Forum
>
Site Discussion
>
Thread
Log in |
Register
I actually agree with everything you wrote. I personally wasn’t seeking out Jessica, Stephanie, or the broad with the alleged nazi tattoo.
I also believe that if you’re going to accuse someone of being a nazi or anything bad, you better have more than a picture of a tattoo or a post from social media to back up what you’re saying, but that’s just me.
Well done most sites these days will end up surrendering and pick a side. this is just a image hosting site about muscular women so not an endorsement of what she does. and if her Instagram and other social media gets removed. maybe there won't be any pics of her online at all. it has happened to some fbbs who are blacklisted and were active a few years ago.
Some thoughts.
Evidence and Due Diligence: While I agree with you that it is crucial to ensure that any accusations are backed by evidence, I also believe that symbols have power. The tattoo in question, "Meine Ehre heißt Treue," has a deeply troubling historical context. It's not just any phrase, it is not a matter of opinion; it's a slogan that was used by the Nazi Waffen-SS. The choice to get such a tattoo is not a trivial one, and it inherently carries a political and historical statement. The weight of this particular symbol cannot be dismissed out of hand. The woman in question is Hungarian - a country that has struggled with far-right nationalist sentiments and was a former Axis power - and the presumption that these words could be chosen at random or innocently is entirely in bad faith.
Tolerance vs. Acceptance: The sentiment of "if you don't like something, you need to deal with it" is valid in many contexts. However, it is crucial to differentiate between personal preferences and issues of moral and historical significance. If someone doesn't like a particular fashion style, then yes, they can simply choose not to engage with it. But when it comes to symbols or statements that resonate with hate, racism, or the advocacy of harm, it's not just about personal preference. It's about community standards and the message we want to send as a collective.
Slippery Slope Concerns: I understand your concern about setting a precedent that might embolden accusers. However, it's equally important to consider the message sent by not addressing glaring issues. Doing nothing can also set a precedent, suggesting that such symbols and ideologies have a place in our community. Each case should be assessed on its merit. Dismissing all accusations because of potential misuse in the future may inadvertently create an environment where genuine concerns are stifled.
Finally, it is deeply troubling to see the far-right sentiments from many users that have come out of the woodwork since this issue was first raised, and the response (or lack thereof) to this. Support for a woman tattooing the motto of the Nazi SS, snidely dismissing those who disapprove, or really any form of support or endorsement for ideologies that have caused immense suffering and loss is unconscionable. The fact is that the Nazis systematically exterminated millions of vulnerable people in a horrifying genocide. The rise of contemporary revisionist histories and associated extreme right-wing opinions on this have and continue to inspire violence. As you say, whether she is or is not a passionate neo-Nazi, many users have assumed she is, and are clearly gleeful at the prospect. If anything it is these attitudes which are just as, if not more disturbing.
I'm not suggesting you remove anyone who is victim of a social media witch-hunt of the week on little or no evidence, but there are cases that clearly go far above and beyond that bar. I share your concerns that moderation of a site like this is undoubtedly difficult, with nearly a hundred thousand users and hundreds of comments a day, but ultimately a community like this survives or dies with its milieu. I wish you the best in this, but this has absolutely opened my eyes to some of the more concerning elements of this site's user-base.
Some thoughts. . . . I'm not suggesting you remove anyone who is victim of a social media witch-hunt of the week on little or no evidence, but there are cases that clearly go far above and beyond that bar. I share your concerns that moderation of a site like this is undoubtedly difficult, with nearly a hundred thousand users and hundreds of comments a day, but ultimately a community like this survives or dies with its milieu. I wish you the best in this, but this has absolutely opened my eyes to some of the more concerning elements of this site's user-base.
Thank you. 100% agreed.
To me it's the same as music artists who have done some questionable things. I might despise what they have done, but if the music is good, I'll still listen to it.
The political views of these women have nothing to do with the hard work where I admire them for on this site. I'm pretty sure there's plenty of women on this site whith whom I could not get along IRL for whatever reason, political or otherwise.
In the end, this is girlswithmuscle.com and the muscles is what I'm here for. If I'd care about their views, no matter how good or bad, I'd go to girlswithpoliticalopinions.com
Finally, it is deeply troubling to see the far-right sentiments from many users that have come out of the woodwork since this issue was first raised, and the response (or lack thereof) to this. Support for a woman tattooing the motto of the Nazi SS, snidely dismissing those who disapprove, or really any form of support or endorsement for ideologies that have caused immense suffering and loss is unconscionable. The fact is that the Nazis systematically exterminated millions of vulnerable people in a horrifying genocide. The rise of contemporary revisionist histories and associated extreme right-wing opinions on this have and continue to inspire violence. As you say, whether she is or is not a passionate neo-Nazi, many users have assumed she is, and are clearly gleeful at the prospect. If anything it is these attitudes which are just as, if not more disturbing.
I agree with everything you wrote, diabolus25, but this is the part that I find most disturbing. The response, or, as you say, lack thereof by GWM, is of significant concern.
This applies to all of the women who've been subject to removal demands recently, including Jessica, Stephanie Flesher, and the various women with Nazi accusations, so I thought I'd make a single thread explaining my thinking for all of these, and so that I can link here in the future when this comes up again.
First: It strikes me as pretty wild just how quick many people are to throw around accusations. Accusing someone of being a Nazi seems like a pretty big deal, so I would think that you'd do your homework and find recent Nazi-esque posts they've made on social media, or something along those lines. Yet I have seen zero instances of anyone presenting anything besides a knee-jerk reaction based on a tattoo.
To be honest I'm not one to call for some lady to be removed from a site with sexy pics because of what she stands for.
BUT
if having the motto of SS written on your body, in German, which is not the said woman's first language, in gothic letters alluding to the aesthetics used by the Reich is not a proof that the woman is a Nazi, IDK what is :D
@diabolus25 Thank you and I agree with you 100%. I don’t recall the last time I’ve read such an informed and thoughtful explanation on any topic by any user on GWM.
My politics are center right. I see the social tactics of both the extreme left and right as equivalent and striving for the same objectives.
I see the dilemma faced by @Chainer who is just trying to define GWM as a site for showcasing and celebrating female muscle.
Well, regarding Barbara Vitéz case alone, I would say that the problem for the site is not her presence per se, but some of her pictures, with the damn Nazi motto showing up in her body. And yes, as stated by others, it is the SS slogan, it's not something open for debate. The fact that you are allowing Nazi propaganda on the site is what you should be concerned, for the same reasons that you don't allow piracy, minors and porn.
So, do I think this model should be blacklisted? Ideally, yes, but I know it's not gonna happen. So at least remove the problematic material and add a new Upload Rule: "No hate material".
Generally speaking, I think this is a reasonable policy, but a blanket policy without nuance will always be problematic to some degree. Specifically, in the case of Barbara Vitez, it's extremely problematic. She is a Nazi. There is no other explanation for why she'd tattoo the motto of the Schutzstaffel on her body. It is a phrase that is prohibited in Germany and Austria specifically because there is no context for it outside of being a Nazi motto.
The choice to keep her on the site is yours, but you have to own the fact that you're okay with knowingly showcasing a Nazi. Don't hide from it, don't pretend there's an alternative explanation for the tattoo. She is a Nazi, full stop. Make whatever decision you want, it's your site, but own it, don't try to deflect with some weak nonsense about "accusations". That's some combination of willfully obtuse and cowardly.
I agree with everything you wrote, diabolus25, but this is the part that I find most disturbing. The response, or, as you say, lack thereof by GWM, is of significant concern.
What would removing her accomplish? It's not like she would care. Any upstanding people here can simply recognize that she's a piece of shit, and move on.
