However, I was taken aback by the use of an unexpectedly provocative example photo (for the monochrome prints) included in the report. I read this material on my PC which is in the family space of our home and, in my opinion, this is not appropriate for "family viewing", even inadvertent views.
I certainly do not wish to dictate my sensibilities on anyone else or on this web site, but I would appreciate a warning when provocative material will be included.
Frankly speaking, I was shocked by your post. Michael has always stated that LL is not a site devoted only to landscape and I don't see the difference between street shot images and some bits of nudity. For me both are perfectly valid aspects of our lives and showing them is normal.
To my eyes, exposing my kids to such an image is not an issue at all and my view has always been that the best education is to prepare them to all the aspects of real life. Sex and nudity being an essential aspect of our existence as human beings, even if it is one we all somehow have problems to deal with.
I had not realized that some people in the US were this sensitive to nudity. Although what Rob C wrote about Talibans is going too far, I understand what he means.
I would for one be opposed to the usage of warning for such harmless images. For me that would be aligning myself to the lowest denominator of censorship. I don't intend to have my wife wearing a veil because some Guru in Saudi Arabia would like her to, and I also don't intend to have to get rid of warning messages each time some bits of breast is exposed because some gurus in the US would like me to. Both are completely unreasonnable.
The real solution is to open up to sexuality by exposing ourselves more to it instead of hiding away from it.
To my eyes, our lives belong to a grand scheme of evolution whose name has to be progress. Progress means many things, but among these things I feel that a key aspect is a deeper understanding of our human nature, and the creation of an environment where all aspects of our humanity are allowed to bloom.
Trying to deny the central role of sex is IMHO akin to trying to oppose the march of progress. It will be seen in a few years as a sad detour, similar to what happened during the darkest periods of the Middle Age.
The key to free outselves from this is to underdstand the actual motives that pushed some man in charge of our religions to oppose sexuality. It has to be said that there is nothing divine about this, puritanism is a purely man made concept.
We boast about how free our countries are, but are we free to even discuss this topic openly?
Here again, we have so many things to learn from Asian countries.