Shmalloween 𓄿 ℝ𝔸𝕍𝔼ℕ𝕊𝕂𝕐 𓄿 on Nostr: I'd value ideas on a nuanced art issue; people with similar values can come to ...

I'd value ideas on a nuanced art issue; people with similar values can come to different conclusions. The topic is *which* content tag to put on art containing non-sexual images that contain at least partly nude human figures.

I'm starting from the assumptions that for social media communities content *has* tags and is hidden behind them, that the audience opts in to what they want to click on to view.

The question isn't whether content warnings and filters are a good idea (they are). Probably anyone can reasonably guess what kind of content they should put content warnings on for their community. I feel that I can, at least. And a social media feed isn't a class or a gallery or a long-form work where the audience has signed up for the full ride. It is more like they're walking to the virtual public square. They deserve choice in what they engage with in that space. I'm solely grappling here with finding the best words with which to present that choice to them.

---

The dilemma can be oversimplified to "do I use NSFW, or nudity, nude figure, unclothed figure, etc. as the content tag for art containing non-sexual, partly humanoids who are not fully clothed?"

*Do not use NSFW*: Within some art communities, any labeling that implies nude figures are inherently sexual is seriously problematic. Models, art, and artists deserve respect. Anything implying that nudity is inherently sexual casts an incorrect intent on the model, the artist, and the art. And note that the model and the artist *are* at work, and the art is going to be "at work" for curators, art historians, and students. Calling such art "NSFW" is literally saying that those people are in an unsafe workplace. This also isn't an argument that I created. But I think it is really import point and I agree with it.

*Use NSFW*: Not everyone is in those artistic and academic communities! People really want simple tags that they can understand and filter by. Make it easy for people to avoid content they don't want to be exposed to, might be involuntarily traumatized by, or might get in trouble for viewing in public. Everyone knows NSFW means *for any workplace*, not for some specific workplace. An image of heart surgery might be appropriate at a doctor's office, but isn't "safe" at an arbitrary office. Just call it NSFW. This isn't a life drawing studio, it is a Wendy's, sir, please just give me a sane tag. We can't have a million different subtle tags or nobody will be able to filter and they'll be confused and accidentally exposed, which is not what anyone wants.

---

This isn't a unique challenge to the issue of bodies in art. Tags for each of lgbtqia2s+ vs. calling everything "gay". Grouping ethnicities into categories like "white" or "latino" or "asian" or "native". Music categories. There's always a tension between over-abstracting--and maybe choosing a problematic term for the over-abstraction--vs. meeting the audience where they are and in their vocabulary. I don't need to solve all of society's linguistic problems, nor social media's problems, I just need to know what to label a (not even well done) life drawing so that I'm respecting all of the different subcommunities within Merveilles.

(Thanks to Somnius :server_tiger: (npub15c5…ncq4) for the private pre-discussion and advice on this topic.)