Back

Bluesky is a platform which automatically slaps content warnings on posts. It also offers very limited options for putting warnings on your own posts, which look like this.

As you'll see, there's a lot of options for "adult". Which is a *very* loaded term.

Now here's a fun fact: it's not only adults that have vaginas and vulvas. Most of you probably don't need to know this, but about 50% of children have this part of the anatomy, too. And most of these children came out of a vagina. Instagram/Meta is particularly egregious for flagging and shadow-banning anything that even so much as uses anatomically correct language, thus obscuring content which, frankly, young people probably *should* be able to access.

The other two options under the umbrella of "adult" are equally inadequate. "Suggestive" is simply baffling and ill-defined. And "nudity" is NOT a neutral term. Nudity is a concept steeped in cultural attitudes, and in the anglo-sphere is linked to misogyny and colonialism.

Consider, for example, the empires which forced Indigenous people to abandon their traditional attire and instead adopt the colonisers' "modest" attire.

Another example of the construct of nudity is that if a man with a flat chest walks bare-chested down the street, in an anglo country this is NOT nudity. If a woman with breasts does the same, this *is* nudity, and will likely result in negative consequences.

So nudity is not neutral. Adult content is not neutral. And the individuals creating automated content warning tools or content labels are most certainly not neutral either.

This use of non-neutral language creates a vicious circle wherein these taboos and attitudes are reinforced and amplified. This has real-world consequences - for example, 65% of women under 25 have a problem with using the word "vagina".

(we would also like to spare a thought for the poor souls who open a post marked "adult" in anticipation of finding some porn, and are instead confronted by things like an 18th century medical illustration of the major pelvic blood vessel. Not a primary victim, but sorry)

Content warnings can - and should - be neutral and specific. We like to do this! For example, here's the content warning section from our website, and further signage is positioned throughout the museum. See how we just describe what's there?

So what would a good content warning system look like on social media? Mastodon does it pretty well, actually. It allows you to write your own warnings. For example, you can warn "photo of a cervix" on a photo of a cervix, or "16th century illustration of a vulva (anatomically incorrect)" on an anatomically incorrect 16th century illustration of a vulva.

This precision means that if someone never wants to see what a cervix looks like, they absolutely don't have to. Or if they're at work, so probably can't look at how hilariously bad da Vinci was at drawing vulvas right now, they can bookmark for later, when at home.

So that's where we're at on this topic. We'd like to see greater neutrality in content filters. We'd like to see language which does not reinforce taboos and stigma. It's possible - but we need to start interrogating the language we use.

P.S. if your interest is piqued and you'd like to see some photos of human cervixes, here ya go: https://masto.ai/@vagina_museum/110571109790648500

And if you're really curious about just how bad da Vinci was at drawing vulvas, here it is: https://masto.ai/@vagina_museum/112275621929822921

And if you'd like to explore neutrality in the museum world a little bit more, our free exhibition "The Museum of Mankind" runs until the end of February... https://www.vaginamuseum.co.uk/visit

@_elena @vagina_museum I was brought up to believe that the reason some paintings of nude women are so bad is that the artist had never seen a nude woman.

@thisismissem I’m glad this is being worked on, it’s always bugged me that Mastodon “abuses” the otherwise neutral summary field for this.

@internetsdairy @vagina_museum the VaJayJay Museum

(God, I hate the cutesy euphemisms)

@euwikipedia
Its probably the single boob vaguely visible on the far right
@vagina_museum

@yogiron @euwikipedia @vagina_museum Perhaps the lady centre left, with the big hat with the ribbon on. Her breasts are visible, which is sacrilege on facebork.

@paulzwalker @euwikipedia @vagina_museum that is just a regular human part.

Maybe it is because of some kind of fear for speaking about what’s humane?

Those guy’s on top can hardly be called humane, looking in what they earn compared to what they pay their workers?