13 ms·

Being offended by cropped image of something that viewers may not know is a nude image is just another level of discovery of what can potentially be rated offen

by larodi 3y ago

Being offended by cropped image of something that viewers may not know is a nude image is just another level of discovery of what can potentially be rated offensive. I remember this article where some girl dropped her PhD to do onlyfans and made like millions in very short time. Wonder what she was offended by? Perhaps offensively expensive tutoring costs, or generally non-competitive pay in academia which it seems is not to be discussed as something researchers from all genders are usually put off by? Sorry, this is such a hypocritical nonsense to ban the Lena image, that it really amazes me somebody cared to be so politically correct while on a daily basis a researcher around the world is marginalised by their seniors by not being listed as the first author of an article. THAT is offensive, not some pixels in the age of TikTok and Insta.

GaryNumanVevo 3y ago
The subject of the photo, Lena Forsén, has explicitly called for it to be retired. No need to get all up in arms about what's "offensive"
- larodi 3y ago
  Thats another story, and while my previous comment on a general basis stands (or rather I stand firm with this position), because the same twisted logic gets applied to other "bans", I stand corrected in the light of your note. Lena has a right to demand the image to be retired. But last time I read interview with her this demand was not included in her responses. thanks for update.
- low_tech_love 3y ago
  That’s misleading. She has been quoted multiple times saying she was amused and thought nothing of it. Until a bunch of activists came and told her she should be offended, and that the matter was of great importance to the future of mankind. Then of course she changed her mind, why not.
  - acdha 3y ago
    I would assume that as an adult she’s capable of making her decisions and we should respect that. Even if you disagree, there is no reason why we need to continue using it and it’s not a good choice purely on technical grounds, so a better question would be asking why anyone would be so committed to continuing to use an objectively obsolete image over the objection of its subject.
    - xdennis 3y ago
      She's capable of making her own decisions now, but not when, for many years, she thought it was harmless? It's weird that papers are banned based on which sample images they pick, rather than technical merits. When will the HeLa cell line papers be cancelled? To this day scientific experiments are being carried out on cells take from a black woman without her consent.
      - acdha 3y ago
        > She's capable of making her own decisions now, but not when, for many years, she thought it was harmless? The IEEE is acting now, so her current position seems most relevant. It’s not the primary reason - that’s the technical limitations and general wisdom of using pornography in professional publications – but it’s a good third point. Switching is trivially easy, why not do what the subject requests? Your comparison with HeLa is interesting because it directly highlights the difference: nobody’s work depends on LENNA.JPG - anyone doing serious work is using multiple images, and there are many easy alternatives so nobody’s paper is getting rejected unless they throw a performative tantrum trying to get an interview with Tucker Carlson. HeLa is different in several ways: it does things which other cell lines could not, allowing some fundamental research to be performed which wasn’t possible when cell lines could only survive for a few days, and the owner isn’t around to tell us how she feels about this. Most relevant, of course, is the reaction in the field: you know about that because it’s been widely recognized as an ethical failure, it’s taught as such in schools, there’s going to be a building named after her on Johns Hopkins’ campus, and there’s a scholarship fund in her honor. Lenna’s contribution is far less significant from an academic standpoint but I can’t help but notice that none of the people complaining are actually doing anything which would benefit her – it’s all about personal entitlement to continue using her photo without compensation.

by larodi 3y ago

GaryNumanVevo 3y ago

The subject of the photo, Lena Forsén, has explicitly called for it to be retired. No need to get all up in arms about what's "offensive"

larodi 3y ago
Thats another story, and while my previous comment on a general basis stands (or rather I stand firm with this position), because the same twisted logic gets applied to other "bans", I stand corrected in the light of your note. Lena has a right to demand the image to be retired. But last time I read interview with her this demand was not included in her responses. thanks for update.
low_tech_love 3y ago
That’s misleading. She has been quoted multiple times saying she was amused and thought nothing of it. Until a bunch of activists came and told her she should be offended, and that the matter was of great importance to the future of mankind. Then of course she changed her mind, why not.
- acdha 3y ago
  I would assume that as an adult she’s capable of making her decisions and we should respect that. Even if you disagree, there is no reason why we need to continue using it and it’s not a good choice purely on technical grounds, so a better question would be asking why anyone would be so committed to continuing to use an objectively obsolete image over the objection of its subject.
  - xdennis 3y ago
    She's capable of making her own decisions now, but not when, for many years, she thought it was harmless? It's weird that papers are banned based on which sample images they pick, rather than technical merits. When will the HeLa cell line papers be cancelled? To this day scientific experiments are being carried out on cells take from a black woman without her consent.
    - acdha 3y ago
      > She's capable of making her own decisions now, but not when, for many years, she thought it was harmless? The IEEE is acting now, so her current position seems most relevant. It’s not the primary reason - that’s the technical limitations and general wisdom of using pornography in professional publications – but it’s a good third point. Switching is trivially easy, why not do what the subject requests? Your comparison with HeLa is interesting because it directly highlights the difference: nobody’s work depends on LENNA.JPG - anyone doing serious work is using multiple images, and there are many easy alternatives so nobody’s paper is getting rejected unless they throw a performative tantrum trying to get an interview with Tucker Carlson. HeLa is different in several ways: it does things which other cell lines could not, allowing some fundamental research to be performed which wasn’t possible when cell lines could only survive for a few days, and the owner isn’t around to tell us how she feels about this. Most relevant, of course, is the reaction in the field: you know about that because it’s been widely recognized as an ethical failure, it’s taught as such in schools, there’s going to be a building named after her on Johns Hopkins’ campus, and there’s a scholarship fund in her honor. Lenna’s contribution is far less significant from an academic standpoint but I can’t help but notice that none of the people complaining are actually doing anything which would benefit her – it’s all about personal entitlement to continue using her photo without compensation.