Welcome to the Worldwide Roar Forum. Please note that customer support enquiries, for example regarding individual orders, should be submitted here

jbrokarlo Show full post »
bejjinks
@Antigenderstereotypificationcrucader BREVITY. Please. Your points get lost in too many words. What is your point?
Quote 0 0
Lefkippus
I agree bejjinks. I have read a few of the long posts that you mention and become lost in the process, so have given up reading them. One writer I do not agree with however was the one who wanted more video footage of the art posing shots. As I have said before, what I like most about the August film was the footage of the guys at play, interacting both for relaxation and when they are practising their sports. For me this gets across the message of Sports Allies more effectively. They are doing what young guys do together, kick balls together/lark around in the water etc, but with no clothes on...as the clothes are irrelevant to their ability to have fun and be together.
Sadly I still have not been able to download the September film. Over the last week I have only had unobtainable, or maintenance replies when trying to sign in to the website, so I cannot report the issue to the support team. Anyone else still having a problem?
Quote 0 0
Antigenderstereotypificationcrucader
It is very hard to explain in a few sentences an issue so complicated it branches over several different areas from art to law, traditions to cultural and religious differences - even personal inhibitions or lack thereof. I suppose my point is we have to be able to hold more than one thoughts in mind at the same time, and less regard art or porn as either or, but more identify practical rules and restrictions for what should be allowed displayed where, and what age groups it should be available for.

Since children both are exposed to nudity showering after sports (mind you, in today`s society many children do not dare to undress in front of their class mates, out of fear of having their photo taken and spread behind their back), and also children in naturist camps and at naturist beaches are exposed to various types of nudity without any indications of it having caused them harm, I don`t get why nudity in film or television should be deemed to be harmful content for them. On the contrary I am deeply worried the attitude towards nudity from sites like Youtube is to blame for many of the shame, ridicule and bullying linked to nudity in today`s society. Could cause children and youths - even adults - unnecessary complexes and worries over their own bodies. Or worse, become so fixated on the shame and sin factor of nudity and sex it could develop into the most unfortunate sexual deviance. 

Therefore I think it would be wise - to avoid young children accidentally being exposed to material they are too young to both understand and have much interest of -  rather than separate between what is art, and what is porn, instead in regard to rules and regulations the focus was placed more directly on the nature of the image or footage in question, in the sense that actual depictions of sexual acts would not be allowed on ordinary sites, movies and tv series, only on special sites, DVDs, tv channels catered for that group of audience. Depictions of simulated sexual acts included in ordinary dramas, comedies and more, however, should be allowed on ordinary sites, cinemas and tv channels, but with an age limit (and for legal reasons on sites like Youtube and similar, that age limit probably would have had to have been 18+), Depending on the explicitness of the content and the country the depictions would be made available for, individual age limits in line with the country`s laws and culture should be a possibility. 

Ordinary naked bodies, on the other hand - not depicted in any form of explicit sexual context - I think should be allowed for any age group. Both because the naked body is a normal part of natural life. But also to de-criminalize nudity and bodies a little, by making them more normal and everyday.

We have to accept that people may not have the same perceptions of what is okay all over the world, and therefore rules for permitted content cannot be exactly the same everywhere. But for harmony, unity and happiness to be achieved, I think it is important that the choices made by grown up individuals are accepted and respected as their choice - but to force or pressure anyone to do something, or to not do something, should become the new no no. If we all set the boundaries for what we could decide and have power over with ourselves, and didn`t try to tell other people how to live or behave, but allowed them to live and be how they wanted (provided they didn`t hurt anyone), and was respected and respected just the same, I think we would find ourselves in a world with fewer problems and more happiness.

Therefore to differentiate between a porn model and Warwick Rower, if both images otherwise is identical, I feel is wrong. An image or piece of film of a porn performer is only porn if the depiction involves some kind of actual sexual act. If he/she is just nude, there is no difference between that nude photo, and that of one of the Warwick Rowers.

If not, we would be replacing one prejudice (against homosexuality) with another (against people involved with porn).

