I removed the post that Sean put up earlier which was causing such controversy. I didn’t want the discussion to keep revolving around one person’s tattoos because we don’t know if that person is a racist or just an idiot (if it’s the first then it looks like the answer would be both).
Shannon and I have been discussing the post via email earlier and he reminded me of this old post of a Hitler portrait from a tattooer in Singapore. As it stands now and has been the policy for years, racist and hategroup tattoos go into the Political Section of BME. Similar to the Animal Tattoo & Piercing sections, we don’t support it but BME’s mandate is to archive and catalog the evolution and history of our community, even the ignorant aspects of it. However, that doesn’t expand to other parts of BME like IAM.
IAM’s long standing TOS states the following:
“IAM is a community built around principles of tolerance. You may not post hatespeech (race, gender, or sexuality-based attacks). This includes use of terms like “gay” or “fag” or “kike” in a derogatory manner, even in jest. This rule is very strict, and extends to racist codes and iconography (“14″, “88″, and so on), as well as NSBM and racist band lists and so on. This includes verifiable offsite posts. To be very clear about this: if you are a bigot, onsite or off, stay off IAM. This is not a ban on racism. This is a total ban on bigots.”
This begs the question as far as political commentary on racist tattoos. I personally don’t want to see them get any more attention than they deserve, which is why they’re generally quietly filed away, along with other ill advised modifications. We can’t sit back and pretend that they don’t exist but we also don’t need to give them any room in the spot light that is Modblog.
As both Sean and I have said in the comments section, neither of us recognized the tattoo as a Totenkopf. At first glance I thought it was three skulls because you couldn’t see the entire tattoo. I was sent some messages stating that the racist aspect of the tattoo should be ignored because it wasn’t the focus of the post. The focus of the post was the small boobs and not tattoos. I don’t agree with that line of thinking. One of the other reasons we can’t flat out reject racist tattoos is that we simply don’t have the manpower to be fully adept at all the secret racist codes out there. As none of the staff on BME are racists, we don’t know the secret handshakes. So we try to file the tattoos where they belong. Maybe it would be more helpful if racists grew balls and weren’t so embarrased by their beliefs that they have to disguise them.
The reasoning for this post was to give you guys a post to comment on that wasn’t attacking a specific individual. So let your thoughts fly.
Comments
303 responses to “The politics of Body Modification?”
i missed the picture. was it art?
i missed the picture. was it art?
@ andre, don’t worry it was just a bit of script underneath some boobs, which weren’t visible anyway cos the chick was holding them with a vice like grip. You weren’t missing anything.
Oh and as for the removal of the post, I didn’t even notice the “racist” content. I just checked my sleeve knowing I have a skull and bones, the bones are below, close call eh! I could have unwittingly had and instant “cast ye into the pit of eternal damnation” tattoo scrawled on me. *sweet relief*
It’s Rachel’s party, and she can do what she want, hell, if I ran the site I’d ban script tattoos. But I don’t and that’s ultimately where the argument ends isn’t it people.
You can’t win, this discussion serves no purpose other than to get accross the viewpoint of BME admin and you will not be able to change anything so like in the real world, sit back and (try to) enjoy. 🙂
Ry
@ andre, don’t worry it was just a bit of script underneath some boobs, which weren’t visible anyway cos the chick was holding them with a vice like grip. You weren’t missing anything.
Oh and as for the removal of the post, I didn’t even notice the “racist” content. I just checked my sleeve knowing I have a skull and bones, the bones are below, close call eh! I could have unwittingly had and instant “cast ye into the pit of eternal damnation” tattoo scrawled on me. *sweet relief*
It’s Rachel’s party, and she can do what she want, hell, if I ran the site I’d ban script tattoos. But I don’t and that’s ultimately where the argument ends isn’t it people.
You can’t win, this discussion serves no purpose other than to get accross the viewpoint of BME admin and you will not be able to change anything so like in the real world, sit back and (try to) enjoy. 🙂
Ry
@ andre, don’t worry it was just a bit of script underneath some boobs, which weren’t visible anyway cos the chick was holding them with a vice like grip. You weren’t missing anything.
Oh and as for the removal of the post, I didn’t even notice the “racist” content. I just checked my sleeve knowing I have a skull and bones, the bones are below, close call eh! I could have unwittingly had and instant “cast ye into the pit of eternal damnation” tattoo scrawled on me. *sweet relief*
It’s Rachel’s party, and she can do what she want, hell, if I ran the site I’d ban script tattoos. But I don’t and that’s ultimately where the argument ends isn’t it people.
