That there nipple...
is in a weird place. Anyway, thanks for pointing it out, El Reg. I hadn't noticed it myself.
El Reg had Middle England choking on its Coco Pops a couple of weeks back following the failure of its jub-detection algorithm (JDA) - an advanced piece of coding designed to protect sensitive readers from an eyeful of unchecked chesticle. The JDA compares images uploaded to our media servers with a photographic database of …
We should stop and reflect just how lucky we are, that the busybody who makes these decisions on which bits of flesh can / cannot be displayed didn't choose noses to be the subject of the nation's modesty, instead.
Not only would we *all* have to traipse around in "nose bras", but you'd probably get locked up for picking your schnozz in public, As for sneezing - I hate to think.
Why erroneous? Consider all the mistakes they've caused.
Michael James (Peter O'Toole): Did you find a job?
Victor Skakapopulis (Woody Allen): Yeah, I got something at the striptease. I help the girls dress and undress.
Michael James: Nice job.
Victor Skakapopulis: Twenty francs a week.
Michael James: Not very much.
Victor Skakapopulis: It's all I can afford.
Modesty taboos are an offshoot of religious strictures, both of which have no place in a pluralistic society. Let people wear what they want (or not, as the case may be), and let them believe what they want in the religious domain - just don't let others tell me what to wear (or not) and what to believe!
As for people who cancelled their subscriptions over a few errant pixels - their loss, and probably fewer trolls for the rest of us to deal with!
True to a degree, but, even as a frothing-at-the-mouth atheist I'd prefer any young children in my care didn't have adult dangly -bits swinging in their direction at (the children's) head height.
It's all natural, yes, and there is too much prudishness, especially when it comes to the odd nipple, but letting it all hang out all the time - I'm not convinced.
OK, so you don't, but I'm going to tell you anyway ...
My opinion is that any part of the body with curly hair on it should be kept covered because it's disgusting. So for me, men going topless is more of a problem than women going topless.
And some people need to wear hats permanently!
"My opinion is that any part of the body with curly hair on it should be kept covered because it's disgusting."
It isn't always curly - depends on your genes. On the other hand "smoothies" bald follicle bumps make them look like plucked chickens.
El Reg should take a cue from the 1950s "Health and Efficiency" air-brushed removal of body hair and nipples. A generation of boys grew up with a very distorted education obtained from scavenging in wind-blown hedges. The next generation had the more natural windfalls of Penthouse.
"Let pretty people wear what they want (or not, as the case may be)"
Unfortunately very few people look "pretty" without the help of clothes. As D H Lawrence wrote in his poem about figs: clothes, no matter how little, are not to hide anything - but rather to adorn and attract attention to what can't be seen. Humans are animals with a high degree of curiosity.
"Modesty taboos are an offshoot of religious strictures, [...]"
There is a deeper instinct of status display. It has been said that some naked Amazonian tribes will avoid a visitor until they have had time to put a string of beads about their waist.
What counts as immodest varies almost incomprehensibly. Some Middle Eastern religions have no problem with nudity per se - but require that the face be covered in social encounters outside the family.
As Salome proved - it is not the naked body that is alluring but the tease of not being able to see part of it clearly.
Hardly the shocker that I expected - I have seen more nipple on my train journey from Norwich to Ipswich. A truly terrifying time was had when I controlled the flesh filter fir a strategic health authority. It was often quite hard to gauge what email should go through and what should be blocked.
*Paris, because she would never let a nipple slip upset her.
If you look back at the comments to the original story, there wasn't any outrage -- the problem was that El Reg had broken the sacred code of NSFW. A few people were worried about corporate JDAs and off-the-shoulder eyeballs. This article is just overstating it for amusing effect.....
... to boost the ratings with another shot of the snake-fondling Pole. I'd be horrified to think that anyone on here would be truly offended by a chance glance of a "slither" (I see what you did there, by the way) of nip.
By the way, nice to see that joke again. Has it really been forty years?
You call that an eyeful? When I was a lad a mere glimpse could be seen through the keyhole and if you wanted a proper eyeful you needed a mate to prop you up to the window sill. Here I was expecting something at least .033 square linguini or 3.1e-5 NanoWales and that's at the paltry 1360 x 768 resolution of my laptop. I hate to think what those poor bastards with retina or equivalent displays have to suffer with. I imagine it barely triggers more than a rod and a pair of cones here and there. An eyeful indeed.