Talk:Breast

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Breast has had a peer review by Wikipedia editors which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article.

Archives

1 2 3

Discussion on Guidelines for images in Sexology and Sexuality articles
Click here

Contents 1 Young woman breast image should be removed 2 What is the matter with you? 3 Brief question... 4 Soviet poster

[edit] Young woman breast image should be removed

I believe that this may not be legal in some states including in California if this young woman turns out to be a young girl and its a felnoy CALIFORNIA CODES PENAL CODE SECTION 186-186.8. Also many of these image have images of peoples breast. Did they release permission to show their breast? LOL. Just wondering if this is an issue of ownership. Like in girls gone wild they do a background check on each person and I believe they sign away their rights. Some of the girls were not even legal age. Wikipedia doesn't do background check on these images. It says on Child Protection and Obscenity Enforcement Act "2257 Regulations (C.F.R. Part 75)), part of the United States Code of Federal Regulations, require producers of sexually explicit material to attain proof of age for every model they shoot, and keep those records on hand." This information is not open with public domain images. I just think Wikipedia should just be more careful so they don't get sued or challenged legally so maybe old women or mature images maybe okay but not young woman.Getonyourfeet 03:56, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

with all due respect sir, what the hell are you talking about?--Honeymane_{Heghlu meH QaQ jajvam} 05:34, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Honeymane do you always have to be a dick? Never mind it’s a rhetorical question. Getonyourfeet, I would have to say that's not for the editors of this page to decide and probably should be handled by wikipedia legal council or discussed at the village pump policy discussion page and then set as wikipedia policy before editors could start requesting images be deleted for the reasons you mention. If you are familiar with Florida law (servers are in Florida so California law may not apply) and know for a fact that a law is being broken I would say that you contact an administrator for additional help. Most likely the issue has been brought up before and discussed to great lengths so someone else may be able to point you in the right direction for an answer on why the images do not violate a law you may be questioning. --I already forgot 07:40, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

…Sexually explicit?! I second Honeymane’s comment. —xyzzy_n 10:27, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

I agree. There is nothing wrong with the female breast. Its purpose is to breastfeed infants. It's only considered a sexual body part in countries that make it out to be, when in reality it is no more sexual than legs, lips, buttocks, etc. or any other part of the body.

Hah! Then, African/Oceanic boy, say to your girlfriend you're not touching her breasts anymore, instead touching her legs! LOLOLOL -- Euyyn

Can someone explain in plain english what this is all about? 22:35, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

There's no way to know, as getonyourfeet's original post makes no sense. Under US law, one cannot "sign away" any rights of any kind. He may be referring to personally identifiable images, but since these images are not personally identifiable, I don't see the problem there. As they're also obviously images of fully-developed postpubescent breasts, I also don't see where there could be a concern over pedophilia. If somehow (which I doubt very much will ever happen) we were to learn the actual age of one of the models of these photos, and the age was low enough to cause a legal problem in Florida, which is where WP's servers are sited, then I think something would probably be done. But I don't see how we've failed in any way to do the right thing on this page. The images here are informative without being prurient; exactly what is called for in an encyclopedia article. Kasreyn 22:21, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Source of Breast pic If you look at the upload summary in Wiki Commons for the image in question, you'll see that the original source was from a Flickr account here. If you look at some of the other pictures in the collection, it seems pretty obvious that the woman is not "underage." It appears to be a German couple who had a baby together recently and posted pictures of the mother throughout the pregnancy. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 22:35, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

I'm well aware, as I'm the one who added the image to this article. What puzzles me is why the descriptor "pregnant" (as in, "a photo of a pregnant woman's breasts") was removed from the image caption. I've been offline for some months, you see. Was it determined to be an unimportant or frivolous detail? Kasreyn 22:57, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

I remember that for a long time, the caption indicated the woman was pregnant; I have no idea why it was removed. It should be restored. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 23:15, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Actually that's not the image in question, OhNoitsJamie - it's the one just under "Changes" about half-way down the article. Ciotog 23:02, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Oops, I guess I didn't read the debate close enough...I didn't realize there were two "pregnant" breast pictures. I don't see how a California law is applicable to Wikipedia (especially since there's nothing about the picture that suggests that individual is underage). OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 23:15, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] What is the matter with you?

There is a big notice saying discussion of whether the picture should be allowed is available at the given link and then the first thing you do is write a heading saying breast photo not allowed.... Jesus, some people. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 217.38.111.126 (talk) 20:42, 1 March 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Brief question...

I'm feeling a bit perverted even asking this...but why are all the breasts of pregnant women? 4 pictures on here, 2 pregnant, one drawing...why not go the whole nine yards? Srsly. Lulzatron 03:21, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

I believe it has to do with the fact that the primary purpose of the female breast is that the mammory gland produces milk for babies. And milk production begins when a woman is pregnant. I remember reading somewhere that male breasts can produce milk in certain situations.

Nooooo! Puaaaajjj!!! -- Euyyn

I did a little math. According to this article, the average american woman has 2.09 children in a lifetime, and lives for about 80.82 years. Assuming a 9 month term, this means that a typical american woman spends 1.93% of her life pregnant. What about the remaining 98%? Ghostwo 21:50, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Soviet poster

What's the soviet poster trying to show? I don't find any relation between it and any part of the article. -- Euyyn 07 March 24 - 14:54

It discusses breast health/disease prevention. The Russian says something like "Are you taking care of your breasts? Harden your nipples with daily washing in cold water". Atom 14:43, 24 March 2007 (UTC)