File talk:2001 Low-rise jeans and thong whale tail.jpg
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
 | This file was nominated for deletion on 27 September 2024 but was kept. If you are thinking about re-nominating it for deletion, please read that discussion first. |
Does she know she's on Wikipedia?
[edit]
Bottom text 2601:247:4300:354:D14B:625F:3986:2D18 16:01, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
- i don't know. I find this image being here quite disturbing since it could have been taken without consent. This image also appears on a page about voyeurism stating that since the image was taken in a public place the photographer wasn't breaking the law. Even if this is true it doesn't make it appropriate or right to upload this image and use it. 90.247.160.183 17:25, 27 September 2024 (UTC)
- While taking a photo of this woman without her consent was not a nice thing to do, I'm in favor of keeping the photo on Wiki because of its educational/historical value and its usefulness as a conversation starter. In the West, revealing thong underwear in public was a very common phenomenon in the 2000s (a time period increasingly seen as history for many of Wiki's readers) and an illustration of that can be useful as a teaching tool (especially for older students). The photo can also be useful as a conversation starter on the topic of appropriateness from two different angles. Is it appropriate to reveal underwear, purposefully or accidentally, in public? Does the right of the individual to make a fashion statement outweigh perceived standards of public decency? On the other side, is it appropriate for someone to be taking photos of someone, even in a public location? Legally, taking photos of people is okay in most Western countries. But is legality enough to commit to an action?
- In addition, whether we like it or not, I suspect that there are many different photos of unsuspecting women revealing their underwear on the Internet. This action, taking photos, was also a part of life in the 2000s. Having this photo on Wiki lets it serve as a reminder of the dynamics of life in the 2000s. Also, I don't believe the photo breaks Wiki's standards on identifiability. Had the woman's face been shown in the photo, I too would agree with you and would argue for the photo to be marked as inappropriate for use here. However, her face is not shown and the photo is almost 25 years old at this point so I suspect the woman in this photo no longer looks the way she did in 2001. If you made it this far, I appreciate you taking the time to read this. I'm happy to continue the conversation if you so desire. CanofCan (talk) 22:19, 28 September 2024 (UTC)
- I just feel like there are ways for it to be consensually done and that should be the way it's done. I for one would feel horrified if an image of me was taken without consent and used like this, even with my face blurred. 90.247.160.183 22:23, 12 October 2024 (UTC)
