My Opinion

[neitherday.livejournal.com]

As moderator, I do agree non-worksafe material should be <lj-cut>. However, I do not believe this post is non-worksafe. All the "inappropriate" bits are covered up. I've seen nudity (barring certain specific areas of the body) in magazines in waiting rooms in offices so many times, that I don't see a problem with dykeprincess's post.

Comments

[hauntmeister.livejournal.com]

Yes, it's true that the "inappropriate" bits of the model in the photo were covered up. Nonetheless, it generated at least one request that the image be behind an lj-cut.

Technically, yes, this sort of image could be seen in magazines in waiting rooms. But I will argue there's a certain sort of expectation for what you see while leafing through a magazine in a waiting room, and a different expectation for what appears on your computer screen...When you may be at work, or with someone looking over your shoulder.

For example, although the Swedish Bikini Team (http://www.swedishbikiniteam.com/images/letsgosurfin.JPG) may appear in ads in a magazine, I believe it would be inappropriate for someone to use their image in a community LJ posting without a warning. (And, indeed, if I had included that picture as an IMG tag rather than an HREF, I fully expect that people would be raking me over the coals at this very moment.)