3 ms·

> Why are you doubling down on your assumption that this is about Lena without you knowing what actually happened? What makes you assume she didn’t know full we

> Why are you doubling down on your assumption that this is about Lena without you knowing what actually happened? What makes you assume she didn’t know full well the image was not under her control? What makes you assume control over the image is even a relevant issue here? Three loaded questions in a row. I think you're reading more into my comments than I stated or intended. I'm not assuming anything, just answering a question and pointing out that regardless of whether she thought it through or not, the the photo was not produced or distributed unethically. The title is literally "Ethically Sourced Lena Picture," which implies the original was sourced unethically. That's all I'm arguing. The words we use matter, and I'd like to be able to point out when the words don't match reality without folks thinking they need to give me a lesson in empathy.

dahart 4y ago
Hehe it’s funny to complain about perceived lessons right after saying “That class of thinking is exactly what she should have considered.” What I think I hear you saying is you don’t like the article’s title (an article that wasn’t written or endorsed by Lena) perhaps because it implies (without stating explicitly) that the original picture was unethical. The new one can be ethically sourced without the old one being unethically sourced. It is an assumption on your part that anyone said anything about the original image being unethically “sourced”. If you want to say that words matter, it definitely makes sense to double-check if your interpretation of words is accurate, and whether you’re taking them literally or projecting assumptions, especially when you, as you’ve said, lack context. The bigger picture here is that the “ethics” of the situation aren’t related to Lena’s choices, which you’ve assumed and claimed and stated explicitly multiple times now. The ethics in this debate are surrounding the ethical use of pinup images in educational and work settings, and is not related to the original sourcing of the image by Playboy specifically aside from it being published in a soft core magazine which makes it symbolic of the lack of tact when using it for scientific or educational purposes.
- twodave 4y ago
  Yes, you’re correct. The title sucks.

dahart 4y ago

Hehe it’s funny to complain about perceived lessons right after saying “That class of thinking is exactly what she should have considered.” What I think I hear you saying is you don’t like the article’s title (an article that wasn’t written or endorsed by Lena) perhaps because it implies (without stating explicitly) that the original picture was unethical. The new one can be ethically sourced without the old one being unethically sourced. It is an assumption on your part that anyone said anything about the original image being unethically “sourced”. If you want to say that words matter, it definitely makes sense to double-check if your interpretation of words is accurate, and whether you’re taking them literally or projecting assumptions, especially when you, as you’ve said, lack context. The bigger picture here is that the “ethics” of the situation aren’t related to Lena’s choices, which you’ve assumed and claimed and stated explicitly multiple times now. The ethics in this debate are surrounding the ethical use of pinup images in educational and work settings, and is not related to the original sourcing of the image by Playboy specifically aside from it being published in a soft core magazine which makes it symbolic of the lack of tact when using it for scientific or educational purposes.

twodave 4y ago
Yes, you’re correct. The title sucks.