule?);) It’s a touchy subject, I know.

My view is this: It’s not so much about whether you *like* something or not as it is the system at large denies the masculine identified a big part of how we perceive ourselves to be, whereas (for the most part) femmes get the green light for anything goes. I’m not defining all butches and their preferences, that’s why I’m using the term ‘masculine’ in an effort not to do so.
I need to stop there for now….more later.

Awesome post, Annie! (y)

aprettydress

01-19-2006, 05:23 AM

No one ever said life is fair and I get that, but do you think butches get the short end of the stick <<cough>> when it comes to erotic gallery pics versus what the femmes are allowed to post? Why can’t we artistically show the true *L’essence du Butch*? Would love to hear opinions from both butches & femmes on this.

i'm pretty sure no one is allowed to show dick or pussy in the galleries--so, i do think we are all equally disallowed to post our homemade hustler crotch shots. this guideline has never been an issue for me--as a viewer or a poster because i don't care about your (general sense) package, and i don't want to see it when i go to the gallery.

-dress

ps. but, i *do* want to see any/all smooshed faced pug dog pics. thank you.

Kai

01-19-2006, 08:27 AM

well I'm sure people would run screaming from the monster I own. other femmes would faint (leaving them vunerable) and butches would squeal (and possibly bend over)...

but I'm afraid my brachiosaur-sized dick will not be photographed on this site.
1) it breaks the rules
2) it would cause far too much jelousy...

Yet one more reason for my Love and devotion to you HB!!
*puts hand to forhead faints*

KwanYin

01-19-2006, 08:35 AM

...
ps. but, i *do* want to see any/all smooshed faced pug dog pics. thank you.

ha! (&) (l)

HardDrive

01-19-2006, 08:49 AM

Hey Buzz, ya it may be that it wasn't porn to some but they do the best they can here for us so we must respect how they handle things. As stated before they can't catch all the posts to gallery or threads so we can only try to do our share to help them. HD

closetfrek

01-19-2006, 09:11 AM

Where there is America there will always be censorship. Unfortuantely, the rules don't always apply fairly. In this case, I am leaning towards you can't catch them all clause. Personally, I would love to look at pictures of butch cock all day but with no age restriction implemented on this site I know this not to be possible. As time goes by I'm sure more will be pulled when reported. Until then sorry about the rough luck . .<<<hugz>>>

oregon_femme

01-19-2006, 09:58 AM

1) I'm already paying HEAVILY out of pocket for the $1200 a month service fees.

I find this very disturbing. Why doesnt someone make a thread about this?

darcy farrow

01-19-2006, 10:09 AM

Daddy Rhon

01-19-2006, 10:13 AM

Can I suggest that the gallery opener should include ‘butch cock, baskets & bulges’, hence the very difference between what one sees as erotic or as hardcore. In my world, a pic of an exposed prosthetic might be considered hardcore, but having an uninflated basket just seems, well, natural. If more site members who post gallery pics were conscious that both exposed & unexposed are prohibited, then I think in good consciousness to this community, there’d be less photos to delete.

.... snip ....

I am asking Daddy Rhon to remove “Censorship & Bias?” from the title of this thread. It’s too inflammatory.

Great ideas. I changed the title of the thread, and also added a "WHY" link to the gallery opener with the clear reasons I listed above. I have had to list those several times when this discussion has come up in the past, and maybe now folks can simply clip n' paste! :|

http://www.butch-femme.com/galleries/galleryguidelines.html

Thanks for the suggestions, Buzz. Appreciate it.

darcy farrow

01-19-2006, 10:23 AM

But you know, if it wasn't for the conviction and "guts" of people like Lenny Bruce and Hugh Heffner in this country in the '50s, do you think we would even be AT this place we are today in this country, having as much freedom for sexual expression as we do?

"Lenny Bruce is dead but he didn't commit any crime
He just had the insight to rip off the lid before its time.
I rode with him in a taxi once, only for a mile and a half,
Seemed like it took a couple of months.
Lenny Bruce moved on and like the ones that killed him, gone."
(Bob Dylan in 'Lenny Bruce', from Shot of Love, 1983)

darcy farrow

01-19-2006, 10:30 AM

...do you think we would even be AT this place we are today in this country, having as much freedom for sexual expression as we do?