You can’t win, this discussion serves no purpose other than to get accross the viewpoint of BME admin and you will not be able to change anything so like in the real world, sit back and (try to) enjoy. 🙂
Ry
“This stuff should be documented on BME, but it should not be held up for idolization on ModBlog, at least not without an accompanying interview to give it context and commentary”
I think Shannon’s hit the nail on the head there. The choice of what to feature on Modblog is – and always has been – that of the editor. I didn’t see that pic so I can’t comment on whether I thought it was a racist tattoo or not. I don’t think Modblog should shy away from the occasional controversy on the other hand, provided the submitter is given a fair chance to put his/her view across.
I don’t subscribe to deriding people as “stupid” for their choice of tattoo design. I may not agree with it, but I respect their right to get it and to submit pictures of it if they so choose – however personally distateful I may find whatever it symbolizes. Attempting to suppress or ridicule racist tattoos doesn’t make them go away, nor does it tackle the underlying problem which is the racist attitudes that inspires them. If anything it makes racism appear less of a problem than it really is, and unless we as a community have the courage to discuss it openly and rationally and try to understand it better, nothing’s going to change.
“This stuff should be documented on BME, but it should not be held up for idolization on ModBlog, at least not without an accompanying interview to give it context and commentary”
I think Shannon’s hit the nail on the head there. The choice of what to feature on Modblog is – and always has been – that of the editor. I didn’t see that pic so I can’t comment on whether I thought it was a racist tattoo or not. I don’t think Modblog should shy away from the occasional controversy on the other hand, provided the submitter is given a fair chance to put his/her view across.
I don’t subscribe to deriding people as “stupid” for their choice of tattoo design. I may not agree with it, but I respect their right to get it and to submit pictures of it if they so choose – however personally distateful I may find whatever it symbolizes. Attempting to suppress or ridicule racist tattoos doesn’t make them go away, nor does it tackle the underlying problem which is the racist attitudes that inspires them. If anything it makes racism appear less of a problem than it really is, and unless we as a community have the courage to discuss it openly and rationally and try to understand it better, nothing’s going to change.
“This stuff should be documented on BME, but it should not be held up for idolization on ModBlog, at least not without an accompanying interview to give it context and commentary”
I think Shannon’s hit the nail on the head there. The choice of what to feature on Modblog is – and always has been – that of the editor. I didn’t see that pic so I can’t comment on whether I thought it was a racist tattoo or not. I don’t think Modblog should shy away from the occasional controversy on the other hand, provided the submitter is given a fair chance to put his/her view across.
I don’t subscribe to deriding people as “stupid” for their choice of tattoo design. I may not agree with it, but I respect their right to get it and to submit pictures of it if they so choose – however personally distateful I may find whatever it symbolizes. Attempting to suppress or ridicule racist tattoos doesn’t make them go away, nor does it tackle the underlying problem which is the racist attitudes that inspires them. If anything it makes racism appear less of a problem than it really is, and unless we as a community have the courage to discuss it openly and rationally and try to understand it better, nothing’s going to change.
OK this whole OMG-that’s-a-white-power-tattoo thing has gone way to far IMO. I can understand that some people can feel offended by swastika tattoos, or in this case, a totenkopf. But really, when are people going to (finally) realize that ‘Nazi iconography’ is effectively non-existent? And before you flame me and proclaim I deny the holocaust (which I don’t), let’s pretend to be grown ups for a moment and think; What did the Nazi’s REALLY come up with? Everything they used, from the banners to the swastika, from the eagle to the salute, and the totenkopf as well, it all comes from other cultures. All of it! The banners are from all over the placed, but were largely inspired by the Roman empire, as was the use of eagles (Aquilas). The salute comes from the Romans as well btw. Everyone knows the swastika comes from buddhism…And the totenkopf was widely used by many armies, not just te Nazi’s.
So it makes me wonder. Just because Hitler basically decided to ‘abuse’ all these icons, does that make it wrong for someone to get it?
I have a friend who has a tattoo of an Aquila, does that make him a Nazi? No, of course not! he’s of Italian descent and has a fascination for the Romans.
