On Sat, Jan 2, 2016 at 1:20 AM, Ric Moore <wayward4...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 01/01/2016 04:47 AM, Joel Rees wrote: >> The comment on facebook aside, I looked at the first twenty or so >> images in the list, and I agree that the general point of view is very >> much one that treats people as objects. I would not want my children >> finding those when looking for clipart. >> >> In my opinion, a complaint is justified here. Those should be sorted >> out into a separate package, at minimum. > > I looked at the first 100 and found nothing meriting censorship. Ric
There were only 95 in the list the OP gave. FWIW. I let you badger me into looking at the rest of them, and, I'll acknowledge that some of the images in the list the OP gave are not really offensive, particularly if taken alone. Others? You and I seem to have different ideas about what we want children to find when they reach up on the family/school bookshelf. Censorship? I'm not suggesting burning bits here -- just moving some of the clipart out into a separate package so that a child looking for a general image of a woman won't bump into a male sexual fantasy cartoon image of a woman giving him or her the come-on in moderately graphic detail. On a positive note, if you know where to avoid looking, the openclipart packages have a lot of useful artwork, both for direct use and for ideas to build on. Does need some more work on organization to make what one is looking for easier to find. -- Joel Rees