Since I brought this up, just to clarify: I should have highlighted the word "much" in my statement above - because I did mean it sarcastically to convey we have a LONG way to go (as per this very thread discussion). I was just curious what others here thought were/are social turning points - or one of the original turning points in this country, in terms of lifting the 'taboo' a bit on ACTUALLY being able to admit that we Americans have sex: and not always between a bio man and woman, and not always "missionary" style, and not always for the soul goal of procreation! OMG! Tell me no more! I can't listen to this!!!

chey

01-19-2006, 11:07 AM

Alarming changes are being made to laws which potentially threaten community web sites like this one, not to mention cripple communication across the globe. Instead of derailing the thread here, I will post a public link from my journal for anyone who is interested in these updated laws:

http://www.livejournal.com/users/daddyrhon/124742.html

(PS - Most of the private entries on my online journal have nothing to do with B-F.com -- just ramblings about my daily life -- but I made this rant public cuz I do think awareness is important.)

I read this link and I had to paste this small part......
"Sexual images or the written word in the form of adult stories submitted by users online are illegal retroactively, and the penalty for web site owners who have no documentation is five years in a federal penitentiary."........
Would not all sexual images fall under this catagory,for I have seen many poses are two femmes,way beyond the form of "Art".....and writting stories,of which I am guilty of as well,fall under these same guldelines that have been noted above...The erotica thread alone,has many literary images that needs no further images to know,what is being said, in short,it is very explicit........and how are we to now know,if any of these do fall into the hands of minor's or some sick perv......Hmmmm.food for thought.

I for one,must say,after reading that,I have to really say,I so admire all that you do for B/F,for it is far more then a place,to just lay anyone's 2 cents........Donating even more so.

alram6969

01-19-2006, 11:32 AM

perhaps sex would not seem like the obsession societys claims it has become if people had been allowed to speak freely about it in the first place.

oregon_femme

01-19-2006, 11:36 AM

I read this link and I had to paste this small part......
"Sexual images or the written word in the form of adult stories submitted by users online are illegal retroactively, and the penalty for web site owners who have no documentation is five years in a federal penitentiary."........
The erotica thread alone,has many literary images that needs no further images to know,what is being said, in short,it is very explicit........and how are we to now know,if any of these do fall into the hands of minor's or some sick perv......Hmmmm.food for thought.

This opens up a whole 'nother can of worms. Some of the "erotica" found on the threads is quite graphic, and even disturbing to some.

Rather than "formal" censorship, perhaps we should use the spirit of respect as our guidline. If it is going to possibly offend someones' senses, (in regards to sexually explicit material), then maybe it doesn't belong here.

alram6969

01-19-2006, 11:38 AM

maybe those soldiers you see smoking are having a cigarette after sodomizing one of the poor iraqi prisoners that did nothing. hmm, i wonder if lenny would have said anything like that. i don't know but carlin would today. well, not sure about that either. i definitely think sarah silverstein would today.

chey

01-19-2006, 11:48 AM

This opens up a whole 'nother can of worms. Some of the "erotica" found on the threads is quite graphic, and even disturbing to some.

Rather than "formal" censorship, perhaps we should use the spirit of respect as our guidline. If it is going to possibly offend someones' senses, (in regards to sexually explicit material), then maybe it doesn't belong here.,
true,but like art,erotic has a standing also within the literary world,and many view literature as another form of the arts.......and as with so many things in society,we all have the right to either see it or not,read it or not, and here,with a simple move of the mouse ,delete it,and we as adults here at B/F should know when we each wish to excercise that right....but what of the minors who I am sure,come here,and of deviated perv's looking for cheap thrills.....and maybe of the one fool,who someday,decides that the simple things we post,has suddenly become offensive,and throws the boot at the web owners....it is indeed food for thought.

femmeextreme

01-19-2006, 12:02 PM

BuzzBoi

01-19-2006, 01:41 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Daddy Rhon

1) I'm already paying HEAVILY out of pocket for the $1200 a month service fees.

I find this very disturbing. Why doesnt someone make a thread about this?

Someone should...but with my luck, I don't think it should be me - LOL!

Hey Daddy Rhon, why don't you put a PayPal logo hotlink on the main page. I think that constant visual reminder will further advance the B-F.com cause. The DONATE (http://www.butch-femme.com/fundraiserdetails.htm) tab on the main page is so small I had to really look for it....just a thought.

Now...I'm off to stuff Daddy Rhon's goodies basket ;) with a modest little PayPal transaction of my own.

Will be back later to address some of these great posts!

