Somebody flagged my hub “Traditional Music In South Africa”. It is now in the line for clearance. The only something that could have given offence was a video of women doing traditional dances topless, exactly as they have done it for ages. So I feel compelled to enlighten the FLAGGER with the fact that in African tradition women’s breast was merely containers of milk meant for babies. Women’s hips and lower backs were the triggers of lust. So, dear Flagger, next time when you see black African women doing traditional dances with their breasts covered, please appreciate their consideration and respect for you and your perceptions.
Ah, I went to read this hub, and I couldn't find it. I wonder if I write a hub about the traditional plumber's butt crack, if it would be flagged as inappropriate, too, and be removed by Google and/or HubPages? Gotta love censorship...
Shame On Any Peanut Brain who would take offense to becoming aroused by the Boobs of Traditional African Women Dancing!
Perhaps they prefer to view extremely obese boys bouncing their spare tires?
Clearly this frustrated flagger hasn't seen what wild elephants do, given the right music Martie!
Maybe that person was an African and did not want non african people to be exposed on Youtube. Who knows why we get flagged? I have had so many things flagged to the point of ridiculousness. It might also be someone who is jealous of you who does this. Who knows?
It sounds like you have fallen afoul, not of flaggers, but of the bots that check for compliance with the wants, desires and TOS of Google.
While a flagger can flag a hub, they cannot unpublish it (I assume it is unpublished as I did not find it).
It may be possible to get it re-instated with a letter to HP, but if it shows topless women, I would have to doubt it. This is not a matter of HP censorship or prudish flaggers - it is a matter of keeping adsense accounts for HP and the rest of us.
Drop a line to HP and see if you can get anything done (firstname.lastname@example.org).
wilderness, I find your comment very interesting. You may be right, though the topless women feature in a YouTube video – but I guess that doesn’t count. Replacing the video, will be like dressing the statue of Zeus.
Who are the ‘bots’ that check for compliances? People or computers?. Sorry, but as a hubber who got unpublished I am totally out of my depths.
Yes, they’ve taken away the adds.
Okay, let me send my defence to the address email@example.com, although I’ve already sent one to firstname.lastname@example.org
Hey, I recall a medical procedure as being too adult for them too (breast reduction). What's on TV has even more during kid hours. Remember, those nat geo mags in elementary schools; same thing. It's just internet police on roids, nothing more.
The bots wouldn't have picked up a youtube video.You are right, someone must have flagged it, BUT it wouldn't have got unpublished if the mods didn't agree with them.
Are you sure it was unpublished for that? What did the message say?
Found it. I would say your problem is the top photo.
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/s … mp;ct=clnk
If you can edit the photo slightly to hide the nipples, you should be OK
Open it in a graphic program and put a thick black line round the chest area or something.
And I agree, there is nothing erotic about this, but HP is prudish (or Google Adsense, not sure which).
You’ve found it! You think it is the top photo? My goodness! Maybe I must use a picture of Adam and Eve dressed in their leaves. Okay, I will go and cover those nipples...... Hahahaha!
May I post the picture in here? Really, this was natural in Africa. Thanks a lot for your advice. How did you get to the hub – if only I can see it? Sorry, perhaps you are one of the staff and I don’t know it. Thanks again!
Has anybody noticed that the Hub of the Day has at last one naked-lady-statue picture in it???
This is sad. I wonder if some of the same flaggers would be moved to action by gore. I'm reminded of Marlon Brando's words regarding the X rating, paraphrasing: X is when a breast is kissed, R is when one is cut off. Sadly, this still seems to apply in many quarters.
ImprovSpirit - Sad, indeed. And I do think those paintings of Africans dressed in traditional clothes are ART and not porn. Thanks for your contribution.
We may like to think so, Martie - but I used to live in Swaziland and I can assure you, a large part of the male tourist audience at ceremonies weren't there to appreciate African traditions, they were there to ogle the semi-naked lovelies.
And it's well-known that, in the days before porn magazines were widely available, men used to buy National Geographic for the same reason. I read a (humorous) article about it just last week.
I'm not defending or condoning either stance but I wonder if all you guys and gals would hold your position if a few penises were flapping in the breeze.
I can name quite a few statues in the world of naked men....
Even a panorama size banner in Utrecht. I wonder if it is still there in the old town?
Anyway, I've covered the lady. Let's see if my hub will be accepted now.
I'm not staff, by the way. Any hub that has been indexed by Google can be seen once it is removed by going the Google cache version of it.
If you put the hub title into google and it comes up, then click on 'cache' you should see it.
I hope that was the problem. Would have been nice if Jason had confirmed it when he posted, but he didn't although he did suggest it was when he talked of allowed images.
You did a good job of covering the African lady up - it still looks natural.
Her's what I had to do to a photo of a young lady's cleavage - and she was covered!
IzzyM - Thank you for telling me about something I was not aware of - Google cache version
My mother had covered me, while I was wearing a FULL costume, with a piece of cotton just like you've done with your girl.
40 years ago.
And I thought she was old-fashioned.
