As with most of the gay Thailand forums, this site bans the posting of nude photos.

 

I presume this is would be for fear of censorship, as such photos may result in the Thai government blocking the site. So that policy is very understandable.

Also, Speedo pics are a nice alternative.

 

A very swift bit of google research shows that there is at least one Thai based straight forum which appears to have a restricted access section. That seems to be open to established members and permits the posting of more racy photos. I can't verify what's in there, but can guess. This should prevent government censors from stumbling upon nude photos.

 

Now, is there a place for such a section on one or more of the gay forums?

I guess it might lead to some interesting debate & promote the visual arts....

 

[Note: This is a purely hypothetical discussion. I have not discussed the matter with the owner of this forum, or any other.]

Now, is there a place for such a section on one or more of the gay forums?

Even though a hypothetical issue, I think it prudent to restrict any comments as applying only to this Message Board. On the other hand if another Board had a racy sub-forum that allowed and encouraged that sort of thing we on this forum would have some kind of yardstick to either copy or reject. Equally if we decided to set one up and it proved popular other Boards would be at liberty to copy us if they wanted to.

 

It has been tried before on at least one other Board, but in the case of the only one familiar to me it wasn't deemed a success and was axed.

 

I'm neutral about this idea but as I am the first to post a reply and the thread's been going 5 hours now, I'm sticking my neck out and saying it hasn't captured the imagination of our fellow-posters . . . so far at any rate.

FWIW, nudity just seems irrelevant and out of place here. There are other sites which are dedicated to soft and/or hard porn and gaythailand.com itself is already a base for meeting people, which in my opinion suffices to entertain. Besides, I like the photos featuring the clothed or semi-clothed, such as Fountainhall's Taipei Parade and Speedo thread, which leaves more to the imagination.

I'm with Khun Thaiworthy on this one. I just don't see the point or the need. I'd hate risking changing the tenor of the board just to join the gabillion other websites that have nudity. Plus, while I'm not offended by it at all (and can see the beauty occasionally), I almost never go look at it anymore anyway. Maybe a sign of age [or, like the kid in the candystore (I live most of the time in Thailand), it loses its allure after seeing it a few million times]

i'm with thaiworthy and Bob. I just can't see the point, given that there are so many free photo sites out there and hundreds of other pay ones.

I hate to sound like beachlover, but I could imagine a member posting pictures of himself nude. Not sure I have the stomach for that.

Also, Speedo pics are a nice alternative.

 

but not without problems - just ask Dave Evans

 

Speedo sues over gay porn sites

 

bkkguy

I hate to sound like beachlover, but I could imagine a member posting pictures of himself nude. Not sure I have the stomach for that.

 

Koko has no shame!

Without blame, there an be no shame. That nude photo does nothing for me, Kokodude. But do keep trying.

I also would not want to change the character of the board to one of those where everyone is predominantly sharing full frontal photos & not debating real issues.

 

On the other hand, the current no nudity rules prevent us from posting (for example) tasteful rear shots that are within the context of the discussion.

 

Of course, it's difficult to write rules that can successfully distinguish between the two categories AND get broad agreement on this. Maybe one of several arguments for the status quo.

 

On the other hand, the current no nudity rules prevent us from posting (for example) tasteful rear shots that are within the context of the discussion.

 

Is that tasteful or tasty?

That is thoroughly distasteful & the legs are really badly deformed.

I agree it's terrible.

 

Surely there is some room for debate as to what counts as nudity. Why should a nice pair of rear cheeks, or even a saggy derri

You guys are sure hard to please. I will try once more and then no more. It was tricky taking this one with a mirror.

You guys are sure hard to please.

Not me! I'm easy to please. I like them both. It could be a whole lot worse. ChaseLB hasn't posted in a while!

ChaseLB hasn't posted in a while!

Oh dear! Please don't encourage the posting of yet more pics from that bar!

Plus, while I'm not offended by it at all (and can see the beauty occasionally), I almost never go look at it anymore anyway.

For many of us growing up in an era when pornography was highly censored, and that was the females, I don't recall shots of nude males being commonly available outside of naturist mags until the early 80's (maybe Playgirl started before then, I can't remember) and they were really tastefully done usually taken from behind or the guy sat in a chair or reclining in one. So when eventually magazines started showing full frontal photos I was hooked. After that they just got raunchier and raunchier - until eventually they became so common you could pick up the mags for free, even outside some gay stores. So the stage was reached the free mags were just there to try and get you to buy the vids. So from scanning my copy of H & E in the 70's for the rare pic of a nude guy to becoming jaded with the plethora of in your face stuff took a long time but like Bob that's how I feel nowadays.

 

I also would not want to change the character of the board to one of those where everyone is predominantly sharing full frontal photos & not debating real issues.

It's precisely because this Board does debate real issues that I post here! Any dilution of the Board's integrity and I probably wouldn't bother.

Surely there is some room for debate as to what counts as nudity. Why should a nice pair of rear cheeks, or even a saggy derrière for that matter, be out of bounds?

 

Yes. Certainly, I consider a nice rear shot is well within the limits of good taste, but outside the scope of the rules on most boards (including this one).

 

I presume the nudity rule was originally written to avoid the risk of censorship? Or was it taste?

Maybe someone can enlighten me. Both are valid reasons for having such a rule -I'm just curious.

 

That nude photo does nothing for me, Kokodude. But do keep trying.

Careful, we still need to observe the rules, which read. "NO posting of nudity in any form is allowed. Any such posts will be immediately deleted"

 

This thread is supposed to be discussing the concept.

Hmmm. Those avatars of z909 and fountainhall might be considered partial nudity (I am not complaining) , but with all those tits and ass posted on Obsessions thread I hink the line had been crossed to some extent.

But to be serious, no, I don't think it is desirable to have a separate forum for nude photos.