User:Svartulfr1 06:35 (UTC) