Upskirts

[Giraffe Stapler]

All around the world and across all cultures, people enjoy watching sports because there's always a chance they will see a momentary flash of some woman's underwear. And those moments are often immortalized with a well-timed image. Those images sometimes find their way to Wikimedia Commons where they are dutifully sorted into "Category:Upskirts in sports" (and subcategories for individual sports, of course).

Now some non-sporting person is trying to delete these categories. This was a surprisingly boring discussion until someone decided that while it might be ok to have adult women and teenage girls in the categories, it wasn't cool to have kids in the upskirts in sports categories.

There are two things that I find amusing about this discussion. One, this is on Commons, where they have a categories for photographs of nude adolescents and children. I mean, yes, get rid of the upskirts in sports categories, but those are really the ones that bother you? Two, the person who removed the category from the photo of kids is Davey2010, who, I have heard, has fetish for schoolgirls in tights.

If "upskirts in sports" goes, what's next?
Category:Female buttocks in sports? (That's a subcategory of "female sportspeople", by the way.)
Category:Downblouse in tennis? (A subcategory of "women's tennis" just like "upskirt in tennis".)
Category:Ponytails in the United States? (I'm just kidding, that's not a real category. That would be ridiculous. Don't even click the link.)

[Trismic]

I’m always forgetting about the world that is commons... usually I don’t mess with it much unless I’m activating old Wikipedia-blocked socks on a Wikipedia-blocked IP (what can I say, I like to squeeze as much out of a sock as I possibly can) Thanks for posting this! It’s given me some inspiration... it’s ok if I’m doing it just to point out how creepy the whole thing is, right? Actually I’m too bored to care.

[watis]

Category:Ponytails in the United States? (I'm just kidding, that's not a real category. That would be ridiculous. Don't even click the link.)

Those are clearly braids.

[ArmasRebane]

I wish them as much luck deleting those categories. It's obviously not useful for (non-prurient) encyclopedic interests, but of course NOTCENSORED to some means "keep worthless dross because it's got some T&A in it."

[Ada Sinn]

Category:Ponytails in the United States? (I'm just kidding, that's not a real category. That would be ridiculous. Don't even click the link.)

Category:Ponytails by country has only three subcategories. Come on, Commonists, you can do better!

[Jim]

Category:Ponytails in the United States? (I'm just kidding, that's not a real category. That would be ridiculous. Don't even click the link.)

Category:Ponytails by country has only three subcategories. Come on, Commonists, you can do better!

Don't be so uncharitable. The parent category contains: File:Canter animated.gif



Not only is that animated, it almost qualifies twice...

[Ming]

Meanwhile, in Category:Upskirt (on purpose) in sitting is Rosie, who definitely is NOT sitting with her plumbing exposed for any encyclopedic reason. This is just part of the "description", btw:

So by now, you all know Rosie - at least in the two dimensional world of photography anyway. So I won't bore you with paragraph after paragraph of how beautiful she is, what an incredible model she is, how wonderful it is to work with her. As I said after my first shoot with her, she is the most beautiful girl Ive met, the best model Ive ever worked with and such wonderful company. For each and every image of her from now on, every statement in the previous statement is implied.

So I got in my car this morning, and after the habitual stop at Costa's to wake myself up, I arrived at a set of wooden security gates at the entrance to Rosie's house. As they opened and I drove in, I parked the little Mini Cooper between the Ferrari and the Porsche and was greeted by a pair of dogs who were both bigger than the car I was too nervous to get out of. They are, for the record, named Panther and Bear; which did little to quell my worries about them eating me, or even worse, my camera. But I do them an injustice, as they are two of the sweetest and funniest dogs you are ever likely to meet. One, the aforementioned Panther, is a labrador the colour of milk chocolate and the other, Bear, a Rottweiler with a head larger than my camera bag. Luckily for me, they seemed to like me and I was allowed to proceed towards the converted barn with an furry escort on either side. However, I digress, as it was not them I was here to work with.

Rosie makes a mean cup of coffee (even if it did expire around the time of the Russian revolution (1917 for anyone who cares). And it was over this cup of coffee that we spent at least the first two hours of hour shoot doing nothing else but sitting there talking. See this is the problem when a model and a photographer get on so well - they never take any bloody photos.

It goes on. Quite a lot further on. Oh, and you have to like this permission box:

When this file was uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, it was available from Flickr under the stated license. The Flickr user has since stopped distributing the file under this license. As Creative Commons licenses cannot be revoked in this manner, the file is still free to use under the terms of the license specified. See the Creative Commons FAQ on revoking licensing.

[tarantino]

Rosie, whose twitter account was suspended for violating their terms of use, is/was a fitness/lingerie model. There are a lot of photos of her out there.

[Jim]

There are a lot of photos of her out there.

There are 179 in: Category:Rosie Robinson

Just for fun, that category is a member of Category:Unidentified female models

I looked at 5 or 6 of the image pages from the Rosie Robinson category at random and they all had similar little "stories" to the one Ming quoted above.

The last one I checked (Commons File: Rosie - Bright-Eyed and Braless (15662084192).jpg) began:

Right, for those of you who actually read these little stories, and I know a few of you do, this could take a while. Seriously, I warn you, there is so much to say about this girl that I think Im going to be up a while.

[Giraffe Stapler]

Meanwhile, in Category:Upskirt (on purpose) in sitting is Rosie, who definitely is NOT sitting with her plumbing exposed for any encyclopedic reason.

Is that an upskirt, though? She's not wearing a skirt. She's wearing a tshirt and panties. You can see her panties because she's not wearing pants. Isn't an upskirt or downblouse or throughshoe supposed to invoke the idea of seeing something you're not supposed to see? If someone's not wearing pants, you're probably going to see their underwear.

(I just made that "throughshoe" but I think it has a good chance of catching on with foot fetishist voyeurs. Imagine if someone is wearing shoes with holes or made out of mesh and you can see the foot through it. If it tests well with focus groups, I will be starting a line of magazines, starting with Barely Legal Throughshoes and Reader's Wives' Throughshoes )

[Giraffe Stapler]

Something seems to be happening over on Commons. First the upskirts category is challenged and now the nipple slip category is up for deletion. These may very well end up getting deleted. Both of the discussions were started by Commons regulars and the usual crew of "free speech" folks don't seem that energetic these days. And it should be said, without Fae around to completely derail this type discussion as they usually do, it might actually get talked out.

I didn't notice until now that our friend Rhododenrites has nominated a few of the images in the nipple slip category for deletion. The interesting one is "Girl, Uganda (15566595376).jpg". It shows a smiling girl of 8 to 10 years old (my guess) with one of her nipples not covered by the neckline of her garment. It's actually a lovely picture.

I'm going to suggest that the problem here is not the pictures, but the Commons community. I don't know why Russavia(T-C-F-L) (now WMF banned) uploaded the picture of the Ugandan girl, but he didn't add any categories about nudity or nipples. A user called Brown boy(T-C-F-L) added "accidental nudity" to the image. It was long-time Commons editor TwoWings(T-C-F-L) who moved it to "Category:Nipple slip". It was TwoWings who created the category nipple slip. TwoWings seems to have two main interests - porn and images young girls doing gymnastics, some of which he takes himself. Not that there's anything wrong with that and I am sure the parents of these young girls completely understand that the two things are unrelated.

Commons facilitates these kinds of pervy things by having categories like "upskirt", "nipple slip", "cameltoe", etc. It will be a shame when the image of the Ugandan girl with the beautiful smile gets deleted because someone tagged it as a "nipple slip". Make a sensible policy about respect for the rights and dignity of people in images, get rid of the categories, and get rid of the people that create those types of categories. If Reddit got rid of their creepshots, Commons can get rid of these. But it has to want to.

[Hemiauchenia]

Most of those images seem fine compared to other many other commons images discussed here, nipples aren't taboo in most countries like they are in the US, and none of the images seem particularly embarrassing for the subject when given the proper context. That said, the nipple slip category is inappropriate and should be deleted.