Miss_Divine

01-19-2006, 01:53 PM

Personally, I really don't care for the pics of bulges and butch cock.
It does absolutely nothing for me.

BUT!!
I really doesn't make any sense to leave certain poses up and not others.
There has been some REALLY offensive cutting pics left up,
while pics like yours are taken down.
Sorry to have that happen to you...

You are oh-so-correct about the pictures posted of femmes..
So why not the Butches... I agree. If you're into posting such things.
Good luck in finding your middle ground~~

scubadyke

01-19-2006, 02:07 PM

[QUOTE=BuzzBoi]
Now...I'm off to stuff Daddy Rhon's goodies basket ;) with a modest little PayPal transaction of my own.
[QUOTE]

ROFLMAO!! ^5 Buzz!!

justaroccitygirl

01-19-2006, 02:29 PM

I'd hate to think that one should not post something, written or image, as it *might* offend someone.

Wearing stripes with plaid might offend someone... but I'm doing to defend their right to wear it. And I might not agree with what someone has to say, but I am going to defend their right to say it.

Calling my Congressmen and women. Writting letters. Going to law school.

And as for 10 year olds on the net: where the hell are their parents?? My mom *always* checked on me when I was on the internet; my mom still hovers over my younger brother. If you don't want your kids to see it or hear it, watch them, put restrictions on them, give them rules to follow... don't let the government raise your kids for you. Cheese and rice people.

I think this sort of censorship (by the Government- not intentionally by this site!) is ridiculous. The Right wants to protect the ammendments to the Constitution that they like (like the right to bear arms) and forget about the parts that they don't like (like the first amendment should it say something negative against them or pertain to things beyond their grasp).

There are a number of sites that are taking pictures and posts down. Suicide Girls, BDSM, erotica sites- you name it, it's going. And so are our freedoms.

Sthrnnyer

01-19-2006, 02:45 PM

I think this sort of censorship (by the Government- not intentionally by this site!) is ridiculous. The Right wants to protect the ammendments to the Constitution that they like (like the right to bear arms) and forget about the parts that they don't like (like the first amendment should it say something negative against them or pertain to things beyond their grasp).

There are a number of sites that are taking pictures and posts down. Suicide Girls, BDSM, erotica sites- you name it, it's going. And so are our freedoms.

Hmmm almost sounds like the bible thumpers picking and choosing what to preach and what not to preach. Politicians=bible thumpers= hypocrites.

msdemeanor

01-19-2006, 03:22 PM

There are a number of sites that are taking pictures and posts down. Suicide Girls, BDSM, erotica sites- you name it, it's going. And so are our freedoms.
More so every day. This is from the AP (bold emphasis is mine):

SAN JOSE, Calif. - The Bush administration, seeking to revive an online pornography law struck down by the U.S. Supreme Court, has subpoenaed Google Inc. for details on what its users have been looking for through its popular search engine.

Google has refused to comply with the subpoena, issued last year, for a broad range of material from its databases, including a request for 1 million random Web addresses and records of all Google searches from any one-week period, lawyers for the U.S. Justice Department said in papers filed Wednesday in federal court in San Jose.

Privacy advocates have been increasingly scrutinizing Google's practices as the company expands its offerings to include e-mail, driving directions, photo-sharing, instant messaging and Web journals.

Although Google pledges to protect personal information, the company's privacy policy says it complies with legal and government requests. Google also has no stated guidelines on how long it keeps data, leading critics to warn that retention is potentially forever given cheap storage costs.

The government contends it needs the data to determine how often pornography shows up in online searches as part of an effort to revive an Internet child protection law that was struck down two years ago by the U.S. Supreme Court on free-speech grounds.

The 1998 Child Online Protection Act would have required adults to use access codes or other ways of registering before they could see objectionable material online, and it would have punished violators with fines up to $50,000 or jail time. The high court ruled that technology such as filtering software may better protect children.

The matter is now before a federal court in Pennsylvania, and the government wants the Google data to help argue that the law is more effective than software in protecting children from porn.

The Mountain View-based company told The San Jose Mercury News that it opposes releasing the information because it would violate the privacy rights of its users and would reveal company trade secrets.

Nicole Wong, an associate general counsel for Google, said the company will fight the government's efforts "vigorously."

"Google is not a party to this lawsuit, and the demand for the information is overreaching," Wong said.

BuzzBoi

01-19-2006, 03:28 PM

:o

Scoob! - Daddy Rhon even giggled a little, I think! And let me tell you, you might think my goodies basket is sexy, bro, but DR's got the biggest basket in da house! Whew! :|

;)

scubadyke

01-19-2006, 03:40 PM

:o

Scoob! - Daddy Rhon even giggled a little, I think! And let me tell you, you might think my goodies basket is sexy, bro, but DR's got the biggest basket in da house! Whew! :|

;)

DAYUM...

...and let it be known...although that was a SEXY pic Buzz...I think I had basket envy not basket lust!! Your safe :) Besides...Am a luster of "Above the waistline" baskets!!

Oh...look at the time...gotta go...PERVING HOUR IS UPON US!!

CHEERS!!

BuzzBoi

01-19-2006, 03:43 PM

fancyfreckle, you’re my SHero & a (*) !!!!

Susie Bright is one of my all time favorites! I kinda cut my teeth on her writings (– plus she told me once how hot I looked working in a toolbelt! Eh hem…where were we?)

For anyone interested in a fantastic primer to lesbian erotica written by a true pioneer who not only lived it, but was a major part of making it happen, then you should read this (http://www.susiebright.com/stories/nbtg_intro.html). Ms. Bright’s writing style flows like buttah! You’ll love it!

Will eventually get through the other links (http://www.butch-femme.com/portal/forums/showpost.php?p=1490611&postcount=36) too.....so much to read/listen to!

Thanks again ff! (y)

BuzzBoi

01-19-2006, 04:52 PM

Annie! You rock my world!

Your insightful post here (http://www.butch-femme.com/portal/forums/showpost.php?p=1491150&postcount=49) is a must read! It is the kind of meat and potatoes thinking I was hoping would happen! And you’re right, it is an important and interesting topic and has the potential to help us all.

You talked about the "male gaze" influence and the "object" categorization of women vs. the "functional" categorization. And how “Men tend to see themselves as practical and active, rather than objectified and passive.”

“…Houston…we have contact!”

And I loved this: “I think it is entirely possible to break down the assumptions that we all (even presumably enlightened folks such as ourselves) have indoctrinated into us. Entirely possible. This is the type of thread that has the potential to help in that manner.”

I read your post this morning and it’s had me thinking all day about our perceptions. Our osmosis.

Here’s what I said this am: “My view is this: It’s not so much about whether you *like* something or not as it is “the system at large” denies “the masculine identified” a big part of how we perceive ourselves to be, whereas (for the most part) femmes get the green light for anything goes.”

So when I thought about what you said & what I had said, the light bulb went off.(i)

Now, I hope I’m not stepping out of bounds here, but if I apply all this to me and my masculine identity, is it safe to say that the current dominant paradigm has the capability to both exploit the feminine (of all forms) while simultaneously suppressing the masculine (lesbian) forms?

Didja get it?! Didja get it?!

Gawd love ya, Annie! (y) Please keep posting!

Woodie69

01-19-2006, 05:11 PM

Driving home from work today I heard on the radio that the Feds are seeking Google records...freedoms lost one by one in my book. :@

I think that if the site EVER gets indangered by the Feds, ppl need to use common sense and take down inappropriate pics that just may close the site. And if someone even "thinks" hey this may not be ok, don't post it. Is the risk worth it?

KwanYin

01-19-2006, 05:16 PM

"Google has refused to comply with the subpoena, issued last year, for a broad range of material from its databases, including a request for 1 million random Web addresses and records of all Google searches from any one-week period, "

this is freaking terrifying. we are living in scary times.

BuzzBoi

01-19-2006, 05:33 PM

Feds take porn fight to Google

January 19, 2006

Federal prosecutors preparing to defend a controversial Internet pornography law in court have asked Google, Microsoft, Yahoo and America Online to hand over millions of search records--a request that Google is adamantly denying.

In court documents filed Wednesday, the Bush administration asked a federal judge in San Jose, Calif., to force Google to comply with a subpoena for the information, which would reveal the search terms of a broad swath of the search engine's visitors.

Listen up..... <---link here (http://www.nytimes.com/cnet/CNET_2100-1030_3-6028701.html)

An attorney for the ACLU said Microsoft, Yahoo and AOL received identical subpoenas and chose to comply with them rather than fight the request in court.

Yahoo acknowledged on Thursday that it complied with the Justice Department's request but said no personally identifiable information was handed over.......

