NSFW/Image Macro: What Do You Mean Its Not For Kids

Technically this isn't a NSFW image, but I don't see an option for modifying problematic captions.

Could we please removing the A Date With Rosie Palms sinkhole from the caption? I think it falls under the "Creepy" category, given the age of the kid. And yes, kids that age may do such things, but that doesn't mean we need to needlessly dwell on it or make suggestive comments about it.

I'd remove gratuitous sinkholes myself, but apparently someone already got banned for doing this and there is now a note saying not to modify this without an IP thread.

edited 4th Mar '12 4:56:34 PM by Catbert

Lampshaded Double Entendre would be a better sinkhole.

edited 4th Mar '12 5:11:38 PM by Jicragg

I don't really care one way or another about the image, though making the page imageless would be fine by me.

The main thing is that I just don't think we need to be making creepy commentary about what some Real Life kid is going to be doing in the privacy of his own bed.

edited 4th Mar '12 5:12:27 PM by Catbert

Why is that creepy?

Sorry, I realised what you were saying afterwards.

edited 4th Mar '12 5:12:25 PM by Jicragg

It doesn't seem creepy to me, just distracting. Obviously, we are interested in the juxtaposition of the kid with the explicitness of the material, not the "audience reaction" by the kid.

Without that pothole it is JAFAAC, no indication that La Blue Girl is hentai. Masturbation fantasy is kind of the point of pornography. Don't understand the objection.

edited 4th Mar '12 5:23:37 PM by rodneyAnonymous

In that case, maybe its a bad picture.

The objection is that we really don't need to be making suggestive comments about preteens.

edited 4th Mar '12 5:24:30 PM by Catbert

It's not a bad picture. It's a picture of a boy holding a Christmas gift that his parents (or someone) apparently thought was a kiddy cartoon, but it's not, it's porn. And the caption says so.

"Suggestive comments"?! That is, like, saying a plate of delicious food is suggestive of it being eaten.

edited 4th Mar '12 5:28:22 PM by rodneyAnonymous

The caption doesn't say it is porn. It speculates about prepubescent children masturbating.

If depending on sinkholes/potholes is considered sufficient to make something more than Just a Face and a Caption, the fact that the picture is potholed to La Blue Girl, which describes the pornographic nature of the work, should be plenty.

edited 4th Mar '12 5:29:11 PM by Catbert

I guess I don't think that's creepy.

I'm personally uncomfortable with the sink-/pothole, but I'm uncomfortable with masturbation in general, so I guess there's bias there.

But I don't think the image would be harmed if the sink-/pothole or even the caption entirely were removed though.

I suppose the caption should maybe say "this is porn" more clearly, but it seems excellent already. Suggested improvement?

BTW the caption is "That kid's sure going to enjoy that nice cartoon his mom and dad gave him."

edited 4th Mar '12 5:48:35 PM by rodneyAnonymous

The caption is fine the way it is

I've no major issues with the current pic or caption, but if we can come up with a more clever option for the latter, that'd be good too.

edited 4th Mar '12 8:04:32 PM by Willbyr

Why not just pothole a simple caption to our entry for La Blue Girl?

'You know. For kids.'

edited 4th Mar '12 8:51:45 PM by pawsplay

I see that particular two sentences far too often on the wiki. Or at least, I used to. It's gotten stale.

Well, let's nuke the other instances, then. I mean, it's never going to get better than this.

I'm pretty sure it's actually an obscure reference, which makes its use here both better and worse.

Ideally, in order to avoid JAFAAC, the caption should clearly indicate that the gift depicted is in fact an adult-oriented original video animation. I'm not quite sure how to go about that, however.

Even if someone doesn't recognize the reference, they can probably detect the sarcasm, and can then click on the link. If the Hudsucker Proxy line isn't considered amusing enough, any other indicative phrase can serve the same purpose.

It seems like that is a somewhat-disguised restatement of the trope name. An improved caption would say roughly the same thing as the current caption I think, or otherwise "some people might think it looks like it's for kids, but it's not" and not just "what do you mean it's not for kids?"

edited 4th Mar '12 10:03:22 PM by rodneyAnonymous

If you want it to say, "That movie contains tentacle rape" you could certainly do that instead.

That is not better than the current caption.

What about linking the full cover in the caption? his hand is covering the "WARNING: ABSOLUTELY NOT FOR CHILDREN" warning.◊

another version of the cover more blatant warnings though.◊

edited 4th Mar '12 10:50:24 PM by rodneyAnonymous