Should "sex" be separated out of "social?"?

Yeah…. what’s so wrong with Fluther having an “Adult” section anyway?

Well, I suppose you might attract more… err, unsavoury characters to the website….

I’ve always thought it was a good idea to have a separate tab for “NSFW” questions. But, as @AnonymousGirl points out, perhaps that would draw attention to the site with users looking specifically to use that category. Also, I have to wonder if it wouldn’t develop a “mind of its own” with a tab just for questions like that.

^^ Yes. On another site I use, they have an “Adult section”. Some users who use that “Adult section” over there seem to view that as an open field for them to talk about bestiality and incest and act like both are perfectly acceptable. It’s disturbing…

Don’t be fooled, we have those discussions here, too… they just tend to be few and far between.

I can’t remember ever seeing them here. Maybe this site is just more tame.

I don’t think we should seperate sex questions from the social section. Putting NSFW beforehand is more than enough in my opinion. Am I the only one that, when seeing “NSFW” before a question, thinks to myself ”woohoo!” ?

I think keeping it in social requires a little more adult attitude.

@Leanne1986 NSFW questions are awesome. I don’t think “woohoo!”, but I view them as questions that probably contain interesting content.

@ANef_is_Enuf Why do you think it is a good idea to separate out sex?

@wundayatta well, it has been brought up in the past that some jellies don’t want to see the questions at all. In fact, didn’t someone recently leave because they were put off by the number of questions of this nature? So, the simple solution seems to be removing them and giving those types of questions a separate area from social/general. But, I’m not sure that it would work.
I like NSFW questions, I’ve seen and participated in some really interesting (and entertaining) discussions with the NSFW label, but I don’t want it to get too raunchy around here, either.

I don’t see why we can’t be adults and control our own hands. If I don’t want to read a thread, I don’t click on it. I will never understand this part of the human psyche where someone can be offended by simply reading a freaking sentence. Why do some people want to be sheltered?

@Blackberry I wonder that, too. As far as I can tell, it doesn’t work, anyway. It’s almost as if people who don’t want NSFW can’t seem to resist looking.

@wundayatta Yes, that’s another part of it. It says NSFW, so you’re curious and since people are discussing pedophilia or anal, now you decide to be offended? I don’t buy it and I don’t think we should appease these types of people.

NSFW – Didn’t see those letters appear when graphic detailed discussions on Viagra and How Often One Made Love was posted. Probably should be separated from Social.

@Blackberry I couldn’t agree more. People who are this easily offended irritate me somewhat.

@Blackberry Well, there was Two Girls, One Cup. In the words of Mick, “Give me shelter”

@retro8 Those letters stand for “Not Safe for Work.” They are a sign that people who are not interested in such topics should stay away. I take it you didn’t know that. Would you have stayed away had you known?

I wonder if NSFW should be spelled out because it seems that the people it might benefit the most don’t know what it means. Would there be a problem with that, mods?

@Adirondackwannabe Oh god…..That should be labelled NSFL: Not Safe For Life.

Just have a separate category and enjoy. You said someone left because they were easily offended and yet you’re worried about having it separate and attracting people that would offend you.

This is, of course, a discussion about events that will not occur. The owners are busy elsewhere and don’t pay attention to our whining about what suits us individually.

I don’t think the problem is with the NSFW tag OR having these questions in a separate section. I think the problem for some people is with the content itself.

Questions about potentially offensive topics are already tagged NSFW and I can appreciate some people are unaware of the meaning of those letters. However, once a question is opened and the content is obviously sexual (or otherwise offensive to that individual), we each have an option to close that question. Nobody is forcing anyone to read on.

If you go to the store and you buy a family sized apple pie and a carton of custard. Take it home, pour it into a bowl, start to eat it and realise it probably isn’t very healthy but continue to eat the whole pie, is the pie manufacturer at fault or the custard manufacturer or the person who ate the whole pie?

This is an adult site. If people want to talk about sex, penises or vaginas or other activities that are not illegal, they should be able to do that. As long as the question is marked NSFW, it is then up to us to decide whether that content suits us. I do not believe in censorship and I do not think there is a requirement to put questions some members consider offensive in another section. We just have to behave like adults and decide not to read content we do not approve of.

I’ve learned things I didn’t know from some of the ‘offensive’ questions. (I know, naive) I think the problem may lie in the NSFW marking. I had no idea what that could mean and it was months before I found out. Perhaps a new word signal that isn’t a mystery would help. Scatological is too long. Beware, sex ahead. That’s too long too. Proceed at your own risk. I’ll think about it.

Well, sex is usually a social thing anyways… It follows that it should remain in said section.

@Bellatrix Hear, hear!

I agree with the opinions that people should be able to say what they want and readers may leave the site if they find it offensive. However, for people who are super-sensitive how about changing the NSFW to SMUT for “sexual matters, upsetting topic.” At least the squeamish could guess what the content is.

