there was a scandal almost 20 years ago now when a copycat exhibition opened in Paris and strangely all bodies had east-asian traits. There was a petition against it later on as the bodies were found out to be coming from Chinese prisons.
ECPM et Solidarité Chine ont mis en avant les origines troubles des corps présentés, qu’ils soupçonnent d’appartenir à des condamnés à mort et à des prisonniers. « Il s’agit exclusivement de
corps de ressortissants chinois, masculins, jeunes, et ne présentant aucune pathologie
particulière, de sorte que l’hypothèse de la mort naturelle de ces hommes paraît improbable »
I’m pretty sure I saw this exhibition in Las Vegas. I assumed it was the more famous one when I entered, but the more I saw, the more I realised all the bodies were Chinese. Closer inspection of the promotional material put the clues together.
It was fascinating because human anatomy is cool, but knowing they weren’t voluntary donations really soured the experience.
I saw the same exhibit in Vegas and came to the same conclusion about halfway through after noticing all the bodies were Asian. Really soured the experience and I wouldn’t go back or recommend it to others.
Because it’s roughly in the same class as extreme gore, even if produced for a very different, educational purpose. I think there are likely plenty of workplaces where having the equivalent of extreme gore visible on your device would be a problem.
I can somewhat understand not wanting to see it, but it literally is not gore. There is zero gore in image. Gore specifically refers to blood.
I don’t think this should be marked NSFW though. There’s a lot of things people can argue they don’t want to see. Some might not want to see swear words, for example. It doesn’t mean we need to censor everything for them. This is tame and should not really be upsetting for an adult. It’s no worse than what you’d see in an anatomy book. It’s not reveling in this person death, or anything like that. It’s just organs.
The literal point of “NSFW,” i.e. “Not Safe For Work,” is that things be marked that way that could cause problems if viewed in a workplace. That’s it, and nothing more. I don’t mean to be rude, but what you go on to argue has nothing to do with that.
Because it’s roughly in the same class as extreme gore, even if produced for a very different, educational purpose. I think there are likely plenty of workplaces where having the equivalent of extreme gore visible on your device would be a problem.
I still don’t agree that it should be NSFW. What workplace would have an issue if you had an anatomy textbook on your desk, for example? You see this as being vulgar, at the same level as watching someone get hit by a car, as an example. I fundamentally disagree. This is purely scientific. Even for entertainment, I don’t think we should NSFW art with nudity, for example. That’s absurd. Porn? Sure. Equating all nudity with porn is the same as equating this with extreme gore.
What workplace would have an issue if you had an anatomy textbook on your desk, for example?
All kinds of places. Imagine being hired to do a certain job, and you have a completely unrelated book of human organs open on your desk or your screen? Imagine if your job is public-facing. There are plenty of scenarios in which that’s either weird or risky, and if you can’t grasp that concept, I don’t know what to tell you.
You see this as being vulgar
No, you’re completely missing the point when you come up with nonsense like that. Indeed, before my disability set in, I wanted to be a heart surgeon as a kid, and would leaf through my dad’s anatomy texts in fascination and build models of various human organs. Point is-- this is in no way about my personal tastes. That’s all in your own head.
Again, and this will be the last time I try to draw such a map for you, the whole point of the NSFW label is to communicate to people in all possible workplaces that certain content might be risky to view in said workplace. That’s all.
This isn’t about certain scenarios you might imagine to yourself in which it would be absurd for anyone to be concerned about such things. There are certainly plenty of those! This isn’t about censorship issues, which you seem to repeatedly confuse the issue for. This is about a friendly, harmless warning tag that lets people know when there MIGHT be a risk for their workplace. Now what people do with that is certainly their business. For example, in settings you can choose how you want such things to display. Either blurring them, omitting them, or taking no action whatsoever. Bam. Problem solved.
Now if you’re just out to waste my time and have no real interest in understanding, then congratulations. Mission accomplished, I guess. Bye.
![[OC] Human specimen](https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/1218c4dc-5344-4f45-8b88-e4e97e892660.jpeg){kind=link}
NSFW tag needed for this one!
Yeah people seeing the image might not know these are real cadavers.
What?!