If my neighbour gets a swastika tattoo, does that mean he’s a rascist? For all I know he is a Buddhist…
And since Hitler liked to borrow from ancient Rome (and let’s be honest, we all know the Roman emperors weren’t innocent either), If I were to get a tatt of Julius Caesar, would that be offensive, too?
My point is, even tho I agree with Rachel, I find it sad that it had to come to this. We’re all adults, and we all have a functioning brain, right? So why can’t we grow up, get over ourselves, and practice what we preach. I have said it before, we never want to judged based on our mods, and there are plenty of people here who have mastered the modders mantra to perfection; “My body, my choice”, but when are we finally going to apply it to others? “Their body, their choice”.
OK this whole OMG-that’s-a-white-power-tattoo thing has gone way to far IMO. I can understand that some people can feel offended by swastika tattoos, or in this case, a totenkopf. But really, when are people going to (finally) realize that ‘Nazi iconography’ is effectively non-existent? And before you flame me and proclaim I deny the holocaust (which I don’t), let’s pretend to be grown ups for a moment and think; What did the Nazi’s REALLY come up with? Everything they used, from the banners to the swastika, from the eagle to the salute, and the totenkopf as well, it all comes from other cultures. All of it! The banners are from all over the placed, but were largely inspired by the Roman empire, as was the use of eagles (Aquilas). The salute comes from the Romans as well btw. Everyone knows the swastika comes from buddhism…And the totenkopf was widely used by many armies, not just te Nazi’s.
So it makes me wonder. Just because Hitler basically decided to ‘abuse’ all these icons, does that make it wrong for someone to get it?
I have a friend who has a tattoo of an Aquila, does that make him a Nazi? No, of course not! he’s of Italian descent and has a fascination for the Romans.
If my neighbour gets a swastika tattoo, does that mean he’s a rascist? For all I know he is a Buddhist…
And since Hitler liked to borrow from ancient Rome (and let’s be honest, we all know the Roman emperors weren’t innocent either), If I were to get a tatt of Julius Caesar, would that be offensive, too?
My point is, even tho I agree with Rachel, I find it sad that it had to come to this. We’re all adults, and we all have a functioning brain, right? So why can’t we grow up, get over ourselves, and practice what we preach. I have said it before, we never want to judged based on our mods, and there are plenty of people here who have mastered the modders mantra to perfection; “My body, my choice”, but when are we finally going to apply it to others? “Their body, their choice”.
OK this whole OMG-that’s-a-white-power-tattoo thing has gone way to far IMO. I can understand that some people can feel offended by swastika tattoos, or in this case, a totenkopf. But really, when are people going to (finally) realize that ‘Nazi iconography’ is effectively non-existent? And before you flame me and proclaim I deny the holocaust (which I don’t), let’s pretend to be grown ups for a moment and think; What did the Nazi’s REALLY come up with? Everything they used, from the banners to the swastika, from the eagle to the salute, and the totenkopf as well, it all comes from other cultures. All of it! The banners are from all over the placed, but were largely inspired by the Roman empire, as was the use of eagles (Aquilas). The salute comes from the Romans as well btw. Everyone knows the swastika comes from buddhism…And the totenkopf was widely used by many armies, not just te Nazi’s.
So it makes me wonder. Just because Hitler basically decided to ‘abuse’ all these icons, does that make it wrong for someone to get it?
I have a friend who has a tattoo of an Aquila, does that make him a Nazi? No, of course not! he’s of Italian descent and has a fascination for the Romans.
If my neighbour gets a swastika tattoo, does that mean he’s a rascist? For all I know he is a Buddhist…
And since Hitler liked to borrow from ancient Rome (and let’s be honest, we all know the Roman emperors weren’t innocent either), If I were to get a tatt of Julius Caesar, would that be offensive, too?
My point is, even tho I agree with Rachel, I find it sad that it had to come to this. We’re all adults, and we all have a functioning brain, right? So why can’t we grow up, get over ourselves, and practice what we preach. I have said it before, we never want to judged based on our mods, and there are plenty of people here who have mastered the modders mantra to perfection; “My body, my choice”, but when are we finally going to apply it to others? “Their body, their choice”.
I almost want to type a short essay of my opinion…
but its nothing that hasn’t been said before, and also previously mentioned, this site and blog is Rachel’s. She can do whatever she want see’s fit with Modblog, and in this case she found it best to remove a picture that would cause mass arguments.
