Talk:Downblouse
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Picture Discussion
No disrespect, but is a picture really necessary for this article?
Why not? A picture is worth a thousand words in this case?!--PeterMarkSmith 10:44, 2 August 2005 (UTC)
Downblouse is a term used to describe images, enjoyed by voyeurs who like women, showing the view down a female's shirt or blouse. Taking photographs of someone surreptitiously is an offense in some countries, but in others there are no laws to prevent this. Some people consider this sort of photography to be a form of sexual abuse and an invasion of privacy if it is done without consent.
An alternative form of this type of voyeurism are upskirt images - similar to downblouse but with the intent of showing a woman's lower half.
The advent of cell phones fitted with cameras (aka camera phones) may be reason for surge in these types of photographs. Pcghost 18:52, 11 Novemeber 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Is this picture really legal?
I just voted to keep this page on AfD, but I'm disturbed by the picture. Could somebody point me to an explanation of how this type of picture is uncopyrightable and legal? If we need a picture on this page, why not use one with a known, willing model posing? --Allen 00:41, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
- I just deleted the picture. I can't imagine the shit we'd be in if the woman in the photograph found out it was on here. --Allen 01:01, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
Uhh... the picture's still up, on the past versions of the page. I don't know if there's an easy way to take care of that (sorta new here), but as the case here is legality, SOMEthing should be done. If it turns out later that it's legal, and the woman consents to it being posted, it can always be uploaded again. --Anonymous 16:57 EST, 17 February 2006
According to a post on Cleavage, this is a picture to whom the "model" (the wife of the photographer) readily agreed. Not the most exciting things (no offense), but kosher. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Kalisphoenix (talk • contribs).
[edit] The new picture is legal
We took that picture for this article specifically. The image description describes that it is public domain with a consentual adult model. However I think the previous comment refers to another picture as the comments are from February and I only recently posted this new one in response to a request at Wikipedia:Requested_pictures. HighInBC 13:45, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
- <comment removed (User:84.9.26.19 suggested a better picture could be found)> --Allen 19:46, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
I took the picture down, there's not picture on the "upskirt" article, why should there be one here? 68.149.23.252 16:51, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
- The picture was requested, it is topical, it is legal, it illustrates the article, information should not be removed without reason. HighInBC 16:53, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Image:Downblouse.jpg
Ok, every so often somebody removes this but nobody has given a reason. I am creating this section for the discussion of whether or not this image is valid.
I am not overly attached to the image being here, but we did make it on a request for this page. Now, if you don't think it should be there please outline your reasoning below: HighInBC 16:56, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
I have added a {{dbauthor}} tag onto this image. Jimbo has not clarified this[1] statement. Since I don't know what the alledged trolling was I can only assume he meant the images she contributed to related articles. I don't wan't to be called a troll, and "indef banned without so much as a how do you do", so I am playing it safe. HighInBC 13:47, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
I have a picture of me. Can I post it? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Capsource1 (talk • contribs).
- Maybe. We've been bitten in the past by people uploading questionable images, claiming they were of themselves, when they were actually of others, who had never given releases. I think this would call for something like the procedures described Wikipedia:Verifying unusual image licenses. Please read that, and if you can comply, please go ahead. AnonEMouse (squeak) 17:12, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Pornography?
This article states that "There are many websites that promote downblousing as pornography, but in real life, taking photographs of someone surreptitiously is a legal offense in some countries." And Oxford Dictionary states "printed or visual material intended to stimulate sexual excitement." So wouldn't young teenagers in search of stimulating pictures key in "downblouse" and see this picture? Just a thought.
