This is discussion archived from a time before the current discussion method was installed.
Kilyle: Given that final word, I feel we need a link to Zero Punctuation's review in which he "tried" to avoid mentioning boobs. I think it might have been Tomb Raider.
Medinoc: I remember seing on this very site a link to a webcomic who treated that quite seriously. However I can't remember either the address nor the name...
Medinoc: Found it! It's Octopus Pie, and the link is on the Nakeder Than The Male page.
Document N: Which got deleted, I guess. Did The Great Crash take it?
Twin Bird: Sadly, no. It eventually went via cutlist.
Medinoc: At least the YKTTW discussion
is still available.
Travis Wells: Come on, it's been there for eight days and no one has complained? What kind of Discussion page is this? There's nudity in the main article! Complain about all the Children are going to be traumatized and all that.
- Narvi: Gasp. I just noticed! Alas for the moral degeneration of this wiki! Happy now? ...Is that a male nipple? It doesn't really have that much areola.
- Rothul "Removed for Obvious Reasons"? Isn't the entire point of the article that the reasons aren't very obvious at all!
- This Trohper: Maybe, but I don't want that picture showing up when I click random item in school.
- Wimblesaurus: Shouldn't you be doing school things at school?
Mike: I remember reading about Oblivion that the reason the female character had nipples under her top was that the skin on her torso was the same skin used on the male torso, meaning that she had man's nipples. Is there a way to use this to make a censor's head explode please?
Twin Bird: I found the Ren And Stimpy short in question on Youtube, but while the mother is little more than a talking pair of breasts, I couldn't find a bath scene. Are you sure you remember that right?
Twin Bird: Ah...Shadow Dragon 8685...does the phrase "Rule Of Cautious Editing Judgment" mean anything to you? (Although it probably speaks volumes that I'm not going to remove the picture.)
Lullabee: I kinda like it. It eloquently expresses the silliness of freaking out about nipples by being such a stupid homely little bump. It's not exactly pornographic, is it? Not very sexy or anything. If it's that important to people maybe it should be swapped for a man-nipple. But that's not the trope.
Twin Bird: I was mostly referring to the entry he made at the bottom...check the page history.
~~~~: Yeah, I kinda went overboard. Deliberately. It was my means of semi-humorously venting exactly the same sort of outrage that Mr/s. "Obvious Reasons" used when s/he deleted the image. I'd do it again in a heartbeat, too. But then, I'm not a very subtle person. And I don't care to be. ^_^
Nentuaby: Errr... Yeah. Re-deleted the photo. I'm probably sticking my dick in a socket here, but while the reasons may or may not be "obvious" they are practical. Simply put, whatever (lack of) deeper reason there may be to react to nipples, they are not accepted in a lot of troper's societys. There are a lot of situations where a person reading TV Tropes at work or in a public place might stumble onto this page and get into real trouble for suddenly having Not Work Safe content suddenly come up on their screen.
- Nentuaby PS: I am not Mr. Obvious Reasons.
- ((Shadow Dragon 8685)): I don't give a flying fuck. I'm putting it back up. If you delete it again, I will put it back up again. I'm also putting back up the line where you deleted the reference to the blue noser editing the page. Here's a newsflash - if you're at work, get to work, ya lazy bum! Your boss ain't paying you to browse TV Tropes. (And if your job is, for some reason, to browse TV Tropes, then your boss ought to understand a little goddamned nipplage on a website which is essentially operated and edited by The Internet.)
Twin Bird: Y'know, at this point, if we're going to get this way, it's probably better just to drop the image. I'm sorry, but can we stop this topfree riding into battle?
Twin Bird: And there it is again. Why the hell are you turning this into such a crusade? Really? You're coming off as at least as ridiculous as the people deleting it. Now the entry at the bottom and the comment at the top make no sense to anyone who hasn't been following this inane thing. I'm not going to delete it again, but if this edit-revert cycle keeps up, I think we'll need to call in the admins...
Nentuaby: Why is this such a crusade indeed. Blah-blah-don't-read-at-work, yes yes. Not Work Safe is just the common term for it. What it means is "safe to have it seen over your shoulder by somebody more conservative than you." In this case, I'm talking about ANYWHERE IN PUBLIC IN THE U.S. OF A. Since this is quite possibly the only outright NWS image on this entire site, I'd really rather see the place have a perfect record. It's easier to read this page. It's a practical consideration. Now, that's why I don't want to have it. Why are you determined to have it, beyond "I Don't give a flying fuck I'm putting it back?" As for the entry I deleted, I only deleted it because it made no bloody sense without the picture up at the top.