I almost want to type a short essay of my opinion…
but its nothing that hasn’t been said before, and also previously mentioned, this site and blog is Rachel’s. She can do whatever she want see’s fit with Modblog, and in this case she found it best to remove a picture that would cause mass arguments.
I almost want to type a short essay of my opinion…
but its nothing that hasn’t been said before, and also previously mentioned, this site and blog is Rachel’s. She can do whatever she want see’s fit with Modblog, and in this case she found it best to remove a picture that would cause mass arguments.
Trynna narrow this down to the important bits for y’alls:
1) Holy shit that was an ugly looking tattoo (wait, those were _two_ ugly looking tattoos)
2) The totenkopf is older than the nazis, so technically speaking a totenkopf != a nazi symbol (not that this girl found it in a history book and did NOT know it’s connotations)
3) I can’t help but lul my ass off every time I see a tattooed, pierced, brown eyed brunette with a third reich fetish: do these mongrels not realize that per Hitlerin’ standards they are bottom of the barrel subhuman scum and oven fodder?
4) Hitler love and dumbitude aside, I woulda gone down on that girl’s ass for days anyway (just mentioning it)
5) “Shit eating AIDS chaser” is the best thing I’ve ever heard, I’m off to call the first person I see this
Trynna narrow this down to the important bits for y’alls:
1) Holy shit that was an ugly looking tattoo (wait, those were _two_ ugly looking tattoos)
2) The totenkopf is older than the nazis, so technically speaking a totenkopf != a nazi symbol (not that this girl found it in a history book and did NOT know it’s connotations)
3) I can’t help but lul my ass off every time I see a tattooed, pierced, brown eyed brunette with a third reich fetish: do these mongrels not realize that per Hitlerin’ standards they are bottom of the barrel subhuman scum and oven fodder?
4) Hitler love and dumbitude aside, I woulda gone down on that girl’s ass for days anyway (just mentioning it)
5) “Shit eating AIDS chaser” is the best thing I’ve ever heard, I’m off to call the first person I see this
Trynna narrow this down to the important bits for y’alls:
1) Holy shit that was an ugly looking tattoo (wait, those were _two_ ugly looking tattoos)
2) The totenkopf is older than the nazis, so technically speaking a totenkopf != a nazi symbol (not that this girl found it in a history book and did NOT know it’s connotations)
3) I can’t help but lul my ass off every time I see a tattooed, pierced, brown eyed brunette with a third reich fetish: do these mongrels not realize that per Hitlerin’ standards they are bottom of the barrel subhuman scum and oven fodder?
4) Hitler love and dumbitude aside, I woulda gone down on that girl’s ass for days anyway (just mentioning it)
5) “Shit eating AIDS chaser” is the best thing I’ve ever heard, I’m off to call the first person I see this
This whole thing does indeed seem like a slippery slope. There is so much iconograpy out there that has or could potentially be considerd to have a connection to one of the various hate groups in the world today that its just ridiculous. As Ru was saying, is a swastica that goes to the right a NAZI swastica? What guide lines are there to determine rather or not an 88 is racist? Is it just based on the general apperance of the person wearing it? Who makes such a call? Are there really that many Buddhist Nazis out there?
Clearly this web site is privately opperated and as such the owners do and should have the right to make whatever calls they want to regarding its opperation. However, if the goal is really to have nothing related to any variation of bigotry on IAM or modblog then there will certainly be many less IAM members as well as a good number of deleted modblog posts. Id venture to geuss that most of the people who were ousted due to their potentially hatefull modifications were far from bigots in the first place. Yet who is to say? Once my hate group that uses tribal tattoos and butterflys as their symbols gets big this web site is goging to get a lot smaller. Maybe we can use microdermals as our hate sign… then you’ll all be racist.
I get not wanting to basicly give free advertising to hate groups by putting hate related modifications up on modblog and such. I’m just saying there is a lot of grey area out there when it comes to rather something is in reality the iconograpy of a hate group or not and to have all of this content banned could very possibly negatively impact a whole lot of people who just dig skull and cross bones tattoos and things of that nature. I feel like that would negatively impact the comunity significantly more than every once in a while having a racist asshole show up on IAM… we can all just call him/her a dick head when he proves himself to be one instead of assuming he must be just because he has an 88 tattoo….right?
(and I dont actually have a hate group…but you get the point… no?)