That is all I have time for - hope you understand what I mean.
Quote 0 1
bejjinks
It is very hard to explain in a few sentences an issue so complicated it branches over several different areas from art to law


Perhaps it would help if you didn't rehash things we already agree about. Who here has ever suggested that we should expose underage children to any of this?

Maybe you don't understand who is on this forum. We are all fans of Warwick Rowers/Sport Allies here and the people who make the products pop in from time to time. However, the fans of Warwick Rowers/Sport Allies are fans for different reasons and the biggest difference is that some fans are here just looking for sexual stimulation while others are here for the Sport Allies message of breaking down the barriers in sport. That is the only "branch" of this discussion that we need to discuss.

And to answer the question "What is the difference between a nude photo of a Warwick Rower and a nude photo in a similar style of a porn star?" If the pose and everything is the same than both photos are art. Who the photo is of does not make a difference in determining whether it is art or porn. However, certain poses or other factors that focus on the sexuality do cross the line into porn.

We do also need to be concerned about links. For example, I saw some really nice pictures of a nude man that were not vulgar in the slightest and those pictures by themselves were great. The problem was that those pictures weren't by themselves but were advertising with links to more vulgar porn sites. The guy was a porn star who was traveling around the country not to promote body acceptance, but to promote his porn site. Therefore, despite how artistic the photos were, he was part of the problem not the solution. His porn promotion was contributing to the barriers in sport instead of helping to break those barriers down. Porn doesn't need promotion.
Quote 0 0
Antigenderstereotypificationcrucader
Bejjinks  I think we look at this from two different angles, and with different objectives. You seem to, and also seem to include most of the other members in your view - since you narrow the width of the membership to only two groups (to which I myself don`t fit into either) - focusing solely on the issues of barriers in sport, and declaring there to be an established difference between what is art and what is porn; and you also, with your latest statement, appear quite condemning of the latter.

I, on the other hand, see the issue of art and/or porn in a much wider context, where the Warwick Rowers project is just part of the picture, and I am more focused on the total picture of how nudity is depicted in not only this project, but in film, tv and sites like Youtube and similar, and is more concerned about the porn industry becoming the sole influence for young people`s sex lives and desires, than whether or not there is a difference between art and porn. As an example there is a US photographer, Robert Mapplethorpe, whose photos have been exhibited the world over, and who also undoubtedly is one of the most important sources for documentation of the New York gay scene in the 70s and 80s - but who also have some images I neither would have wanted to have on my wall, not even would want to look at, frankly. But that is my subjective opinion and taste - it doesn`t change the fact that in art circles Robert Mapplethorpe is regarded rather highly - by some - and not at all by others.

I mention this as an example of how difficult it is to establish objective differences between what is art and what is porn, since both definitions and perceptions are as subjective as they are. But objective differences is an absolute necessity to establish rules that can both be understood, obeyed and judged easily and fairly. Therefore whether something is art or porn is, in my opinion, a discussion better conducted in arenas exclusively reserved for art, what is key to a project like Warwick Rowers to be able to reach a larger segment of the population of the world with their message, is clear rules of what type of content should be allowed to which age groups, so they could tailor there promotion material to comply with those rules without getting nasty surprises of having them flagged unfairly. Had sites like Youtube has much more precise rules in regard to permitted content, especially in the 18+ category, it would have been easier both for uploaders and those whose job it is to monitor the site. 

The fact people like Bryan Hawn, the students doing the Drinking boys song, comedic performances including full male rear nudity and also (not included on this thread, but in a reply of mine on the film thread) the homemade edit and fictional gayer version of Glee, with included soft core nudity clips with a porn model, have been allowed on Youtube - but, as Angus himself said, Warwick Rowers have been denied to make money from their site because of the content, seems to indicate it is not so much the content, but the purpose - to only upload trailers with the intent of directing viewers away from Youtube and to the WR site - which has gotten Warwick Rowers out of Youtube`s good books.

I therefore see a potential Warwick Rowers and Sport Allies both could have a solid income from their Youtube site, and at the same time reach a wider audience with their message more clearly, and more often, if the Youtube site had had exclusive uploads in their own merits, both advertising the products and the message at the same time, but because the exclusive Youtube content created traffic and income for Youtube, Youtube allowed it. Instead of like Youtube probably felt, Warwick Rowers where using their site as free publicity platform, but didn`t put much in that was of benefit to Youtube itself. If Bryan Hawn can get 303 000 viewers, so should Warwick Rowers be able to - with a little effort, and frequent enough uploads for people to find it worth subscribing.

I don`t see Warwick Rowers only to have relevance in sport, I see it could have a potential to break down barriers and established gender and sexual preference stereotypes on a much larger scale, and that way contribute to improvements in quality of life ranging from more acceptance, less bullying, stronger unity between people and generally more happiness and less anxiety - to fewer sexual abuse and -assault cases, fewer suicides, less alcoholism and -drug abuse - perhaps even less war (the macho tough guy image many men feel they have to live up to, which increase the chances of conflicts becoming violent).

But to get to that level it has to reach a wider audience than it currently does, and I also think it has to implement the art element more into it`s advertising and image building. And instead of just focusing on calendars, films, books, subscriptions and onesies, also focused more strongly on being more creative and inventive - especially on it`s Youtube channel. By performing stunts like the Drinking boys song, as an example, more people is likely to be reached by that, than solely be the various trailers. And if new content is provided regularly, more people is likely to subscribe, than when the freshest content is the 2017 trailer.

With it`s idealistic message Warwick Rowers could have been the spear to split the wall of taboo currently surrounding nudity on the internet - and showing that nudity is not restricted to either art or porn, but also can be something in between of both. The latter would break down far more barriers, than just the same people buying the same products from the same source year after year.

In short, I don`t see Warwick Rowers photos or films neither as art or porn, I see them as something much more important than that - a celebration of life and freedom of expression and the right to be who you are.
Quote 0 1
bejjinks
Bejjinks  I think we look at this from two different angles, and with different objectives. You seem to, and also seem to include most of the other members in your view - since you narrow the width of the membership to only two groups

But to get to that level it has to reach a wider audience than it currently does, and I also think it has to implement the art element more into it`s advertising and image building.


I am not "narrowing the width". I am pointing at that currently we don't "reach a wider audience". I'm reminding you that you are not speaking to a wider audience. You are speaking to a narrow audience. This forum is the audience, not the organization. What your doing is like going to a High School drama performance and telling the audience that the audience needs to become a Broadway production. Your expectations are too high.

Do I wish to reach a wider audience? Yes I absolutely do but I can't expect these people to just instantly become ambassadors to the world. They've already got their hands full just managing what they already do. You're proposing some glorious global campaign that I like but I know that it is way too grandiose for Sport Allies currently. If you want to do something so grandiose and all encompassing, maybe you need to start your own organization instead of trying to take over Sport Allies.

I like your ideas. As we are able to, perhaps we should implement SOME of your ideas. Just remember that we are limited in scope currently and there are good reasons for staying limited for now.
Quote 0 0
PVogt
AND we’re limited on time for reading these novels that ANTIGENDER ... keeps sending. I’m not bullying you ANTIGENDER... but we’ve been suggesting that writing novels every time you post something is just too much and we’re also suggesting that as a new member , that you tone it down a bit..., that it’s a bit ballsy for you to have all these ideas and suggestions when you’ve just joined . And I’m saying this nicely , not with any malice. Make your responses much shorter and concise or no one is going to read them anyway. ( thumbs up... smile!)
Quote 0 0
Antigenderstereotypificationcrucader
I am not trying to take over anything. I wrote some of the thoughts that sprung to mind reading through some of the comments on this forum, that is all. Then I was told I had been unclear, and therefore tried to specify what I had meant a little better.

But I am also of the opinion that the message part of the project could have been spread to a lot more people, and potentially have had a much greater impact and influence, if the scope of the project had been wider than the official site, this forum, the products and the limited media attention the launches get annually, and now and again. I also think, since that is the case with most universities the world over, there are hidden talents among the Warwick Rowers models which could benefit both themselves and the project, if being allowed to grow and develop more freely, as a Youtube vlog could have been the vehicle for. And I have included both suggestions as well as some examples of videos to how that potentially could be done (the sketch with nude model and the chair, and the dancing students to the song Drinking boys in particularly. As examples of fun and easy ways to combine Warwick Rowers with the level of nudity acceptable on Youtube).

I will even dare make the claim that amateur made home edited video using Glee footage + footage of a nude model, in itself and it`s own right, does more to break down barriers and prejudice, as well as offers support for gays who feel alone and isolated, than what a Warwick Rowers trailer does. 

As praiseworthy as the Warwick Rowers and Sport Allies initiative is, nude models will never reach hearts and minds the same way a story with a character facing the issue will. And if it is funny or well created, such a video could reach audiences far wider than any trailer, Warwick Rowers photo or filmed photo session could. 

Those are all ideas and suggestions, in line with, I thought, what Warwick Rowers asked for us to provide for them. Whether Warwick Rowers wants to act on them, or not, is entirely up to the organisation itself. I just gave my honest opinion, and have the same freedom of speech and freedom of expression as anyone else in the world, and therefore will continue to write what I want, when I want, and how I want. You are free to not read it, but you don`t have any right to dictate what I can, and cannot, hold opinions about, or make suggestions to. I am a customer of products and member of this forum just as the rest of you. You can agree or disagree with my suggestions or opinions, fair enough, but you don`t have the right to dictate what I am allowed to think or say - or how I want to say it. 

Please don`t perceive this to be harsh, or I myself to be difficult - I am just stating facts, and is rather in a hurry when doing so.

PS:  Attention PVogt. I do not think you to be a bully - nor Bejjinks or most others. Aussie-nudist, on the other hand, I am still not convinced about. 
Quote 0 1
bejjinks
@Antigenderstereotypificationcrucader Your writing is clear. We were not asking for clarification. What we were saying is that your points are getting lost because you write so much. I don't mean to be rude but your writing is verbose.

Brevity means concise and exact use of words in writing or speech.

Concise means giving a lot of information clearly and IN A FEW WORDS; BRIEF but comprehensive.

I try to read your posts because I do like your ideas and I think you are a very clear communicator but even I get tired after reading that much text. I'm not trying to hinder your freedom of speech. I'm giving you suggestions on how you can be a better communicator and reach a wider audience and my suggestion is brevity.
Quote 0 0
Antigenderstereotypificationcrucader
Bejjinks  English is not my native tongue. Also (apart from this reply, which I have been thinking about for days without coming up with something better to say), I tend to just type what pops into my head when reacting to what I read. I express my view, and that is it. Personally I don`t think my English is the worse to be found online. I have come across replies and comments where the writer clearly have used both the incorrect words and has a unique syntax, making it almost a code deciphering mission to understand what they have written.  

Another factor is time. Should I analyze every sentence, shorten and polish, I would spend more time than I have. I am however a very fast typer, so when one thought catches the other, the commas and more tend to pile on, and likewise the paragraphs. But I finish what I write fairly fast - and then press post. Should I read through, polish and shorten, it would take a lot longer. 

That also being the more boring aspect of writing, I reserve that solely for the writing I am getting paid for. 

So sorry if you feel I am writing too long and too complicated, but since I don`t get paid for this, I stick to the part of the writing I find fun, and which I enjoy. The flow. When one thought catches the other, and your fingers have to chase your thoughts over the keyboard. 
Quote 0 1
bejjinks
So sorry if you feel I am writing too long and too complicated, but since I don`t get paid for this, I stick to the part of the writing I find fun, and which I enjoy. The flow. When one thought catches the other, and your fingers have to chase your thoughts over the keyboard. 


If that's the case, then write it in your own diary. Putting it here means you expect us to read it and so sorry if you feel we should read what you spewed out lazily, but since I don't get paid for this, I don't stick to the part of the reading I don't find fun: wading through tons and tons of rambling words. I have limited time too.

Okay, I understand not wanting to make it perfect. In my own writing here, I don't spend a lot of time making every word perfect. But I get to the point, I don't let myself ramble, and I give my writing a read over to make sure it's at least readable.
Quote 0 0

By posting on this forum you agree to our Forum Rules, Terms & Conditions as agreed at sign up.