On Fri, 22 Oct 1999, Nicole Zimmerman wrote:
> But why does she *need* to be in the screenshot in the first place if
> it's not about her, or something related to her?
Why does everything in the screenshot HAVE to be about the theme? Isn't
the purpose of a screenshot to show what the theme looks like while being
used, rather than what it looks like with a bunch of apps and images put
there because they relate to the theme? Apps and images that you may not
have?
> But, if you're looking for a wide audience or have a very general theme,
> a picture of nekkidWomanA isn't necessarily within your target
> audience...
Its not necessarily out of your target audience, either. As I pointed out
before, we are there to look at the THEMES, and the images contained in
the screenshots are just so much noise. It doesn't matter to me what
people put there, because that's not why I am looking at the screenshot.
> unless... you think the "community" that uses windowmaker (or less
> specifically X) would always like a picture of nekkidWomanA, and we run
> into the problem I believe we started out discussing. How do we let the
> people who think everyone wants to see nekkidWomanA know that NOT
> everyone is looking for nekkidWomanA or would enjoy seeing nekkidWomanA
> in their perusal of themes?
There *is* an Adult section, and anything relating to nakedness is put
there. Problem solved. I don't believe its necessary to take it a step
further, and tell people not to put images of models in their screenshots.
> > All of this starts me thinking back to my belief that people have become
> > SO worked up over objectification of women, that ANYTHING representing
> > gorgeous women in little clothing is deemed offensive. It feels like men
> > (and those of us who LIKE women too) are not allowed to appreciate the
> > female body, to take sexy pictures and share them with the world, or to
> > put images of them in advertizing and movies. YES, objectification is a
> > problem. However, all images of scantily clad women are NOT
> > objectification.
>
> So since there are more people that like women (male or female), we
> should not be bothered by it at all?
That is not my point, and if that is how it reads, (which it doesn;t to
me, natch :) then my apologies. My point is that people take their
offended sensibilities too far, and try to tell people they can't even
THINK about looking at/creating images that could be said to objectify
women. Or men. Its NOT a gender issue. Its not about which party has the
majority. Its about dealing with the fact that people LIKE to appreciate
male and female forms, and the act of putting these images in a screenshot
is not such a big deal. Again, all my own opinion. To some people it is a
big deal, and quite honestly, that's fine as long as they don't tell me
what I can and cannot put on a public website. The lines between Adult and
non-adult themes is firmly drawn.
Bikkini-clad women can be seen in many places, and I think that attacking
themes.org is ridiculous. There are too many OTHER places where its a real
issue. Go look at a website for racecar-fanatics, or low-riders. Pick up
one of those magazines. Take a long hard look, and then try to tell me
that themes.org screenshots compete with THAT.
And since I have just been repeating myself, I think I will stop here. I
am quite outnumbered here anyhow ;)
+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+* http://www.ganzir.org/siozie/ *+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_
)\._.,--....,'``. Full Riot Pussycat
/, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,.
fL `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.' Pussy Wrangler Extraordinaire
************
[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