This whole thing does indeed seem like a slippery slope. There is so much iconograpy out there that has or could potentially be considerd to have a connection to one of the various hate groups in the world today that its just ridiculous. As Ru was saying, is a swastica that goes to the right a NAZI swastica? What guide lines are there to determine rather or not an 88 is racist? Is it just based on the general apperance of the person wearing it? Who makes such a call? Are there really that many Buddhist Nazis out there?
Clearly this web site is privately opperated and as such the owners do and should have the right to make whatever calls they want to regarding its opperation. However, if the goal is really to have nothing related to any variation of bigotry on IAM or modblog then there will certainly be many less IAM members as well as a good number of deleted modblog posts. Id venture to geuss that most of the people who were ousted due to their potentially hatefull modifications were far from bigots in the first place. Yet who is to say? Once my hate group that uses tribal tattoos and butterflys as their symbols gets big this web site is goging to get a lot smaller. Maybe we can use microdermals as our hate sign… then you’ll all be racist.
I get not wanting to basicly give free advertising to hate groups by putting hate related modifications up on modblog and such. I’m just saying there is a lot of grey area out there when it comes to rather something is in reality the iconograpy of a hate group or not and to have all of this content banned could very possibly negatively impact a whole lot of people who just dig skull and cross bones tattoos and things of that nature. I feel like that would negatively impact the comunity significantly more than every once in a while having a racist asshole show up on IAM… we can all just call him/her a dick head when he proves himself to be one instead of assuming he must be just because he has an 88 tattoo….right?
(and I dont actually have a hate group…but you get the point… no?)
This whole thing does indeed seem like a slippery slope. There is so much iconograpy out there that has or could potentially be considerd to have a connection to one of the various hate groups in the world today that its just ridiculous. As Ru was saying, is a swastica that goes to the right a NAZI swastica? What guide lines are there to determine rather or not an 88 is racist? Is it just based on the general apperance of the person wearing it? Who makes such a call? Are there really that many Buddhist Nazis out there?
Clearly this web site is privately opperated and as such the owners do and should have the right to make whatever calls they want to regarding its opperation. However, if the goal is really to have nothing related to any variation of bigotry on IAM or modblog then there will certainly be many less IAM members as well as a good number of deleted modblog posts. Id venture to geuss that most of the people who were ousted due to their potentially hatefull modifications were far from bigots in the first place. Yet who is to say? Once my hate group that uses tribal tattoos and butterflys as their symbols gets big this web site is goging to get a lot smaller. Maybe we can use microdermals as our hate sign… then you’ll all be racist.
I get not wanting to basicly give free advertising to hate groups by putting hate related modifications up on modblog and such. I’m just saying there is a lot of grey area out there when it comes to rather something is in reality the iconograpy of a hate group or not and to have all of this content banned could very possibly negatively impact a whole lot of people who just dig skull and cross bones tattoos and things of that nature. I feel like that would negatively impact the comunity significantly more than every once in a while having a racist asshole show up on IAM… we can all just call him/her a dick head when he proves himself to be one instead of assuming he must be just because he has an 88 tattoo….right?
(and I dont actually have a hate group…but you get the point… no?)
I hope she gets the number 6 tattooed below the skull. (So it would be a Death in June logo..for the uninitiated).
I hope she gets the number 6 tattooed below the skull. (So it would be a Death in June logo..for the uninitiated).
I hope she gets the number 6 tattooed below the skull. (So it would be a Death in June logo..for the uninitiated).
What happens when people of hateful ideology recycle motifs for their own propaganda?
As in how do we distinguish intent from those whom have swastika/swatik and other “hate group motifs”?
I feel the dialog needs to be up. It means a lot to the community that Rachel and Shannon are involved working as a team on the matter.
What happens when people of hateful ideology recycle motifs for their own propaganda?
As in how do we distinguish intent from those whom have swastika/swatik and other “hate group motifs”?
I feel the dialog needs to be up. It means a lot to the community that Rachel and Shannon are involved working as a team on the matter.
What happens when people of hateful ideology recycle motifs for their own propaganda?
As in how do we distinguish intent from those whom have swastika/swatik and other “hate group motifs”?
I feel the dialog needs to be up. It means a lot to the community that Rachel and Shannon are involved working as a team on the matter.
I dislike that the post was removed, it should’ve been left and edited for content (ie: add a disclaimer up top).
The post wasn’t cached, and I can’t even find the iAM page anymore of the person who uploaded it.
I dislike that the post was removed, it should’ve been left and edited for content (ie: add a disclaimer up top).
The post wasn’t cached, and I can’t even find the iAM page anymore of the person who uploaded it.
I dislike that the post was removed, it should’ve been left and edited for content (ie: add a disclaimer up top).
The post wasn’t cached, and I can’t even find the iAM page anymore of the person who uploaded it.
BTW, AFAIK I’m the one who originally posted the girl’s totenkopf in the BME galleries, and I also posted the “White Power Unicorn” tattoo here on ModBlog, so let me briefly respond to the “what about that” query. The white power unicorn tattoo is one of two things:
1. Making fun of white power, and/or generally trying to be “bad taste humor”. Personally I think that’s worth posting, and given how extreme this example was, I think it was absolutely worth posting. I also don’t think that people would be instantly assuming it represented a general support of white power, so to me I didn’t worry that people were going to say “oh, now BME is featuring white power stuff?”
2. A way of supporting white power but getting away with it because of the silliness of the image. I personally did not think this was the reasoning, but I suppose it could be. If it is, I find that just as fascinating, and worth posting as well. It would make an interesting comment on the subversive nature of the modern racist movements, and how they are at once “out” but still ashamed or afraid to show themselves.
Either way, it’s completely different from posting a line-for-line copy of a key Nazi symbol.
Also, this is not a slippery slope as some have suggested. No one as far as I know is proposing not featuring anything that is ambiguous in its meaning, or applying the “don’t feature this” suggestion in anything except the most obvious cases. The totenkopf that was removed was not ambiguous. It was very specific. It might as well have said “Waffen SS” underneath it (and if the girl didn’t know it and somehow did this “by accident”, which I doubt given her BS followup about the claimed reason, she’s an idiot). Somehow saying “watch out if you have a skull tattoo” is silly, and seeks to create a strawman.
Also, remember, this is not censorship on BME. The image is still on BME. It just hasn’t been chosen to be FEATURED. Just like if you’re in school, not winning a “top student” award is not the same thing as being expelled. It just means you didn’t work hard enough.
I hate strawmen, and I hate claims of slippery slope when there is none… and as someone who has spent a long time fighting censorship (and as BME continues to do without me I hope), it upsets me when claims of censorship or rights violations are made when nothing of the sort has happened. It’s deceptive and it’s ignorant.
BTW, AFAIK I’m the one who originally posted the girl’s totenkopf in the BME galleries, and I also posted the “White Power Unicorn” tattoo here on ModBlog, so let me briefly respond to the “what about that” query. The white power unicorn tattoo is one of two things:
1. Making fun of white power, and/or generally trying to be “bad taste humor”. Personally I think that’s worth posting, and given how extreme this example was, I think it was absolutely worth posting. I also don’t think that people would be instantly assuming it represented a general support of white power, so to me I didn’t worry that people were going to say “oh, now BME is featuring white power stuff?”
2. A way of supporting white power but getting away with it because of the silliness of the image. I personally did not think this was the reasoning, but I suppose it could be. If it is, I find that just as fascinating, and worth posting as well. It would make an interesting comment on the subversive nature of the modern racist movements, and how they are at once “out” but still ashamed or afraid to show themselves.
Either way, it’s completely different from posting a line-for-line copy of a key Nazi symbol.
Also, this is not a slippery slope as some have suggested. No one as far as I know is proposing not featuring anything that is ambiguous in its meaning, or applying the “don’t feature this” suggestion in anything except the most obvious cases. The totenkopf that was removed was not ambiguous. It was very specific. It might as well have said “Waffen SS” underneath it (and if the girl didn’t know it and somehow did this “by accident”, which I doubt given her BS followup about the claimed reason, she’s an idiot). Somehow saying “watch out if you have a skull tattoo” is silly, and seeks to create a strawman.
Also, remember, this is not censorship on BME. The image is still on BME. It just hasn’t been chosen to be FEATURED. Just like if you’re in school, not winning a “top student” award is not the same thing as being expelled. It just means you didn’t work hard enough.
I hate strawmen, and I hate claims of slippery slope when there is none… and as someone who has spent a long time fighting censorship (and as BME continues to do without me I hope), it upsets me when claims of censorship or rights violations are made when nothing of the sort has happened. It’s deceptive and it’s ignorant.
BTW, AFAIK I’m the one who originally posted the girl’s totenkopf in the BME galleries, and I also posted the “White Power Unicorn” tattoo here on ModBlog, so let me briefly respond to the “what about that” query. The white power unicorn tattoo is one of two things:
1. Making fun of white power, and/or generally trying to be “bad taste humor”. Personally I think that’s worth posting, and given how extreme this example was, I think it was absolutely worth posting. I also don’t think that people would be instantly assuming it represented a general support of white power, so to me I didn’t worry that people were going to say “oh, now BME is featuring white power stuff?”
2. A way of supporting white power but getting away with it because of the silliness of the image. I personally did not think this was the reasoning, but I suppose it could be. If it is, I find that just as fascinating, and worth posting as well. It would make an interesting comment on the subversive nature of the modern racist movements, and how they are at once “out” but still ashamed or afraid to show themselves.
Either way, it’s completely different from posting a line-for-line copy of a key Nazi symbol.
Also, this is not a slippery slope as some have suggested. No one as far as I know is proposing not featuring anything that is ambiguous in its meaning, or applying the “don’t feature this” suggestion in anything except the most obvious cases. The totenkopf that was removed was not ambiguous. It was very specific. It might as well have said “Waffen SS” underneath it (and if the girl didn’t know it and somehow did this “by accident”, which I doubt given her BS followup about the claimed reason, she’s an idiot). Somehow saying “watch out if you have a skull tattoo” is silly, and seeks to create a strawman.
Also, remember, this is not censorship on BME. The image is still on BME. It just hasn’t been chosen to be FEATURED. Just like if you’re in school, not winning a “top student” award is not the same thing as being expelled. It just means you didn’t work hard enough.
I hate strawmen, and I hate claims of slippery slope when there is none… and as someone who has spent a long time fighting censorship (and as BME continues to do without me I hope), it upsets me when claims of censorship or rights violations are made when nothing of the sort has happened. It’s deceptive and it’s ignorant.
Re: “Just because Hitler basically decided to ‘abuse’ all these icons, does that make it wrong for someone to get it?”
I really want to emphasize this — her tattoo was not some general totenkopf. It was a line for line replica of a Nazi SS totenkopf. No one is saying don’t get a skull tattoo. It’s being said that if you get a NAZI totenkopf, don’t be surprised when you don’t get featured on ModBlog, and your image just goes on BME as normal.
Re: “Just because Hitler basically decided to ‘abuse’ all these icons, does that make it wrong for someone to get it?”
I really want to emphasize this — her tattoo was not some general totenkopf. It was a line for line replica of a Nazi SS totenkopf. No one is saying don’t get a skull tattoo. It’s being said that if you get a NAZI totenkopf, don’t be surprised when you don’t get featured on ModBlog, and your image just goes on BME as normal.
Re: “Just because Hitler basically decided to ‘abuse’ all these icons, does that make it wrong for someone to get it?”
I really want to emphasize this — her tattoo was not some general totenkopf. It was a line for line replica of a Nazi SS totenkopf. No one is saying don’t get a skull tattoo. It’s being said that if you get a NAZI totenkopf, don’t be surprised when you don’t get featured on ModBlog, and your image just goes on BME as normal.
Re: “I dislike that the post was removed, it should’ve been left and edited for content (ie: add a disclaimer up top).”
Actually, the post was edited a few times before it was removed, and this was in my opinion a mistake. Removing it totally was the right decision. Because:
1. Partial removal meant more fighting, and targeted this girl very directly.
2. Editing an entry after the fact is disingenuous.
Re: “I dislike that the post was removed, it should’ve been left and edited for content (ie: add a disclaimer up top).”
Actually, the post was edited a few times before it was removed, and this was in my opinion a mistake. Removing it totally was the right decision. Because:
1. Partial removal meant more fighting, and targeted this girl very directly.
2. Editing an entry after the fact is disingenuous.
Re: “I dislike that the post was removed, it should’ve been left and edited for content (ie: add a disclaimer up top).”
Actually, the post was edited a few times before it was removed, and this was in my opinion a mistake. Removing it totally was the right decision. Because:
1. Partial removal meant more fighting, and targeted this girl very directly.
2. Editing an entry after the fact is disingenuous.
Hm, I should add that after a bit of searching google it’s possible to pull up a photo of the tattooed showing the totenkopf in full view.
