5/4/2008 9:12:43 PM

maybe they blotted out the nips for the ad so they could show how it works

5/4/2008 9:13:54 PM

it is called photoshop, blur tool.

5/4/2008 9:13:55 PM

Lingerie sites often blur out nipples so that they're aren't porn.

5/4/2008 9:17:32 PM

ha, they didn't bother doing it in the small pic

5/4/2008 9:18:38 PM

They didn't seem to mind the wicked camel toe

5/4/2008 9:32:11 PM

Quote :

"Lingerie sites often blur out nipples so that they're aren't porn. "

this sort of seems like the reverse of how it should work? shouldn't the more natural the body is make it less like porn? no? ok.

5/4/2008 11:51:30 PM

Quote :

"Lingerie sites often blur out nipples so that they're aren't porn."

What a stupid, stupid concept. I just don't understand the various "obscenity" laws or the FCCs position on the matter. Do you realize just how close this is to the Japanese "no visible genitalia" rule in their graphic, violent anime. I mean god forbid someone see a titty, but we can show people being shot on primetime TV dramas. Stupid, stupid, stupid.

5/5/2008 12:00:51 AM

^ exactly. AND if she had nipples it seem like it would be less objectifying and less like porn? i don't get it at all. what is offensive about a boob. nipples are used to nurse. it is natural.

5/5/2008 12:03:45 AM

^^ the japanese have to blur out genitalia in their hardcore PORN.

5/5/2008 12:05:17 AM

Quote :

"this sort of seems like the reverse of how it should work"

5/5/2008 12:06:22 AM

I think that the edited picture would be more traumatic/confusing for a kid.

5/5/2008 12:11:58 AM

well if the boobs are already completely out why is having the nipple showing like crossing the line? everyone knows it should be there. how is having a nipple-less boob somehow less offensive than one with a nipple.

5/5/2008 12:18:45 AM

how is it NOT less offensive??

5/5/2008 12:19:18 AM

b/c female nipples are not PG. it's just american society, you're asking a question that you know the answer to. if you want to discuss sexual standards in usa#1, that's different. this is kindof beating a dead horse.

5/5/2008 12:20:22 AM

yeah really...i mean its obvious why they blurred it out yet she seems shocked

5/5/2008 12:21:02 AM

i just don't think i could suck on those tits

5/5/2008 12:22:38 AM

lace camel toe ftw

5/5/2008 12:23:46 AM

i'm not shocked

i obviously get why they're blurred out. i get that that is american society. i'm asking WHY. why does it offend you (although i'm sure it doesn't), but why do YOU personally think it is less offensive.

5/5/2008 12:24:02 AM

its less offensive cause you can see less

5/5/2008 12:25:45 AM

and i want to know why you find it more offensive than if you just saw her tit

5/5/2008 12:26:37 AM

i think it offends him because he wants to get a rise out of you.

my question is, what kind of clothing would need a bra that leaves the nipple uncovered?

5/5/2008 12:28:03 AM

I think you people are looking at this from the completely wrong angle.

If the pic were unedited, sites like TWW and others would rape their servers with hotlinking them. Editing them like that significantly (oddly enough) deters people, I would imagine, from linking them billions of times around the web.

It's probably more for business reasons that social. If they were so concerned about art/porn or whatever, they would just not even take pictures like that.

5/5/2008 12:29:16 AM

haha it isn't giving me a rise i'm just looking for some late night stimulating discussion (procrastination). this thread ALMOST had potential. but now i give up haha.

and the answer is...sexy time clothing

^ oohhhh good answer!!! dingdingding a winner. now i feel somewhat satisfied in my quest.

[Edited on May 5, 2008 at 12:30 AM. Reason : .]

5/5/2008 12:29:26 AM

yeah it had potential till you came in with your assbackward views that nudity is less offensive than non nudity

5/5/2008 12:31:01 AM

Quote :

"^^ the japanese have to blur out genitalia in their hardcore PORN."

Creepy simonn fact #290348746

5/5/2008 12:32:37 AM

cmon! that's not creepy.

it'd have been creepy if i knew this off the top of my head (which i didn't)

Japan was slow in updating its child pornography laws to bring them into line with those of the West. It was only in 2003 that Japan caught up, with the passage of new laws that made it illegal to produce, distribute, sell, possess or trade in child pornography.[8]

"Lolicon" is the slang term used in reference to the child porn industry. It is short for "Lolita Complex", or "Lolita Icon".[9]Today it is still a very lucrative industry with the Japan Times reporting an estimated 3 million photo books sold in 2006-07.[10]

[Edited on May 5, 2008 at 12:36 AM. Reason : apparently the japs love child porn.]

5/5/2008 12:34:04 AM

^^^ its still nudity her boobs are obviously out. if they're obviously clearly 100% out, i'm saying that i don't get why, if they are out (again, her boobs are out incase you missed it) showing the nipples on boobs that are already out and uncovered is somehow so much less offensive than blurring the nipples when the boobs are already out and uncoverd. and out in the open for everyone to see. without clothing.

[Edited on May 5, 2008 at 12:34 AM. Reason : .]

5/5/2008 12:34:12 AM

you need to reword that...i cant read gibberish

5/5/2008 12:35:37 AM

Quote :

"i'm saying that i don't get why, if they are out (again, her boobs are out incase you missed it) showing the nipples on boobs that are already out and uncovered is somehow so much less offensive than blurring the nipples when the boobs are already out and uncoverd. and out in the open for everyone to see. without clothing. "

You obviously are grossly under-informed about how a guy's brain works.

5/5/2008 12:36:26 AM

^^

[Edited on May 5, 2008 at 12:37 AM. Reason : ^]

5/5/2008 12:36:50 AM

Quote :

"you need to reword that...i cant read gibberish "

intentional - adj. done with intention or purpose

5/5/2008 12:39:05 AM

ok i'll try to explain it again


if they showed her tit, that would be like "pornography"

obviously this clothing place doesnt want to push around the "pornography" label


so how is that more offensive?

5/5/2008 12:40:56 AM

I just got a bra magazine from the UK (bravissimo) and they leave the nipples in. I think its so much handier for shopping because you get a feeling of the sheerness of the fabric than like Victoria Secret, who blurs.

5/5/2008 1:21:33 AM

Quote :

"this is kindof beating a dead horse."

TOO SOON.

5/5/2008 2:47:20 AM

lol shit, forgot about that.

5/5/2008 3:06:45 AM

it's just a nipple. If guys weren't always so "omg!!! its a tittie!!!" they wouldn't feel the need to blur it out.

5/5/2008 7:25:33 AM

omg!!! its a tittie!!!

5/5/2008 7:31:50 AM

Quote :

"how is having a nipple-less boob somehow less offensive than one with a nipple"

5/5/2008 7:42:53 AM

as a female, I find it offensive that its removed. It looks unnatural.

5/5/2008 9:04:27 AM

the problem here is that this picture has been taken out of context. obviously it's most likely from a lingerie magazine. showing the natural condition of the woman in that outfit is no more offensive than showing a penis in a hard core porno. i mean if that picture were to show up on the back of a baseball card it would probably be offensive, but in a lingerie magazine - no.

5/5/2008 9:18:33 AM

alien tits. what's wron wit showing some nips. those look like fake tits anyways.

5/5/2008 9:54:23 AM

so theoretically.... since this is considered to not be offensive.... it should not have a NSFW tag... hmmm

5/5/2008 11:53:35 AM