So I guess we can now talk about 'ancient'. But no, my drummer-girl is 'ancient'.... So what do one call a person today who is excessively concerned about propriety?
Anyway, thanks for your contribution. Much appreciated.
I gues I wasn't talking about world class fine art of the masters. I was really talking about HP.
Breasts are not genitalia and in many countries, Canada included, it is perfectly legal for women to be topless in the same places men are allowed. Granted, most women are not out mowing the lawn this way but on the beach? Yes!
Penises flapping around? I think that would be more comparable to vaginas getting out on their own. While HP has every right to establish guidelines, they should at the very least be consistent. That's the real problem and the root of much confusion.
Unfortunately, these standards were put in place to make all of HubPages's content "ad-safe." I remember that even Janet Jackson's iconic CD cover for her album, janet, was not allowed according to AdSense's content standards.
If you contact our moderation team, they can help explain the boundaries of our policy. Please do not contact press@ since the link makes clear that is for press inquiries only (i.e. you will not receive a reply).
Jason, thanks so much for your comment. Yes, I do understand their rules and the reasons thereof, but somehow I feel this picture of mine could have been regarded as an exception. But, of course, everybody who gets unpublished feels like this.
I've already send one to Pia - and another one to the team. So I hope to hear from somebody soon.
Thanks a lot!
Well, now it looks sort of like a guy and REALLY inappropriate...hahaha
I don't think it takes away from the picture. It's ok. If I didn't know you altered it, I would just think it's part of the outfit.
Martie, of course it's ridiculous, but there's a very good reason for it.
HubPages is a place to make money writing articles.
For us to make money, HubPages must be able to show ads from Google Adsense.
If HubPages breaks the rules set by Adsense for content, it could lose its ability to show Adsense ads on ALL Hubs. Then we'll all lose our income.
Unfortunately, the rules set by Adsense are quite broadly worded, and Google isn't interested in clarifying them. For that reason, and because the site's very existence depends on keeping our Adsense accounts, HubPages plays it very safe when deciding what's acceptable.
There are other sites which are more willing to take risks and accept images or subjects that might be against the guidelines. Personally, I'm glad HubPages errs on the safe side - it is a bit annoying to have some subjects off-limits, but there are plenty of other things to write about. And it protects my livelihood.
I really feel there is no difference between the picture of today's Hub of the Day and mine....
I don't see anything at all "improper" about either the African dancer or the fine-art statue not having the "adipose hankies" (couldn't resist there) covered, but, to be honest; I wouldn't put either photo in one of my Hubs. I just aim very much for "erring on the side of caution" because there's the whole thing about Google, its ads, etc. etc. I'd agree that there's not a whole lot of difference between the statue and the dancer in a lot of ways, but then too there is a difference between non-living fine art. I don't mind the "ad-safe" thing, though. Google's only apparently erring on the side caution too. There's a whole lot of ad-subject categories that I've blocked in my AS account (and that have mostly OK enough ads a lot of the time) because I just don't want to worry about what might show up and change the "image" of my page. (I couldn't help but laugh at the irony of seeing this thread on the same day that every time I click back onto HP there's the fine-art photo in the Hub of the Day.
Thanks so much for your opinion, Liza. I agree with your views. But in situations like this I turn into a rebel. This is nothing but discrimination - accepting Western art as publishable, but rejecting African art and, good grief, call it 'Adult Content', in other words 'porn'. I've got to write a hub about this; if HP's reject it, I'll post it elsewhere.
This is actually an International issue. I believe the individual who flagged my hub did not realize the seriousness of this matter.
Take care and carpe diem.
Martie, I can very much see your point about Western art versus African art; and in spite of my seeing humor in the irony that your thread showed up the day as the Western-art Hub did, I can certainly see why it is you'd be offended by being flagged and don't want to appear not to take your getting that Hub flagged seriously. One thing I do think of, though, is that the same flagger might also have flagged the Western-art Hub if s/he had seen it.
If you haven't already done this, and if you're not already planning to do this, I think the subject of the different types of art (and standards for what constitutes it) would make a good one for you to write a Hub about. (Not necessarily the thing that Google has its "lines" that it draws, or that HP adheres to Google's standards - but the general thing that there can be such different "versions" of what is "simply art" and what crosses some lines for some people of different cultures. (I don't blame you for being aggravated that someone flagged the particular thing as "adult content" or that someone would interpret it as that.
Lisa, paxwill and Marisa, thank you so much for your opinions and advice. Lisa, I am busy working on a hub about this.
Call me a Drama Queen, but explode I will explode until Michelangelo’s statue of David and all his brothers and Venus de Milo and all her sisters are regarded as ‘adult content’, or until paintings of Africans wearing the traditional clothes they’ve worn once upon a time are regarded as art.
When it is Western, it is art, but when it comes from Africa, it is porn. WTH can be more ridiculous and discriminating as this? Africa is proud of their culture and art, just as proud as the Westerns and Eastern nations are of theirs. All of them are unique and some are better than others, but art is art and discrimination is discrimination.
In spite of the fact that I’ve covered my piece of art’s breasts, and sent e-mails to the apparent correct addresses, my hub is still unpublished. So what does this mean?