Hey, guys, if we can have a picture of a female nipple here, then does that mean I can post a picture of my dick on the gag penis page?
PuppetChaos: Above comment is epic win.
Also, this discussion page wants to make me scream TV TROPES IS SERIOUS BUSINESS.
Rothul: Well, the obligatory Take That! response would be something along the lines of "No, because such a picture would clearly not demonstrate the trope!"... See... it's funny because despite having never met the man, I wish to imply that he has inadequate genitalia. Haw hee haw hee haw.
As for the Edit War SERIOUS BUSINESS... I mean, it's no more than a reflection of society at large, isn't it? Despite the apparent silliness of the phrase, Nipples are Serious Business. That's the point the page makes, right? It's an extension of how Sex is Serious Business (which, for a myriad of reasons biological, psychological and sociological, should be self-apparently true.) It's kind of asking too much to say that people who would otherwise care about a subject, should not because they're on the internet.
Inkblot: How about we keep the picture, but cover the nipple with insanely over-the-top censoring?
ZeldaTheSwordsman: I say keep it, or better yet, a link to it. With a warning label.
Seven Of Diamonds: I think a ridiculously censored one might be kind of funny. But yeah, nothing NSFW without a warning.
Shiroi: I would say, let's take the breast image on the wikipedia (or another one) and quite completely cover it with the image of a bunny (buy anything is ok), like the one they show in the Azumanga Daioh episode when one of the protagonist got drunk, in such a way that any user could see some skin but otherwise wouldn't be even able there's a naked person there. Then in the comment we say "Under the bunny there's a nipple, but we won't show you!!" I think it's funny, over the top, and makes the point of the page at the same time, what do you say?
Nentuaby said: Why are you determined to have it, beyond "I Don't give a flying fuck I'm putting it back?"
Legendarylugi: Maybe because deleting it undermines the entire point of the page? Is that a good enough reason? The whole point of the page is the obviously flawed standards that make a female nipple so "offensive" to begin with. Removing the picture undermines the text. If it were up to me, I would put the picture back up, and simply caption it "Is this really that big a deal?" Honestly, it speaks volumes that infants are fed by breasts (it's their primary function), and yet nipples are hidden from view to "protect children" or for "common decency". It's a meaningless taboo. Like recently, when Selma Hayek went to an impoverished African nation, and breast fed a starving infant, and the news media here in the U.S. made a HUGE controversy over her feeding a child that would otherwise starve to death, in the name of modesty. That is not natural.
The only "good" reason I can think of to remove the picture is that, while perhaps the taboo is unneccessary, maybe for TV Tropes that's not so important as the fact that said taboo exists, and TV Tropes isn't for political soapboxing. That is the only reason I can understand to remove it, and even that feels tenuous.
Twin Bird: This page is about the taboo. It is not about "the obviously flawed standards" leading to the taboo, just the taboo. We don't make pages like that on the main wiki. See Tropes Are Tools, License To Whine.
Caswin: So I deleted the image that was placed here (accompanied by the note "Time to emotional scar some people...") a few weeks back without — apparently much like the original editor — a clear idea of what led to it, with a half-joking comment in the reason box that, in retrospect, could easily be misinterpreted. However, I'm still leaving it out because this page has gotten along fine without having the exact same controversial image in a slightly less volatile area. Just covering myself here.
deltree: I'm not going to delete the image, as that's not going to contribute anything to this discussion... But I would like to know, what does the image contribute to the article. I mean, I like boobs 'n all... But I don't need a reminder of what they look like to provide extra context for the article. I don't think this image contributes to the article in the slightest.
- Put in an image that won't get tropers... "promoted" (ads there can be NSFW, by the way). Please. Just because you don't agree with the Double Standard does not mean it's not Flame Bait. As it is said in a sticky thread in Image Pickin': "If a trope can not be described accurately with a picture, then don't give it one. As regards this topic no picture at all is an improvement over a bad one." And this image simply doesn't describe the trope; at best, it only demonstrates it in a very meta fashion by starting a lame edit war, which is less than mature troper behavior. If you must have an image, at least put in a subversion, which at least demonstrates that it's a taboo. I propose this:
