Difference between revisions of "Talk:Self breast exam"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
:Is this not intended as a reference tool that is considered safe for children? Do you really consider nudity appropriate? --[[User:BillOReillyFan|BillOReillyFan]] 22:15, 15 March 2007 (EDT) | :Is this not intended as a reference tool that is considered safe for children? Do you really consider nudity appropriate? --[[User:BillOReillyFan|BillOReillyFan]] 22:15, 15 March 2007 (EDT) | ||
::That wasn't nudity. Really, how on earth was that 'unsafe' for children? [[User:JamesK|JamesK]] 22:17, 15 March 2007 (EDT) | ::That wasn't nudity. Really, how on earth was that 'unsafe' for children? [[User:JamesK|JamesK]] 22:17, 15 March 2007 (EDT) | ||
| + | ::: I saw a woman's body. I saw no clothes. It was completely unnecessary. The article is just as informative without it, and much more friendly to younger users. They don't need to see a woman touching herself intimately to learn about breast examinations. --[[User:BillOReillyFan|BillOReillyFan]] 22:23, 15 March 2007 (EDT) | ||
How is the female form offensive to children? Especially a photo of a breast exam? It is not even remotely sexual... Are you also going to disallow presentation of Michaelangelo's David? | How is the female form offensive to children? Especially a photo of a breast exam? It is not even remotely sexual... Are you also going to disallow presentation of Michaelangelo's David? | ||
| + | :Michaelangelo's David is a piece of rock, not an actual person. --[[User:BillOReillyFan|BillOReillyFan]] 22:23, 15 March 2007 (EDT) | ||
Revision as of 02:23, March 16, 2007
How was that image offensive and/or graphic. The woman's breast was concealed by her hand - it was a harmless image demonstrating exam technique.
Highly graphic and offensive image? Oh please! JamesK 22:14, 15 March 2007 (EDT)
- Is this not intended as a reference tool that is considered safe for children? Do you really consider nudity appropriate? --BillOReillyFan 22:15, 15 March 2007 (EDT)
- That wasn't nudity. Really, how on earth was that 'unsafe' for children? JamesK 22:17, 15 March 2007 (EDT)
- I saw a woman's body. I saw no clothes. It was completely unnecessary. The article is just as informative without it, and much more friendly to younger users. They don't need to see a woman touching herself intimately to learn about breast examinations. --BillOReillyFan 22:23, 15 March 2007 (EDT)
- That wasn't nudity. Really, how on earth was that 'unsafe' for children? JamesK 22:17, 15 March 2007 (EDT)
How is the female form offensive to children? Especially a photo of a breast exam? It is not even remotely sexual... Are you also going to disallow presentation of Michaelangelo's David?
- Michaelangelo's David is a piece of rock, not an actual person. --BillOReillyFan 22:23, 15 March 2007 (EDT)