Woodie69

01-19-2006, 05:49 PM

I do not trust our gov't or President Bush when it comes to my civil liberties or rights. It seems that my freedoms just vanish...

BuzzBoi

01-19-2006, 06:00 PM

"They that can give up essential liberty
to obtain a little temporary safety deserve
neither liberty nor safety." (http://www.franklinposse.com/frames.html)

-Ben Franklin
Historical Review of Pennsylvania, 1759

.......(*) Ben Franklin has a Posse (*).......

;)

Ben Franklin
Historical Review of Pennsylvania, 1759

chey

01-19-2006, 06:15 PM

BuzzBoi

01-19-2006, 07:10 PM

Funny how it was denied by the US Supreme Court already.......

"The Bush administration, seeking to revive an online pornography law struck down by the U.S. Supreme Court has subpoenaed Google Inc. for details on what its users have been looking for through its popular search engine...."

hmmm.....:@

Big Brother????

BuzzBoi

01-19-2006, 07:29 PM

MaineButch

01-19-2006, 09:14 PM

<scrambles to take all sites and pics off computer...lol>

I say "SCREW THEM"!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I think I'm gonna move to another counrty. If that azzhole in office can get by with spying on private calls and not get in trouble......dangggggg...what is it all comming to. seems like we have went "BACKWARDS" since IT has been in office......grrrrrrrrrr

I remember where it was just freedom of speech we were talking about.......<sigh>

Anyways........good thread ya got Buzz. I do understand how ya feel........but I also understand Rhon's position here. I love this site and for it....yes I went out today and got a money order..lmaoo.... ;) ....now I just need to find the address........hummmmmmmmm

OH......BTW.Annie......awsum post ya have....... (f)

EVERYONE DONATE!!!!!!!!!!!.........:)

I didnt realize they took credit cards..lmao....I just made a donation......woottt......!!!!!!!!!!! Guess I'll send in the money order too.hahahaha....... ;)

MB <who made a donation>

Annie

01-20-2006, 03:59 AM

...if I apply all this to me and my masculine identity, is it safe to say that the current dominant paradigm has the capability to both exploit the feminine (of all forms) while simultaneously suppressing the masculine (lesbian) forms?
Hey BuzzBoi,
It's hard for me to post at night these days, since my work is demanding so much of me right now, so I pretty much have *my* thinking time in the early morning, which is why I'm here right now responding to your post.

Thanks for mentioning my post - it's hard to know if what I'm writing at 6am is making any kind of sense at all - and the lack of responses to my post really made me wonder if I was being hugely UNCLEAR, or maybe just plain boring, and that nobody was interested in discussing these issues. So your lovely post and compliments really made me feel happy and encouraged me immensely. Thanks for that.

I need some clarification around your quote above.

I'm not sure if you are ascribing masculine traits to lesbian identity ("suppressing the masculine (lesbian) forms") - which I have problems with - since I don't believe that lesbian is necessarily masculine, but I know that most of the world outside Butch-Femme or even lesbianism probably does view it this way. Or you might be saying that the society at large (dominant paradigm) is assuming that ALL lesbians are masculine? Or maybe that lesbianism is ONE way of "doing masculinity"? I'm not sure.

Can I have some clarification before I can really respond with some thoughts?

I look forward to more meat and potatoes LOL.

BuzzBoi

01-20-2006, 05:12 AM

Annie - it's early, I know!

Here.....(c) (c).....one for me too!

I only meant the "masculine identified" dykes. Like me.

I'm saying the male dominated 'system at large' can exploit all 'feminine form' - whether you're gay, straight, etc., "if you've got tits & ass, it's okay - we wanna see 'em!" while simultaneously repressing the 'masculine identified'..."Oh, there's a cock in your jock? Why, that's pornography!"

So, I basically get denied showing how I perceive myself.
Is that any better?

The story you told about the stolen butch cock pic by non-community members and the ridicule that insued reminded me of something. I worked for years in a lesbian owned & operated sex toy/erotica store. Sometimes bio men and their wives would come in. Some were respectful, some were complete assholes, but my boss always told us that "In this store, you don't have to take any crap from anyone who walks in that door".

Occasionally, and usually in pairs, bio men would look at the display of dildos and harnesses and start snickering and making jokes - like I wasn't even in the room, much less standing right next to them. So it got to the point that I would turn & look them right in the eye, smile and say, "Yeah, you fellas might think it's funny, but you know what? I've never lost a woodie in my life!"
When I said that, here's what they looked like :| :|
and they almost ran from the store.

