I’m talking about this sort of thing. Like clearly I wouldn’t want someone to see that on my phone in the office or when I’m sat on a bus.

However there seems be a lot of these that aren’t filtered out by nsfw settings, when a similar picture of a woman would be, so it seems this is a deliberate feature I might not be understanding.

Discuss.

  • RBWells@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    46
    ·
    3 months ago

    I think if you wouldn’t use it as your wallpaper at work because it is inappropriate for work, that’s NSFW. So yeah at my job that would be NSFW.

  • theherk@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    39
    ·
    3 months ago

    Of course it should. NSFW doesn’t mean too hot to handle. It means, I don’t want coworkers or customers seeing this on my screen, as a matter of professionalism.

  • glitchdx@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    34
    ·
    3 months ago

    I am of the opinion that there should be more granularity to NSFW than a simple binary.

    I’m a fan of how e621 does things:

    rating:s (safe)

    rating:q (questionable)

    rating:e (explicit,)

    But I would add another:

    rating:t (traumatic, known elsewhere as Not Safe For Life)

    Call it “purity” and allow users to filter posts to allow or block any arbitrary combination of purity levels (wallhalla, formerly wallbase, does this if you want to see how it could work).

    • fine_sandy_bottom@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      2 months ago

      It would be great if everything could be classified in this way, but is it practically possible to apply a more complex system like this across instances, given that we struggle with the simpler NSFW tag?

      • Mistic@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        The reason why people are struggling with one tag may also be exactly because it’s only one tag.

        It’s difficult to categorize gray as black or white, after all.

        Imo, the real issue is how not to go overboard, adding more and more tags, and keeping things easy to filter.

        • fine_sandy_bottom@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          Perhaps. I’m not expert but I’m just not convinced you’d get good compliance across instances.

          After all, even minimal non- compliance makes the whole thing pointless

          • Mistic@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            2 months ago

            Can’t the same be said about what we have right now, though?

            No system is flawless, but you’d be surprised the lengths people will go to uphold the ones that work.

    • recapitated@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      Moreover I don’t think these need to be on a single scale. Like, trauma isn’t “more” than pornographic, it’s just something completely different (ideally).

      There can be a scale of safe to unsafe for a variety of reasons, and people might be able to filter what they see more proactively based on their own tolerances (and interests).

      But then again complexity can be a deterrence. Tagging and cataloging can be a big content management problem and I think most want to do the simplest thing possible.

      But maybe content advisory could be a crowd sourced effort, using a up/down ranking on explicit categories just like we can do on posts.

  • EnderMB@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    24
    ·
    2 months ago

    Yes.

    The tag is Not Safe For Work. I’d say that if you were to look at this in most work places you’d probably be speaking to HR within the hour…

  • crossover@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    23
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    I just want posts or communities to have category tags for me to block by tag. So I can block all anime and every non-English community.

    I have nothing against them. They’re just not of interest to me and I don’t want them on my feed. Blocking a community is mostly useless because there are so many of them it’s like playing whack a mole.

    • phoneymouse@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      3 months ago

      Agree, if I scroll past it and someone looking over my shoulder is going to call me a weirdo, it should be NSFW.

  • Toastypickle@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    18
    ·
    2 months ago

    I wish there was strictly an amine tag so I could filter all that shit out like you can with nsfw. Blocked countless weirdass communities that randomly popup.

  • Shimitar@feddit.it
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    2 months ago

    That would be perfectly acceptable where I live and work. No nudity, no tits, no genitals, move along…

    On the other hand, anime in general is relegated to teens more than not here, so any anime would raise eyebrows if seems browsing from my phone by others given I am definitely not a teen by large.

    YMMV, but different cultures different sensibility.

    Should Lemmy be a MCM or a MCD? I think this should be the question.

  • JohnEdwa@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    If the NSFW limit was put on “image of a woman wearing shorts and sports bra”, would you run to shut down the break room TV when they showed such obscene NSFW things like the Olympic games with their skimpy track and field and beach volleyball outfits? All of those communities would obviously need to be marked NSFW on Lemmy too.

    And while NSFW indeed does come from the words “Not safe for work”, it isn’t “blur everything that wouldn’t be appropriate for my coworkers or boss to see me browse during work time”.
    Getting caught watching episodes of My Little Pony would be pretty inappropriate and embarrassing during working hours as well.

    • davidagain@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      2 months ago

      And while NSFW indeed does come from the words “Not safe for work”, it isn’t “blur everything that wouldn’t be appropriate for my coworkers or boss to see me browse during work time”.

      Why not??? That’s surely exactly what NSFW should mean.

      Your “there’s no clear boundary between appropriate and inappropriate” is bogus. You could use the same argument to remove NSFW tagging altogether or allow CSM on the platform. It’s not a useful or sensible contribution.

      • JohnEdwa@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        Nudity, gore, violence - explicit materials. Stuff you wouldn’t be allowed to plaster on a giant billboards in the middle of the city or on the side of your office building or have run on daytime TV in the breakroom. If an image of a clothed female is NSFW then obviously a man wearing nothing but a towel in a shower is as well.

        You start making a list of everything everyone takes offence into and finds inappropriate and you end up with a list with literally everything on it. Some people in this thread have used “If I couldn’t use it as a wallpaper at work, it should be NSFW”. Plenty of people would find this picture absolutely disgusting and inappropriate, so should it and everything like it be NSFW tagged as well?

        • davidagain@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          2 months ago

          That’s the same argument again. It claims that something is sometimes hard to do therefore should never be done. It claims that some people might disagree therefore no decision can be made. It’s fallacious.

        • ulterno@lemmy.kde.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          I’ll go with, if you are browsing an Anime related channel, then that’s not to be NSFW’d.
          When x-Posting, it would be NSFW.

          But I don’t use Lemmy or social media at the workplace anyway, so what would I know

          CC BY-NC-SA 4.0

  • recapitated@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    Yes, they should be. For the same exact reason anything that is taboo but socially acceptable but definitely unprofessional should be. Real boobs, cartoon boobs, it doesn’t bother me at all but it makes me very much less likely to browse lemmy in a public setting. Setting morals completely aside, if you want this platform to thrive, you’ll have to be compassionate to the consumers of it, the user base. The community can definitely make this thing not usable if they want to. It’s about being practical.

      • Cethin@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        No, that doesn’t solve the problem. You have to have a merge accepted by the owners of the repo, unless someone wants to start a new fork and maintain that.

    • JamesTBagg@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      3 months ago

      I do the same but there so fucking many, it seems. Why are people so into the cartoon porn? It’s fucking weird.

      • systemglitch@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        Yeah, there seems to be some disconnect with those people. I look at the people’s history before blocking them, and the ones posting that content often have some mental health issues.

        Probably resulting from an inability to find healthy love or the feeling of being loved, as most mental health issues seem to stem from.

        Love is all we need, and when it’s lacking, shit gets weird.

  • wjs018@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    3 months ago

    Where the NSFW line is drawn varies depending on the moderator and community. If there are communities that are either not moderated actively enough or draw that line too far to one side for your taste, then don’t subscribe or block those communities. Those tools exist there for a reason.

    I would not consider the post you have linked to as NSFW. I also think that the NSFW tag has evolved over time, so perhaps my definition of NSFW just doesn’t line up with what today’s standard should be. There are plenty of anime characters in very popular shows that have a character design similar to that. There are big billboards of them some places to promote the show. Just because it might be NSFW in your work environment/region, does not mean it is everywhere.

  • Moghul@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    3 months ago

    NSFW has become code for porn, effectively. My friend and I use NSFO for ‘not porn, maybe not even nudity, but not necessarily appropriate for the office’. Maybe that’s what we need. A second filter.

    • atrielienz@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 months ago

      I see plenty of memes labeled NSFW. I sometimes assume they’re porn and keep scrolling. Sometimes I recognise the image even through the filter and I’ll click on it. I find this very confusing. It’s not a bad idea to have two different terms. But I feel that that might get lost in the sauce as the term has already gone critical mass. People will probably start to use them interchangeably.