I think that's a fairly silly comparison. Your example is essentially neutral: a wallpaper without sexual imagery doesn't cater in particular to any group, at least not on gender/sexuality grounds. An image with sexual imagery manifestly does cater more to one group than others (albeit, in this case, probably only very slightly). J On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 8:55 PM, Louigi Verona <louigi.verona@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > "I think that including an image of a 'hot' female tacitly sends the > message that those who are viewing it are likely to be (heterosexual) > males, i.e., that this is a 'boy's space'." > > > Using that same logic, NOT including an image that is considered "hot" > by one sex or the other must then mean that we are tacitly send the > message that those who are viewing are likely to be asexual, that this is > "asexual space". And some asexual people might get offended. > > _______________________________________________ > Linux-audio-user mailing list > Linux-audio-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user > _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-user mailing list Linux-audio-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