You said: "Men tend to see themselves as practical and active, rather than objectified and passive."
Never had their penises been challenged by a dyke! I had just objectified their dicks! They were horrified.

Yep, I had to keep a whole bag of one-liners like that.....

They play it off like they don't think two women are capable of having 'real sex', but subconciously, I know it's really, really threatening to them, especially with masculine identified dykes.

MissZMindy

01-20-2006, 05:43 AM

I think what it comes down to is the fact that women have always been objectified and exploited by males. When you walk into a store that sells the "naughty" magazines and really take a look at them, you see many, many magazines that cater to men, but what is there for straight women? One lonely little magazine! The porn industry caters to the heterosexual male. Very little is made for lesbians or straight women.

Men don't want to, and won't allow the male race in general to be objectified. The hold themselves up as above that or maybe the more important gender. Men hold the power in most of the world. Men make the rules. Men want to see naked women. Men (straight men, that is) don't want to see their parts unless they are being used on a woman (in porn and such). Men don't want to be made into sex objects, and men, in general, make the rules.

I think that the issue bio men also have with penis size might somehow come into play here. Maybe they don't want pictures up all over because then they'd see their own doesn't measure up? (ok, this is said mainly in gest, but um, with a touch of seriousness too)
It all comes down to the fact that woman, even in this day and age, have always been treated as objects to serve men. Men want to look at nekkid women and treat us as mindless sex objects.

chey

01-20-2006, 06:01 AM

....BUT not to worry, people, this is the kind of thing that gets caught up in courts for months and why high priced lawyers get paid the big bucks $$$$.....

BUT, CYA!
....yer IP address *is* being logged!

And don't forget your congressman/woman if yer outraged!

[Hint: The number is right there in the phone book]

heh,
(h)

(now... where were we?)

Guess I better start packing for da" big house"......wonder if anyone would make me a chocolate cake?????with a nail file in it ....of course;) oh and um......better make sure my locks of realllly strong on that chasity belt........,ok,what else do I need while in there................how about a pc,so I may visist some raunchy porn sights...

Seriously though,how many of these congressional asses can say,they never go into these venues of pornography? How many can claim to be that model citizen,without skeletons tumbling out of every closet?,and why is it,every time we get some holy roller president,all of our freedoms are being taken away?
Just when we think we have progressed into a new era and century,we suddenly get slapped back into time,where some self proclaimed,I will change the US ass,dictates and turns things within our nation to appease his thoughts and way of life.Hell,I thought that bamboon worked for the people,not himself.

Think I want to move to Canada.......

Ravenouss

01-20-2006, 05:38 PM

i'm pretty sure no one is allowed to show dick or pussy in the galleries--...-dress

Is it ok inside a cake?

Woodie69

01-21-2006, 04:51 PM

Women are objectified all the time. They are looked at by their breasts, ass, and vaginas - just as Annie stated in her earlier post. I am offended when the gov't wants to play big brother. What if the Feds want to "investigate" this site? How would you feel? I think Rhon and Miz Chris have every right to say no to whatever pic they want too as well as closing down any thread they want too. This is a free and public website.

As for being offended by butch cock images...I have been told to my face and on this site by only 5 ppl (who I can name) who have a personal issue with me, and use my FTM-ness as an attack mode. It is sad really.

BuzzBoi

01-21-2006, 07:17 PM

Everyone’s been using this very broad ‘women are objectified’ statement….

…and for feminine identified women, that’s more than likely true. But where are the masculine identified women on this?

I am a masculine identified woman. I’m happy being a butch woman & I find comfort in my masculine traits. So I’m not necessarily ‘objectified’ by bio men or the system at large.

I am, however, repressed by it. I go against the grain of the sex-stereotyped ‘norm’. I am the direct threat. I’m the one who separates ‘masculinity’ from ‘maleness’ and the system at large hates me even more for it. I’m not *objectified* per se, but I’m definitely *condescended to*, especially working in a profession 95% dominated by bio males. I contend with this almost every day.

This whole thread started over the removal of a picture due in part to semantic ambiguity between erotic vs. pornographic. But look at the bigger picture. In essence, it’s a ‘system at large’ attempt to protect itself from it’s own objectification. No?