You read it right, look up “Body Worlds” by artist Gunther von Hagens.
it wasn’t always “body worlds”!
there was a scandal almost 20 years ago now when a copycat exhibition opened in Paris and strangely all bodies had east-asian traits. There was a petition against it later on as the bodies were found out to be coming from Chinese prisons.
https://worldcoalition.org/fr/une-exposition-de-cadavres-dorigine-douteuse-interdite-a-paris/
https://www.humanite.fr/-/-/lexposition-de-cadavres-our-body-interdite-en-france payWalled credible source
exhibition got banned
I’m pretty sure I saw this exhibition in Las Vegas. I assumed it was the more famous one when I entered, but the more I saw, the more I realised all the bodies were Chinese. Closer inspection of the promotional material put the clues together.
It was fascinating because human anatomy is cool, but knowing they weren’t voluntary donations really soured the experience.
I saw the same exhibit in Vegas and came to the same conclusion about halfway through after noticing all the bodies were Asian. Really soured the experience and I wouldn’t go back or recommend it to others.
Do you also need a NSFW tag for steaks?
Do people need a NSFW tag for a commonly eaten food item? No, probably not.
Any other penetrating questions to ask?
Still a bloody part of a murdered being. The corpse in the picture is clean and was in all likelihood ethically sourced
deleted by creator
Good points, but that’s leaving out the power of normalisation.
Why?
Because unclothed!
Because it’s roughly in the same class as extreme gore, even if produced for a very different, educational purpose. I think there are likely plenty of workplaces where having the equivalent of extreme gore visible on your device would be a problem.
That’s why.
I can somewhat understand not wanting to see it, but it literally is not gore. There is zero gore in image. Gore specifically refers to blood.
I don’t think this should be marked NSFW though. There’s a lot of things people can argue they don’t want to see. Some might not want to see swear words, for example. It doesn’t mean we need to censor everything for them. This is tame and should not really be upsetting for an adult. It’s no worse than what you’d see in an anatomy book. It’s not reveling in this person death, or anything like that. It’s just organs.
Nobody that I know of said that it was gore.
The literal point of “NSFW,” i.e. “Not Safe For Work,” is that things be marked that way that could cause problems if viewed in a workplace. That’s it, and nothing more. I don’t mean to be rude, but what you go on to argue has nothing to do with that.
Exactly. At no point did I say that it was actual gore. I was making a functional comparison for the purposes of the NSFW context.
Are you really trying to tell me that you don’t understand the point of the NSFW label?
I still don’t agree that it should be NSFW. What workplace would have an issue if you had an anatomy textbook on your desk, for example? You see this as being vulgar, at the same level as watching someone get hit by a car, as an example. I fundamentally disagree. This is purely scientific. Even for entertainment, I don’t think we should NSFW art with nudity, for example. That’s absurd. Porn? Sure. Equating all nudity with porn is the same as equating this with extreme gore.
All kinds of places. Imagine being hired to do a certain job, and you have a completely unrelated book of human organs open on your desk or your screen? Imagine if your job is public-facing. There are plenty of scenarios in which that’s either weird or risky, and if you can’t grasp that concept, I don’t know what to tell you.
No, you’re completely missing the point when you come up with nonsense like that. Indeed, before my disability set in, I wanted to be a heart surgeon as a kid, and would leaf through my dad’s anatomy texts in fascination and build models of various human organs. Point is-- this is in no way about my personal tastes. That’s all in your own head.
Again, and this will be the last time I try to draw such a map for you, the whole point of the NSFW label is to communicate to people in all possible workplaces that certain content might be risky to view in said workplace. That’s all.
This isn’t about certain scenarios you might imagine to yourself in which it would be absurd for anyone to be concerned about such things. There are certainly plenty of those! This isn’t about censorship issues, which you seem to repeatedly confuse the issue for. This is about a friendly, harmless warning tag that lets people know when there MIGHT be a risk for their workplace. Now what people do with that is certainly their business. For example, in settings you can choose how you want such things to display. Either blurring them, omitting them, or taking no action whatsoever. Bam. Problem solved.
Now if you’re just out to waste my time and have no real interest in understanding, then congratulations. Mission accomplished, I guess. Bye.