What would removing her accomplish? It's not like she would care. Any upstanding people here can simply recognize that she's a piece of shit, and move on.
Well, there's a fair few people whose ancestors were exterminated that might not care to see the motto of the organization responsible for said extermination tattooed on a model. I can't measure that hurt objectively, but I'm confident it outweighs whatever value there is in keeping some awful woman's pics on the website.
Generally speaking, I think this is a reasonable policy, but a blanket policy without nuance will always be problematic to some degree. Specifically, in the case of Barbara Vitez, it's extremely problematic. She is a Nazi. There is no other explanation for why she'd tattoo the motto of the Schutzstaffel on her body. It is a phrase that is prohibited in Germany and Austria specifically because there is no context for it outside of being a Nazi motto.
The choice to keep her on the site is yours, but you have to own the fact that you're okay with knowingly showcasing a Nazi. Don't hide from it, don't pretend there's an alternative explanation for the tattoo. She is a Nazi, full stop. Make whatever decision you want, it's your site, but own it, don't try to deflect with some weak nonsense about "accusations". That's some combination of willfully obtuse and cowardly.
This is what I was alluding to, Tall1. Though I don’t believe I could have expressed it as well.
What would removing her accomplish? It's not like she would care. Any upstanding people here can simply recognize that she's a piece of shit, and move on.
Oh Tall1...if your doctor told you that you had a severe case of lung cancer, would you be cavalier about it and say "So? I also have bad taste in clothing. Who cares?" Fascism/nazism/rabid intolerance/hate etc are just like metastazing cancer...needs to be rooted out asap. But no, you insist upon being superficial and non-thinking.
Well said Diabolus25. Thank you ever so much. At least we are aware of at least 15 apologists for Hate material on this site. A small number to-be-sure, as fringe elements go, but certainly cause for profound alarm.
Judging from the popularity of her photos, there are a lot more than 15 individuals. And more supporters are coming out of the woodwork. I for one deleted her from my favorites after this came to light.
Judging from the popularity of her photos, there are a lot more than 15 individuals. And more supporters are coming out of the woodwork. I for one deleted her from my favorites after this came to light.
judging from her popularity its more likely that people don't give a shit about the tattoo (or have not looked into it to form an opinion) and favorite her images because she has a nice body. the fact is most users don't care about anything beyond the pixels to comment or report (which is why there are often complaints on why certain images haven't been removed at times), though if I had to guess this particular issue has brought more first-time commentors out of the woodwork than other things that have come up here. I've not been tracking but there have been at least two with zero commenting or upload history but they have something to say now.
EDIT: also i had noidea what the tattoo says because it's barely legible unless you're blowing it up, most users are not looking that closely.
also, no one is showcasing anyone. the users vote something up so it winds up in any of the front page things---you are empowered to favorite or not favorite photos on a whim, and also you don't have to click on them, just like you don't click on other photos that even from the thumbnail you are already 100% sure you're not interested in. Posting a girl with muscles isn't going to "allow fascism to fester in grow", that's such an exagerration. y'all are PUSHING this woman to most recent because you keep commenting on photos.
The absolute bare minimum in this case should be to remove any individual images with blatant nazi iconography - swastikas, iron crosses, mottos, etc. - and this is a conscious decision to allow nazi propaganda to be openly displayed. The tattoo of the SS slogan is clearly visible and legible and has no other context outside of being the slogan of the SS, and the people being willfully obtuse about its existence or its unknowable meaning are more than likely grinning ear to ear now that the question of how to deal with nazis has been definitively decided on in favor of the nazis.
Any bar that welcomes nazis becomes a nazi bar, and it's just bleak to see this much open, comfortable right wing revisionism on this site which could've been avoided by simply deleting a few select images.
Edit: in response to the "slippery slope" argument, consider the stakes here: establish a precedent where a model could include the 14 words on every one of their pictures and still be featured on the site; or, erase a few images that would be illegal to display in Germany.
But when it comes to symbols or statements that resonate with hate, racism, or the advocacy of harm, it's not just about personal preference.
The problem with this is that it's a fully general argument that can apply to basically anything you want it to. "Advocacy of harm" is whatever you want it to be. This is basically just the implementation of what I spoke about in my second and third points in my first post: "This thing is unacceptable for anyone to view" and then later the scope of what falls under this umbrella keeps expanding.
Specifically, in the case of Barbara Vitez, it's extremely problematic. She is a Nazi. There is no other explanation for why she'd tattoo the motto of the Schutzstaffel on her body.
There is definitely a good chance this is the case, but, like... has anyone asked her? Just to be absolutely sure?
Finally, it is deeply troubling to see the far-right sentiments from many users that have come out of the woodwork since this issue was first raised, and the response (or lack thereof) to this. Support for a woman tattooing the motto of the Nazi SS, snidely dismissing those who disapprove
Maybe I missed it (I certainly don't even come close to reading every comment posted to the site) but I haven't seen anyone seriously and unironically say "Gee, Nazi tattoos are great, her having one is great, Nazis did nothing wrong!" I have seen a lot of people, myself included, not want her images removed, but that's not a "far-right sentiment", and let's just say that calling it that doesn't exactly alleviate my slippery slope concerns.
Imho, having that tattoo is completely disgusting and out of place, since it has obvious Nazi connotations, but it's a free world; it only shows what kind of person the woman is. Leave her, ban her, cover the tattoo, whatever (although I suspect covering it wouldn't be enough for some).
But, for once, I find interesting how many here are dancing literal circles (spirograph-like) around "I'm gonna report this site!" without saying it.
About that...would you behave the same about a hammer/sickle tattoo? Last time I checked, the "bad" numbers are way higher with the last one. Remember people: someone's loved flag/symbol might be another person's rightful anger cause. No one's exempt.
But, for once, I find interesting how many here are dancing literal circles (spirograph-like) around "I'm gonna report this site!" without saying it.
because if the site was taken down by the ADl or whoever (and on what basis? hosting a few photos?) there's no other site like this and every photo from the last 12-13 years on here would be lost.there's no other active archive like it.
This applies to all of the women who've been subject to removal demands recently, including Jessica, Stephanie Flesher, and the various women with Nazi accusations, so I thought I'd make a single thread explaining my thinking for all of these, and so that I can link here in the future when this comes up again.
First: It strikes me as pretty wild just how quick many people are to throw around accusations. Accusing someone of being a Nazi seems like a pretty big deal, so I would think that you'd do your homework and find recent Nazi-esque posts they've made on social media, or something along those lines. Yet I have seen zero instances of anyone presenting anything besides a knee-jerk reaction based on a tattoo. Similarly, with Jessica and Flesher people are extremely quick to judge a situation mostly based on the posts of one instagram influencer whose main motivation is to get views and attention.
(Note that I'm not saying that the various impressions of these women are wrong, just that people are astonishingly quick to jump to conclusions even in the face of a lot of missing information.)
Second: I very much don't like the attitude that has become common in recent years that basically goes, "I don't like this, therefore it needs to be removed." No, if you don't like something, you need to deal with it, and not look at it or seek it out. If other people also don't like it, they can come to that same conclusion themselves.
Third: The combination of these two points makes it likely that if I were to start removing women from the site in these sorts of cases, it would serve to embolden the accusers and there would be an increasing stream of people digging up bad things women have done and demanding their removal. And before you come at me with "that's the slippery slope fallacy", it's not a fallacy when there have already been 6+ of these in the past year. Therefore, it is best to nip this in the bud before it has a chance to get going.
Note that I will be closely monitoring this thread and if you are uncivil or throw cheapshots at your political opponents, I will ban you without warning. (Well, the ban is the warning.) Additionally, I may lock this thread at any time. I generally like to explain my reasoning, but ultimately it is neither feasible nor does it matter to me to get everyone to agree.