Hm, I should add that after a bit of searching google it’s possible to pull up a photo of the tattooed showing the totenkopf in full view.
Hm, I should add that after a bit of searching google it’s possible to pull up a photo of the tattooed showing the totenkopf in full view.
is this still going on? geez, IMHO it was an honest mistake, i didnt know that it was a nazi. so in fairness it was removed, why people are question rachel about cencership i’ll never know, im sure there are sites full of nazi/white power bull, IAM isnt one of those sites, i know the odd one dose pop up from time to time, 99% of the time it just gets up loaded and lost.
sean and rachel didnt know it was a nazi sign, and when did removed what they felt they should, why should BME/IAM include nazi’s? while im not saying the owner (of the tattoo) is or isnt nazi (and if they where they wouldnt admit it.)
i 100% understand why A. it was changed and then removed (since it was about tits) and B. why some people are a little crancky about someone changing the post.
is this still going on? geez, IMHO it was an honest mistake, i didnt know that it was a nazi. so in fairness it was removed, why people are question rachel about cencership i’ll never know, im sure there are sites full of nazi/white power bull, IAM isnt one of those sites, i know the odd one dose pop up from time to time, 99% of the time it just gets up loaded and lost.
sean and rachel didnt know it was a nazi sign, and when did removed what they felt they should, why should BME/IAM include nazi’s? while im not saying the owner (of the tattoo) is or isnt nazi (and if they where they wouldnt admit it.)
i 100% understand why A. it was changed and then removed (since it was about tits) and B. why some people are a little crancky about someone changing the post.
is this still going on? geez, IMHO it was an honest mistake, i didnt know that it was a nazi. so in fairness it was removed, why people are question rachel about cencership i’ll never know, im sure there are sites full of nazi/white power bull, IAM isnt one of those sites, i know the odd one dose pop up from time to time, 99% of the time it just gets up loaded and lost.
sean and rachel didnt know it was a nazi sign, and when did removed what they felt they should, why should BME/IAM include nazi’s? while im not saying the owner (of the tattoo) is or isnt nazi (and if they where they wouldnt admit it.)
i 100% understand why A. it was changed and then removed (since it was about tits) and B. why some people are a little crancky about someone changing the post.
I missed the titties :(. Was it of laurenelizabeth? She also has an inner lip tattoo that says “whites only”, which could have been borderline funny, but with that context….
I missed the titties :(. Was it of laurenelizabeth? She also has an inner lip tattoo that says “whites only”, which could have been borderline funny, but with that context….
I missed the titties :(. Was it of laurenelizabeth? She also has an inner lip tattoo that says “whites only”, which could have been borderline funny, but with that context….
Alright I’ll preface this comment by saying I’m jewish, just haven’t practiced in many years and don’t really care much about it. I think that racism is stupid, but I don’t feel personally affected if that is the persons mindset. Naturally, people are going to hate people. It has always been that way. So even if someone says something about my religion, or the fact I have tattoos, or any other reason they can find to hate me, I brush it off. If that is really their feelings, it is usually impossible to change the way they feel about it. I can understand not wanting to promote that on this site, but its a lot like the hitler portrait. Keep it archived for the sake of it being a modification, just have it tagged as being a nazi symbol and controversial.
Alright I’ll preface this comment by saying I’m jewish, just haven’t practiced in many years and don’t really care much about it. I think that racism is stupid, but I don’t feel personally affected if that is the persons mindset. Naturally, people are going to hate people. It has always been that way. So even if someone says something about my religion, or the fact I have tattoos, or any other reason they can find to hate me, I brush it off. If that is really their feelings, it is usually impossible to change the way they feel about it. I can understand not wanting to promote that on this site, but its a lot like the hitler portrait. Keep it archived for the sake of it being a modification, just have it tagged as being a nazi symbol and controversial.
Alright I’ll preface this comment by saying I’m jewish, just haven’t practiced in many years and don’t really care much about it. I think that racism is stupid, but I don’t feel personally affected if that is the persons mindset. Naturally, people are going to hate people. It has always been that way. So even if someone says something about my religion, or the fact I have tattoos, or any other reason they can find to hate me, I brush it off. If that is really their feelings, it is usually impossible to change the way they feel about it. I can understand not wanting to promote that on this site, but its a lot like the hitler portrait. Keep it archived for the sake of it being a modification, just have it tagged as being a nazi symbol and controversial.