3 ms·

having to look at dick pics all day is not healthy Why? I mean, if you are just looking at nudity - even if the men are 'prepared for sex' - at the end of the

having to look at dick pics all day is not healthy Why? I mean, if you are just looking at nudity - even if the men are 'prepared for sex' - at the end of the day, it is just nudity. I've worked in nursing homes. Other folks work at hospitals. Lots of folks see nudity everyday. Lots of those folks see genitals daily, in a much more intimate way than a dick pic. I don't really get what is so unhealthy about it. There is nothing inherently wrong with simple nudity in general, even when it is suggestive.

intended 3y ago
Theres more nudity seen in one day by a T&S team than what a whole hospital will have to deal with. Finally, you curtail your argument by saying “simple nudity”. Trust and Safety exists because of context and action. These arent tasteful nudes or art people are looking at. I wont speculate too much, but the intent of a picture, the context and the target make a difference. Sending a pic to someone not interested in them, or a minor - has a vastly different connotation.
- bozhark 3y ago
  So porn actors can’t handle their jobs?
- Broken_Hippo 3y ago
  In general, sex isn't something to get upset about. A hard penis isn't traumatic. It is still simple nudity. Heck, it isn't even universally linked to sex. I don't have a penis, but from what I understand, they do randomly become erect and cycle through this stage during sleep. A penis, even in hand and suggestive, is still simple nudity. None of the people in the center have had it sent to them personally, and surely they know. Harassment using pictures of yourself is different: That's harassment, and should be frowned upon. They are still using simple nudity to do it, and the nudity isn't the issue.
  - watwut 3y ago
    The pics they were looking at were not "simple nudity" and it is puzzling why you insist on framing it that way. People can and do communicate through pictures more then just mere object of it. That being said, if it was a picture of a penis erect in sleep, the context of "probably not consensualy taken" on itself makes it more disturbing. And seeing a lot of these can easily make you more paranoid to sleep where you can't lock door and everything.
  - intended 3y ago
    Making general statements is the starting point for policy principles.nThe application is nuanced. Defining simple nudity, I would say, is of low importance. i would be looking at types of harm using case data. Spending time defining only the non problem parts is a luxury. Theres pages of que to clean and no one to do it. I need a definition, plus examples and tests that a team can actually use daily. Furthermore - unsolicited sexual imagery IS traumatic to a swathe of people (survivors of abuse) and illegal in many cultures. That moderators get affected seeing such content should not be a surprise. The very least that happens to mods is desensitization. Paranoia, PTSD, high risk behaviors are common fates if you work in tough ques.
    - Unbefleckt 3y ago
      Surely if your job entails reviewing these images, then the images are no longer unsolicited, and are now just simple nudity as the poster states. I don't like warehouse work, and I do find it traumatic, but that's why I don't work in a warehouse.
  - soVeryTired 3y ago
    If I sent someone a picture of a raw steak via a dating app, it wouldn't "just be a picture of a steak". There's nothing inherently wrong with pictures of steak, but the context is important. In the context of a dating site, sending someone a picture of a steak is inappropriate and creepy. Is the user trying to communicate that they see someone as a piece of meat to be used for pleasure? Is it a threat ("I'm going to cut you up")? Likewise, there's nothing inherently wrong with a picture of a penis. But seeing first hand the aggression and intent to humiliate or victimize that's behind a dick pic is what's disturbing. See enough of that every day and you'd lose your faith in men. That's the problem for the moderators.
MerManMaid 3y ago
>Why? I mean, if you are just looking at nudity - even if the men are 'prepared for sex' - at the end of the day, it is just nudity. I think a big part of it is adequate training; Think of surgery, a trained surgeon seems to be able to cut someone open (to help obviously) and go to bed fine that night but if I ever had to do it, regardless of the outcome I most likely wouldn't be able to sleep. An adequately trained content moderator should be equipped with whatever emotional tools needed before they're expected to moderate their company's content safely.

intended 3y ago

Theres more nudity seen in one day by a T&S team than what a whole hospital will have to deal with. Finally, you curtail your argument by saying “simple nudity”. Trust and Safety exists because of context and action. These arent tasteful nudes or art people are looking at. I wont speculate too much, but the intent of a picture, the context and the target make a difference. Sending a pic to someone not interested in them, or a minor - has a vastly different connotation.

bozhark 3y ago
So porn actors can’t handle their jobs?
Broken_Hippo 3y ago
In general, sex isn't something to get upset about. A hard penis isn't traumatic. It is still simple nudity. Heck, it isn't even universally linked to sex. I don't have a penis, but from what I understand, they do randomly become erect and cycle through this stage during sleep. A penis, even in hand and suggestive, is still simple nudity. None of the people in the center have had it sent to them personally, and surely they know. Harassment using pictures of yourself is different: That's harassment, and should be frowned upon. They are still using simple nudity to do it, and the nudity isn't the issue.
- watwut 3y ago
  The pics they were looking at were not "simple nudity" and it is puzzling why you insist on framing it that way. People can and do communicate through pictures more then just mere object of it. That being said, if it was a picture of a penis erect in sleep, the context of "probably not consensualy taken" on itself makes it more disturbing. And seeing a lot of these can easily make you more paranoid to sleep where you can't lock door and everything.
- intended 3y ago
  Making general statements is the starting point for policy principles.nThe application is nuanced. Defining simple nudity, I would say, is of low importance. i would be looking at types of harm using case data. Spending time defining only the non problem parts is a luxury. Theres pages of que to clean and no one to do it. I need a definition, plus examples and tests that a team can actually use daily. Furthermore - unsolicited sexual imagery IS traumatic to a swathe of people (survivors of abuse) and illegal in many cultures. That moderators get affected seeing such content should not be a surprise. The very least that happens to mods is desensitization. Paranoia, PTSD, high risk behaviors are common fates if you work in tough ques.
  - Unbefleckt 3y ago
    Surely if your job entails reviewing these images, then the images are no longer unsolicited, and are now just simple nudity as the poster states. I don't like warehouse work, and I do find it traumatic, but that's why I don't work in a warehouse.
- soVeryTired 3y ago
  If I sent someone a picture of a raw steak via a dating app, it wouldn't "just be a picture of a steak". There's nothing inherently wrong with pictures of steak, but the context is important. In the context of a dating site, sending someone a picture of a steak is inappropriate and creepy. Is the user trying to communicate that they see someone as a piece of meat to be used for pleasure? Is it a threat ("I'm going to cut you up")? Likewise, there's nothing inherently wrong with a picture of a penis. But seeing first hand the aggression and intent to humiliate or victimize that's behind a dick pic is what's disturbing. See enough of that every day and you'd lose your faith in men. That's the problem for the moderators.

MerManMaid 3y ago

>Why? I mean, if you are just looking at nudity - even if the men are 'prepared for sex' - at the end of the day, it is just nudity. I think a big part of it is adequate training; Think of surgery, a trained surgeon seems to be able to cut someone open (to help obviously) and go to bed fine that night but if I ever had to do it, regardless of the outcome I most likely wouldn't be able to sleep. An adequately trained content moderator should be equipped with whatever emotional tools needed before they're expected to moderate their company's content safely.