[Vigilant]

These are porn images/categories and often child pornography.

Anyone who uploaded an image, moved an image made a category around these topics should be SanFranBanned to the Kuiper Belt.

That they aren't, speaks volumes about both Commons and the WMF.

[eppur si muove]

I've just looked at the deletion discussion and was struck by a post by Daniel Case of the sort that would have got the pitchforks and flaming torches out if he lived on this side of the Pond.

I would distinguish the open-crotch pants image I took in China that shows part of the boy's bare butt through the open seam in the back of his pants as a) taken not only in a public park but with the full awareness of the boy's parents ... I was ten feet (3 m) away sitting on a park bench, and they're in the uncropped original of that image which I have never uploaded and don't plan to (they were clearly aware of me taking the picture and did not object) b) preserving the subject's privacy since we cannot see his face (granted, it's hard to take that sort of image from the front anyway) c) taken with the intent of documenting that this is a real thing that exists, as without the picture people the concept sounds so unbelievable that people think it's made up.

[Charliebware]

I've just looked at the deletion discussion and was struck by a post by Daniel Case of the sort that would have got the pitchforks and flaming torches out if he lived on this side of the Pond.

I would distinguish the open-crotch pants image I took in China that shows part of the boy's bare butt through the open seam in the back of his pants as a) taken not only in a public park but with the full awareness of the boy's parents ... I was ten feet (3 m) away sitting on a park bench, and they're in the uncropped original of that image which I have never uploaded and don't plan to (they were clearly aware of me taking the picture and did not object) b) preserving the subject's privacy since we cannot see his face (granted, it's hard to take that sort of image from the front anyway) c) taken with the intent of documenting that this is a real thing that exists, as without the picture people the concept sounds so unbelievable that people think it's made up.

Open-crotch pants (T-H-L)
That is a surprise.

[Giraffe Stapler]

The resurrection of this thread made me look at one of the images that was previously in the "nipple slip" category. It is no longer in that category. Now it is in the "females wearing clothing with bare nipples" category. Not to be confused with the "women wearing clothing with bare nipples" category. The latter is a subcategory of the former. I guess there could be non-human females wearing clothing with bare nipples, but it seems strange to separate those by sex.

The distinction seems to be that the females category contains adolescents. I guess someone didn't feel right about creating "adolescent girls wearing clothing with bare nipples". I wonder why?

[eppur si muove]

I want to avoid looking at those as it seems as if a lot of the adolescent stuff sounds as if it would be illegal to view in this country. Obviously historically a number of societies have had women go about bare-breasted. I think that Abel Gance's Napoleon features some post-revolutionary scenes with fashionable women so dressed. And National Geographic used to feature a lot of bare breasted women from non-Western societies.

Neither of those sorts of exposed nipples are objectionable. But given the amount of Flickr-washing that goes on I wouldn't be surprised if some bare nipple on Commons are a product of revenge porn that's been downloaded by bots.

[Beeblebrox]

I've just looked at the deletion discussion and was struck by a post by Daniel Case of the sort that would have got the pitchforks and flaming torches out if he lived on this side of the Pond.

I would distinguish the open-crotch pants image I took in China that shows part of the boy's bare butt through the open seam in the back of his pants as a) taken not only in a public park but with the full awareness of the boy's parents ... I was ten feet (3 m) away sitting on a park bench, and they're in the uncropped original of that image which I have never uploaded and don't plan to (they were clearly aware of me taking the picture and did not object) b) preserving the subject's privacy since we cannot see his face (granted, it's hard to take that sort of image from the front anyway) c) taken with the intent of documenting that this is a real thing that exists, as without the picture people the concept sounds so unbelievable that people think it's made up.

Open-crotch pants (T-H-L)
That is a surprise.

I'd have to do some searching to find the discussion, but yours truly led the effort to keep that image from being featured on the main page via DYK. I really don't think when people check the main page they expect to see a picture of a child's ass as they prepare to take a shit on the ground.