@Sunny2 Why not L.U.D.E. Libidinousness, Unusual Desires & Eroticism? :p

XXX

? ;P

@wundayatta XXX would really make a promise about half of the NSFW questions couldn’t deliver upon; many of them really are only X or XX…

NSFW really seems like the best acronym, because it’s becoming more and more the standard on the internet. Changing it would just confuse even more people.

Particularly since this discussion or debate is moot. No one is changing anything, a least for now.

@gailcalled :: Well, the mods could nuke all the NSFW questions removing the need for the separate category. A move that I would actually be in favor of.

@johnpowell, have you seen the other question here about which words are subject to censorship in the titles? There is no list, it is a matter of judgement but no matter how carefully the mods operate someone will always be unhappy. Add removing any questions that could be deemed NSFW and the conflict about what is or is not appropriate would go crazy. People will not put the tag on to try to get them through. More sensitive people will flag questions that are perfectly acceptable. How do you suggest we manage such disputes?

As has been said by a number of jellies here so far, some of the NSFW are informative and useful. The recent question about Viagra for instance has a place here. Some men don’t feel able to their peers about sexual dysfunction. Similarly there is a current question from a young woman with a problem that has a NSFW tag. Where do you stop? Where is the line? Do you really want people to have to act as censors on the site?

“it is a matter of judgement but no matter how carefully the mods operate someone will always be unhappy.”

I’m not sure I see the problem with them being unhappy.

“Add removing any questions that could be deemed NSFW and the conflict about what is or is not appropriate would go crazy. People will not put the tag on to try to get them through. More sensitive people will flag questions that are perfectly acceptable. How do you suggest we manage such disputes?”

Give them a timeout.

“Do you really want people to have to act as censors on the site?”

I thought you were a mod. It has been done for years.

@johnpowell Wait, so instead of creating a separate category, just get rid of all sex questions?

I think there is a difference between moderating and censorship.

I am happy to mod people for personal attacks, to remove spam and to keep the place tidy and fair, I would not be a mod if I had to start making calls on what is acceptable and what is not in terms of content. I have no desire to be a censor.

Furthermore, I have no problem with NSFW questions. If people don’t want to read them or answer them, they should not open them. I rarely answer NSFW questions myself, but I believe in people’s right to ask them.

@johnpowell I feel that you are being unreasonable. As a person who has had fears related to sex, I am quite glad I have an outlet like Q&A sites to talk about it where I don’t have to live in fear of judgement that would hurt me personally. It’s not like I feel comfortable talking to my parents about it. They taught me that sex before marriage is wrong.

The addition of an “adult” section sort of makes this site look like an “adult” website. If you were a new user, would you place a lot of credibilty on any site that hosted “adult” content? To be honest, I wouldn’t.

@everephebe Oh I like that much better! Clever you!

@Sunny2 FLONK: Fluther’s Lusty Omnipresent Naughty Kinkiness

NSFW is enough, I think. It’s fairly standard on the ‘net, and if people don’t know what it means, they can always ask someone.

^^ Yeah. I didn’t know what it meant before. I may have looked it up or put two-and-two together eventually… :/

It is explained in the guidelines.
Now, I cannot remember if new members have to agree on terms and guidelines before they get to be Jellies, but one could (have) know(n) what NSFW stands for and what can be found behind it.

@rebbel It is explained there, but it is common for people to not read guidelines or rules on a site. That’s why there are people who say the biggest lie ever told is “I have read and agree to the terms of use.”

@everephebe I don’t think so. Needs too much explanation.

@Sunny2 “verb To Flonk: To stimulate the sexual organ. Especially auto-stimulation in a noisy manner. This word definitely has onomatopoetic characteristics. Synonym: Masturbate.” See also, flonking & and flonking it…

I thought flonking was close enough to fluthering to be thematic…

@everephebe Another example of my learning something I didn’t know. I’ve never heard the word before. I suspect people who eschew sexual innuendo, let alone out and out talk about sex, wouldn’t know it either.

@Sunny2 it’s not typically an american turn of terminology no. But it is onomatopoetic, which means it inherently lends itself to its own understanding, via sound and guesswork. I’m just playing around with alternative acronyms for the NSFW tag, I don’t think we should change it or anything.

Not all NSFW questions are in Social. Some are in General, and it is perfectly appropriate for them to be there. Putting NSFW at the beginning just makes the title a little more descriptive and helps someone decide whether or not they are interested in the question. A good title, after all, is clear and descriptive; people should be able to get the idea of your question from the title so that they know if they wish to participate—NSFW or not.

I see no reason to separate the NSFW questions out from the other sections, then, as they don’t really share anything in common other than being NSFW. We might as well separate out all questions containing the words “what if.”

