The Nudity Clause: Photobucket, Vanessa Hudgens – Yes her again, Art and Please don’t Show Boobs, I’m Conservative.

I use Photobucket for one purpose only; to store pictures I use on my blog, so as to not litter my Flickr account with countless anodyne images other than my photographic work. My Photobucket album is private and the only time anyone can see pictures from the album is if I post from it to my blog or send someone a link.

All these image sharing sites have clauses in their TOS about nudity. Nudity is a big no-no. Here’s the policy with the snippets concerning nudity:

5. Restrictions

You will not do any of the following while using or accessing the Site or the Services:

e. Post, upload, email, or otherwise transmit, via the Site or Services, any Content that is unlawful, obscene, harmful, threatening, harassing, defamatory, or hateful, or that contains objects or symbols of hate, invades the privacy of any third party, contains nudity or pornography (including without limitation any child pornography or child erotica), is deceptive, threatening, abusive, inciting to unlawful action, defamatory, libelous, vulgar or violent, or constitutes hate speech, or is otherwise objectionable in the opinion of Photobucket;

Photobucket does not control the Content in Registered Users’ accounts and does not have any obligation to monitor such Content for any purpose. However, on both free and PRO accounts, and regardless of whether the Content is public or private, Photobucket may choose to monitor such Content at any time, in its sole discretion. Photobucket reserves the right at all times to terminate your account, and delete any and all Content, in whole or in part, for any reason including without limitation violations of this Section, or of any part of this Agreement. Photobucket reserves the right at all times to disclose, in its sole discretion, any Content as necessary to (a) satisfy any law, regulation, or governmental request or (b) reduce or prevent what Photobucket considers to be, in its sole discretion, a serious or imminent threat to your health or safety, or the health or safety of another. For information regarding Photobucket’s handling of your personally identifiable information, refer to the Photobucket Privacy Policy.

It’s a lot of legalese. Now I’m all for blocking porn, especially child porn and offensive material. But the no nudity clause exists for one sole purpose, to prevent these free services from becoming free storage for internet porn distributors and I get that, the disk space and the CPU would get eaten alive.

But here’s my issue. I’m uploading new pictures to my Photobucket account to display on my blog. I notice that three of my pictures have been removed and replaced by their image saying that the image violated the terms of service. This is where I go “Come the fuck on!” and then I smell a rat.

The three pictures that were “banned” are the following:

• A picture of Vanessa Hudgens, the nude one, with her firm naked breasts and her neatly trimmed beaver everyone flipped out about and still drags huge amounts of traffic to this blog.
• A picture of Madeline Zima’s nude scene from Californication I intended to use in a blog post but never did. Oh boy worth a look… woof woof.
• And this is where it get’s me all upset, a scan of nude study I did way back when I was studying art in college.

First of all, the pictures were not pornographic, just nude, no big deal. Get a grip, no pun intended. Secondly, my nude study was a drawing, as in art and that was banned. I’m sorry but that’s sick. Does this mean I can’t upload images of classical art like:

Déjeuner sur l’herbe?

Or Venus de Milo?

Because they are drawn or painted nudity? This reminds me of the American Attorney General Ashcroft covering up the breasts of Spirit of Justice because the nudity offends him. People have to relax. You came out of genitalia and were fed from breasts and seriously who doesn’t enjoy their comforts as adults?

Since we first began making colors to paint the walls of caves, we started depicting the female form and since we started revering made up gods we started shaming the female form. Enough already.

What’s odd is that these two other sketches were not banned, they seemed to be overlooked. Most of my sketches are inspired by pictures taken from photography books.

I think I know why. My banned sketched had a woman who’s visage depicted some kind of pleasure – she was in the shower – and was, how can I say this delicately, well endowed and the moderator must have found this titillating enough to warrant a ban, as for the earlier drawings, well everything is pretty innocent, so no worries. As long as the woman is not enjoying herself I guess. Prudish conservative minded dolts.

And to top it off my account was raided by a moderator within the same week as a commenter on my blog insinuated that Hudgen’s picture was kiddie porn. She was eighteen when they were taken, but I digress. Not to sound paranoid but my account gets raided the same week someone complains about the picture on my blog, well, that’s much too coincidental for my taste considering that Photobucket has close to 3.7 Billion images in storage as we speak as per their own statistics.

Like I said I can understand not wanting their servers flooded by web-porn distributors, but this can be checked by traffic spikes. I currently have 245 images in my Photobucket album and 2 of them had real nudity. I’m obviously not pushing porn here or running a nudie-site. This is the problem with conservative thinking. Applying the law in the strictest to-the-letter way and not in-the-spirit of the law. That’s what that Spirit Of Justice statue and her bare breast mean, the one Ashcroft tried to cover up because he was probably afraid she’s give him a boner.

What’s really funny is that the moderator didn’t ban my incomplete bald-headed lesbian orgy bas-relief… this one almost got me expelled from college for it’s near pornographic nature. Go figure.

---

Possibly related posts: (automatically generated)