Martie, explode all you like, just be aware it won't make any difference to HubPages or Adsense policies. We've been through all this before on these forums many, many times.
Also, bear in mind that some people would interpret your position differently.
I can imagine some people saying "why do you think it's acceptable to show an African woman's breasts, if it's indecent to show a white woman's breasts?"
I take your opinion to heart.
I still regard the painting of the Venda-woman in the same light as a Venus de Milo and statues of Aphrodite. Let me more or less repeat a comment I've made in that hub of mine -
Those naked statues of Venus de Milo and kie all over the world in the open – Western Art – were inspired by the immoral life-style of the Romans – From the very start they had an erotic intention; the models were participators of orgies on high level. While the standards and norms of Africans, before they got westernized, were extremely high. Immoral practices were taboo. Men had to marry the women they wanted to see naked.
Shaka was one of the minority illegitimate children – (the son of a prince who went against the rules when he impregnated a girl) - and his mother had to flee with him in order to escape a horrible death-penalty.
So really, I cannot help but emphasizing my discontentment with Google’s double standards. It honestly boggles my South-African mind. Google may be stationed in America, but Cyberspace is an International World, and the traditions of all continents should be treated alike. What is good for the goose should be good for the gander.
Thanks again, Marisa, for your contributions in here.
Yes, and I understand your viewpoint. The thing is, Google's largest customer base is American so their standards reflect America's standards, which are extraordinarily prudish (at least, by my standards as a Brit/Aussie). I'm amazed at what's regarded as "unacceptable" on American television (think Janet Jackson's wardrobe malfunction all those years ago, which wouldn't have raised an eyebrow here).
So it's highly unlikely your little Hub will make any difference in their attitude, unless you're willing to take on American society single-handed!
There is a big difference between your painting of the Venda woman and the Venus de Milo - antiquity. Michelangelo can get away with naked paintings, an unknown artist cannot. That's been a common view amongst conservatives since Victorian times - it is surprising that it still prevails, but that's life.
Of course, Marisa. Lol, I remind myself of the little courageous mouse trying to fight for justice in the world of cats. I will do the hub just to get rid of my uncomfortable thoughts ababout this. This type of contradiction is as old as the mountains. So unfair. Who decide after all what is acceptable and what not? But only people with perceptions and interpretations according to the size of their minds. Have a good day !
I've just learnt I am supposed to submit the hub again, and it may take another 72 hours before it gets approved or not by the administrator.
I think it is great that you made such a natural Hub on Black women. It is a shame that it is here in America that we equate nudity with sex all the time. In areas of less Industrial progress, nudity is seen as a natural thing. And what if it did have to do with sex? It is our taboos on sex that is offensive, not a women's naked breast.
Parasmart, I appreciate your comment tremendously! I pondered for a long time over your opinion "it is our taboos on sex that is offensive". Imagine life without any taboos on sex.
Don't you think humans would have been then just like animals? Women would have had a baby every 9 months, say from the age of twelve. OMG! If there were no taboos, who would have stopped this? The entire human race would have lived in absolute poverty, as is the case today when there are merely more than 3 children to feed and educate. Cannibalism would most probably have been at the order of the day, for where would so many people found food on this planet?
My logical mind says taboos prove human's ability to think and to plan a life more divine than that of a clever primate.
I would say SELF-CONTROL - mastering the art of being stronger than the animal in us - is the challenge to be met by humans, in order for them to have a better life.
Goodness, you have forced me to think very-very deep about taboos on sex.
In African tradition, before westernization, and according to folklore, people who had sex before marriage were summarily killed.
Thanks for your reply. You did think a lot about it. But it is guidelines we need and not taboos. Guidelines that say this is OK and this is not OK. Sex is natural. When man say that it is evil that is a taboo and that is wrong. Mankind is a moral animal. We were always human. We can grow and live well without taboos. What is taboo in one place is acceptable in another. So let's not condemn sex, but how it is approached.
by Peeples4 years ago
Ok I am at my end! I seem to be having an issue with HP. Everytime I flag something I end up getting flagged. Yesterday I published my 2nd part in a 3 part series on Jeffrey Dahmer. Ads were taken and I was fine with...
by PoeticPhilosophy3 years ago
No idea why.
by CrystalSingleton6 years ago
By means of substandard quality? One of which has almost 700 views on it. These three hubs have been on here for over a year and are now being flagged although they generate comments and daily reads. I don't understand...
by joniki8 years ago
So I am away for a couple days and come home to hubpages for a nice Easter gift.EVERY ONE of my hubs has been flagged and unpublished. ALL OF THEM??Hubs that have been live for almost a year now with thousands of hits...
by ajcor5 years ago
the following hubs are in the main my poems but it seems that if some action doesn't follow by 25th March they will be unpublished because they don't fit the current mould!...a poem is not like text it takes a concept...
by Benz B4 years ago
I am having issues with the hubpages staff. Yesterday I updated a hub that was published in 2009. And notice that I was not allow to resubmit it before it was reviewed. Then I tried to update another...
Copyright © 2017 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.