A couple of points I made earlier:

-the male dominated 'system at large' can exploit all 'feminine form' - whether you're gay, straight, etc., "if you've got tits & ass, it's okay - we wanna see 'em!" while simultaneously repressing the 'masculine identified'..."Oh, there's a cock in your jock? Why, that's pornography!" So, I basically get denied showing how I perceive myself.

-My view is this: It’s not so much about whether you *like* something or not as it is “the system at large” denies “the masculine identified” a big part of how we perceive ourselves to be, whereas (for the most part) femmes get the green light for anything goes.

- if no one sweated the little things, there would be no Annie Leibovitz's, no Robert Maplethorpe's, no Herb Ritts.....

(...gee, I thought the feminists & art people whould be all over that....)

I must either be the only masculine identified woman with an opinion, or the only one with an opinion on masculine identified women……

Glad to know the fire suppression system in here works so well….

honeybarbara

01-22-2006, 02:20 AM

1) buzz... a few people made the same points. So there are people on your track. Did you miss them?

2)

Everyone’s been using this very broad ‘women are objectified’ statement….

…and for feminine identified women, that’s more than likely true.

It's not more than likely, it is a fact of life. I see who I am, my representation of feminine self to sell shit, in corner store porn, in movies to titilate. Just last night I had to verbally tell the cabbie to back off coming onto me so strong while he's in control of the car and the locks and knows where I live now. And what he kept saying over an over? "y'know... it's just... you have a beautiful figure...."
plus I made a good ammount of cash being an escort. I think that's kinda pure objectication.

but then I do it too.

But where are the masculine identified women on this?

oh I objectify them too, sexually. and so do men- but as something to conquer and put you into place or as an object of ridicule/fear/subjugation or purgation. yer still an object. Just like the rest of us.

I am a masculine identified woman. I’m happy being a butch woman & I find comfort in my masculine traits. So I’m not necessarily ‘objectified’ by bio men or the system at large.

I wouldn't be so sure of that. see my above statement.

Woodie69

01-22-2006, 07:54 AM

Buzz,

I'm a FTM. I get objectified because I have a female body. I adore my masculine traits. I adore being male. I adore everything there is about being trans. I just hate my female body. It betrays who I am. Yes, I get the standard bullshit thrown in my face on a daily basis. I have been told that I am a "hard" woman. Or that I don't know right from wrong. Or that I have no clue as to what it is to be a man (even though I live as a male and have for years). All of these statements came out of the mouths of staight hetero doctors whom I asked for hormones. Just an excuse to "not" give me what it is I desperately need. What about when I ask people to address me as my male name or nickname and they continue to call me ma'am, miss, mrs, etc. That is nothing but disrespect.

Heart

01-22-2006, 09:50 AM

Buzz - I find your questions interesting. I agree that objectification of femininity (in all its forms) is entrenched and commonplace.

But do masculine women experience a similar objectification - or is it different? I once opened a thread in order to ask butches about their experiences with objectification. Not many hits. But Woody makes the point that he experiences objectification based upon what others perceive as his female-ness.

I think the dangers and risks of objectifictaion for masculine women/butches/trans folk etc lies in the perception that you are appropriateing masculinity from those it belongs to - namely bio men. They want to reduce you to your female parts so that they can proceed to objectify you in the way they feel entitled to.

Because masculinity is so valued and prized in this culture, it is closely guarded and policed. Femininity is more disposable, therefore it can be played with, exposed, and exploited with more ease.

Is one worse than the other? I see no point, and have never seen anything productive come out of trying to determine who has it harder/easier.

Heart

edited to add: for a very intense and contentious forum discussion about objectification go to
http://www.butch-femme.com/portal/forums/showthread.php?t=18886

Annie

01-22-2006, 09:54 AM

Everyone’s been using this very broad ‘women are objectified’ statement….

I am the direct threat. I’m the one who separates ‘masculinity’ from ‘maleness’ and the system at large hates me even more for it.

-the male dominated 'system at large' can exploit all 'feminine form' - whether you're gay, straight, etc., "if you've got tits & ass, it's okay - we wanna see 'em!" while simultaneously repressing the 'masculine identified'..."Oh, there's a cock in your jock? Why, that's pornography!" So, I basically get denied showing how I perceive myself.[/color]

-... it is “the system at large” denies “the masculine identified” a big part of how we perceive ourselves to be, whereas (for the most part) femmes get the green light for anything goes.

There's a bit here to chew on.

I agree that the male dominated system at large *can* (and I would add *does*) exploit all feminine form.

That statement almost sounds like women are passive in this, however. I don't see it that way. I see many times that women also exploit the feminine form (due to the lack of a definition of this so far, I'll say that I'm coming from the view of "the feminine form" as the female BODY). HB noted that she made a pretty penny while working as an escort. That's an example of her exploiting the feminine form.

I see Femmes and Butches alike exploiting the feminine form many times. Can any of us say we have never knowingly used our physical traits to get what we want or need? I know I can't say that I have never flirted with somebody to get something done (I have), or let a bit of leg show to change somebody's mind (I have), or wink, smile, pout, and seduce somebody because I needed to have sex right then and there (I have), or give the implied promise of something more IF this (whatever it is) is done for me (I know I have).

We exploit our sexuality and use our bodies to mainpulate others for many different reasons: sometimes financial (I bet most have heard stories about people asking others for money for whatever reason), sometimes social (the need for friendship relationships, which can be made by being in a particular crowd, and behaving in a way (frequently sexualised) that crowd finds desirable or clever), sometimes physical.

Included in here would be presenting images of oneself (and I thinking here in the Galleries) that present as somewhat sexualised. By this I mean the images of women in their many forms (yes, tits and asses, and butch cock close-ups) presented to gain something. And why would we post pics of any sort without an intent to gain something (maybe social, maybe sexual, maybe emotional)? We all have our reasons, and they are as varied as we are. We don't think of this as exploitative, because it's got the stamp of "agency" all over it. WE CHOOSE the images we present, and we control (to a certain extent) the way they are presented (the pic itself), the intent behind the presentation (we write the description), and to a certain extent we also control the responses by having the ability to clarify, rebuke, explain and ultimately to remove the images.

Therefore we may feel that many times we come from an empowered stance when we post sexualised pics of ourselves in the galleries here. That's VERY different from the images of the feminine form that abound in "society at large", and over which we have NO control oftentimes. We often view these as "exploitation". We are NOT empowered by these images because we lack ANY kind of control or agency over them, except perhaps for choosing to ignore them.

Does the society at large views tits and asses and vaginas as different from butch cock? Without a doubt, yes they do. WHY? Because butch cock is made of synthetic fibre, and it not REAL, as real as it may appear to the wearer or recipient, or as real as it may FEEL to the wearer. This is what relegates these images to the category of "comical" or "ridiculous" to the "society at large". I wonder where you have heard this idea, that outside this space images of butch cock might be "pornographic". This is really new to me.

I believe ridicule from "the society at large" comes from the fact that outsiders see butches (whom they most often perceive as women who want to be men, evidenced by their seeming rejection of the "feminine form", and their adoption of masculine traits) as a threat to their own sexuality. This comes from a belief that there are only two genders. Their views of gender and identity are challenged on a very fundamental level when a woman-born person straps on a dick (which is often BIGGER than theirs, and never goes limp) and feminine women WANT IT. Not only that, their egos are also challenged by the realisation that there are a significant number of women in the world who PREFER this kind of dick to their own bio one.

A cock on a butch is usually implied for the use of that butch WITH a femme, it's fair to say (yes I know that's a broad statement, and I know many butches are into other butches, but indulge me on this a bit, so I don't have to spend four paragraphs explaining please). That equation removes men from the picture entirely. Mean are not required. Therefore the roles of men are threatened, especially if a woman can do them as good as, if not better.

So I think my view of your perception that you are denied showing the way you perceive yourself is a little different from yours. The green light you see femmes getting to display their sexuality is a provisional light. It's totally conditional on the male gaze finding the images appealing. Which really makes it no different from the butches, and reveals that the patriarchy is indeed alive and well and working it's quiet way over all of us.

I think both Butches and Femmes are denied the expression of their identities in the society at large, because both groups are STILL at risk of being overpowered, raped and "put in your place". If you are woman-born, you are fair game to any bio male who has the strength and will to make you cower to him. If it wasn't, we wouldn't need this type of community, it would be redundant, because we would have the freedom to express ourselves genuinely in all areas within both our private and public lives.

I hope you can follow my thoughts here, it's such a BIG issue that I keep thinking of all the things that come into play, and if I talked about all that it would take many pages... LOL It would be nice to sit around a fire, sharing some food and drink and really converse about this. In the absence of this opportunity, I'll hope you take my words as they are intended: to create discussion and help build community.