P.S. Anyone who doesn’t know what “NSFW” means can always type the acronym into a search engine. This is the internet that we’re all using.

I already spend all my time in the Social section, If you create a NSFW section then I will be spending all of my time there. Honestly, Fluther was way more awesome when it was just Fluther….No sections, just questions, all grouped together.

@AnonymousGirl I think you just replaced one of the three greatest lies. It’s now your lie, the checks in the mail, and I won’t cum in your mouth.

I think adding another section would be a bad idea. As it stands now, if people need a serious answer to their NSFW question, they go to general, if they want to chat about it, they go to social. One category for all NSFW questions would mean users may not be able to get the strictly on topic or conversational answers they were hoping for that is spelled out in the general and social sections.

I really think the NSFW tag along with some personal responsibility should be enough.

Seems to me a title should be sufficiently clear to indicate what the question is about without adding “NSFW.” I really dislike it when someone says the equivalent of “I have a question but you have to look in the details to see what it is about.” That happens often enough, here. It’s annoying. I guess hope springs eternal in my heart because I will often enough look at the details to see if there is anything worth my time. So far, I can not think of one example where the question could not have been perfectly adequately described in the title.

I think that “NSFW” generally serves more as advertising than to keep people away. It’s a cheap trick someone could use to garner attention. It’s a trick I won’t use except when forced to.

In any case, I don’t think NSFW questions should be separated out. Quite the contrary. I think they should be reintegrated with the mainstream. It’s unfair discrimination, pure and simple.

@wundayatta The whole point of the NSFW tag is so that nothing that could cause offense to anyone is seen on a page without them clicking on the link. I think this is why many people on here encourage the reader to go to the details in order to read the question. Something that shouldn’t be offensive like “what colour should healthy discharge be?” may still be considered offensive to some or inappropriate to be on a screen at certain times.

@wundayatta A cheap trick someone could (but is not definitely, just there’s that possibility) to garner attention? The horror!! And I’m sure that attention-seeking behavior goes away if they just use the word “sex”? And then it would be proper, honorable, moral, and quite simply, right?

@Aethelflaed Well, since you put it that way…

But I think that using tricks like “Sex, sex, sex” is obviously tongue in cheek. People can see that, and it’s honest in a way that using “nsfw” is not. Using nsfw means I’m following the rules to break the rules. Manipulating by using the word “sex” is all on me. It’s much more honest manipulation. Less complicated.

@Leanne1986 do you not see how absurd your comment is? “nothing that could cause offense to anyone?” It’s just not possible. You can never watch out for other people’s sensibilities because a) you don’t know what they are and b) they vary so widely. There is stuff on here that really offends me, but no one cares because it isn’t sexual. So I just have to deal with it on my own. And in fact, the hypothetical you offer is one of those things that makes my stomach churn. I don’t know why you say it shouldn’t be offensive. It is offensive to me. But then, sex shouldn’t be offensive to anyone. How come people are such babies?

I’m just being hyperbolic there. I really would not tell anyone else what should or should not offend them. But if people are going to tell me what shouldn’t offend me, I feel like I should return the favor. fluther has no business being in the business of telling people what to think. But it is. It tells people that sexual subjects are racy and possibly offensive. That is what happens when you force people to label things “nsfw.”

I understand why people do it. I understand fluther thinks it is protecting people. Fluther thinks it is being nice. None of these things are true, but most people feel better pretending to believe the illusion that they are true. It’s deliciously hypocritical. But then, I get philosophical about that—it’s really hard to live a life without being hypocritical. So, wtf? Honestly, I don’t know why I say anything, since nothing is going to change as a result of this conversation.

@wundayatta I don’t think fluther is trying to tell people what to think or that sex questions are bad, I think fluther’s trying to make sure no one gets fired or shows a young child any words they aren’t ready to see.

Oh, I agree. However, in the process of the doing the latter, they also do the former. Can’t be helped. Cost of doing business. So long as people are aware of the effect of what they do, they can count it in the cost of doing business. I think that sometimes people like to pretend they are doing something noble so it won’t have any consequences of an unintended sort.

The [NSFW] tag isn’t used to keep anyone from being offended. It is simply to alert users that the content within the question may not be appropriate to look at while at work. This also acts as a signal to people with small children around that they may not want to look at it as well. The reason certain words (penis, vagina, etc.) are not allowed in the actual question is because the may be words that would flag monitoring software or filters on business computers and since the questions are listed on the main pages of Fluther, that could be a problem for someone at work. These words can be in the details because they do not show up on the main pages of the site and would only be seen if the user clicked on the question. The [NSFW] tag does not imply that the question itself is good or bad, just that the content may not be appropriate for those at work.

@wundayatta How does using “NSFW” mean one is following the rules to break the rules? NSFW questions are in no way against the rules, there’s nothing wrong with them, and they are great content to have on this site. If you think being NSFW means being bad, that’s on you. It means you have judged the standards of employers to be indicative of what is right and what is wrong. Personally, I don’t think that’s true. As such, “NSFW” in no way means “bad” to me. Perhaps there is some latent prudery in your mind?

@wundayatta I don’t think my comment was absurd at all. I use Fluther at work. It is ok for me to do so as Fluther is not considered to be inappropriate should a customer see it on my computer. However, as much as I love the NSFW questions, I am greatful to the people that put things like “NSFW Is this normal?” rather than “NSFW What colour should healthy discharge be?” That was my point. Whilst I don’t find the word “discharge” to be offensive at all I can appreciate that it may innappropriate should one of my customers see it on my screen.

@SavoirFaire It is not technically breaking the rules, but it is giving folks a way of getting an unfair advantage for a question. If you want extra eyes and extra clicks, you add NSFW to your question. It’s legal, but it’s cheating in my book. The breaking of the rules has nothing to do with sex or feelings for or against sex. Rather it is taking advantage of people’s natural prurience. It’s marketing. Sex sells. NSFW stands for sex on this website. I know there are people who create NSFW questions because of the attention it gets them. These are questions that wouldn’t be here, I believe, if we didn’t have the NSFW requirement.

@Leanne1986 What can I say. I don’t know how many questions that might be interesting I have missed because people did not describe the question in the title. I do know how much aggravation it causes me when I do decide to click through an NSFW question and find it to be a waste of time.

The “just for you” system…. kind of breaks down on things like this. I’m glad it works for you. It must work for a lot of people, or it wouldn’t be here. Too bad.

@wundayatta You seem really upset that there would be people looking for attention on Fluther and using sex questions to get it. Why is it such a problem?

@wundayatta Wait… so NSFW is a form of censorship and a form of advertisement now? Methinks your argument is internally inconsistent. Some people see “NSFW” and say “not for me.” Some see “NSFW” and say “let’s have it!” And NSFW is not just for sex questions. Regardless, sex isn’t the only thing that sells (or repels). Politics can be the same way. There are people who avoid political questions like the plague, and there are people who are drawn to them like moths to a flame. Moreover, there are political questions we wouldn’t have if some people weren’t looking to get some attention. I just can’t see blaming a four-letter acronym on the internet for human nature.

@SavoirFaire Yes. It works both ways. But different from politics, NSFW is an artificial and meaningless distinction (with respect to the content, not the employer responses).

@Aethelflaed I don’t have a problem with people looking for attention. I have a problem with fluther giving them a leg up in the competition. Now my questions won’t stand on their own merits whenever I am forced to apply NSFW to them. When my questions get moderated, that is often why—I don’t use NSFW when they think I should. Then people accuse me of seeking attention, something they never do with my other questions. We have no level playing field for questions here, and I don’t like it.

@wundayatta Censorship prevents viewing. Advertising promotes viewing. It can’t be both. Indeed, it seems to me that using “NSFW” is an alternative to censorship in that it keeps sites—many sites, not just Fluther—from banishing certain kinds of content altogether. The label may be artificial, just like every other linguistic construction in existence, but it isn’t meaningless. When I see it, there is a range of topics that it designates.

@wundayatta Fluther is not the only place on the internet that uses the NSFW tag. I’ve been seeing it used on a lot of forums for many years now (at least the past 10). I think you may be taking the NSFW tag to mean a bit to much. For myself, and many others I know, seeing the NSFW tag does not cause us to have any specific feelings toward the question before we even read it, such as thinking the OP is attention seeking or anything like that.

What can I say, @Seaofclouds? Just because you’re paranoid doesn’t mean they aren’t out to get you. Try paying a bit more attention to what people say about the NSFW appellation. Maybe you’ll notice some things you didn’t see before.

@SavoirFaire The world is a strange place and indeed a single stimulus can have two, opposite effects. It happens quite often, whether or not you don’t want it to be that way. Remember, that people don’t all behave the same way. Indeed, some are attracted to NSFW questions, and others are put off from asking such questions because they don’t want to see the warning on their question. I find it very surprising that you would baldly assert that there “can’t” be two opposite effects from a single phenomenon—as if because it is illogical to you, it therefore can’t possibly be. There is more to the world than you might like to admit.

@wundayatta I’m not saying that a stimulus cannot have two effects. I’m saying that you cannot simultaneously do x and not-x at the same time. That is not merely “illogical to me,” it is logically impossible. “NSFW” allows people to react as they wish, just like any other part of the title. And since people are different, they will react in different—maybe even opposite—ways. This means it is them, and not the label, making the choice. That has been my point, and it shows how muddled your argument is that you have slipped from where you started into something resembling my position without realizing it.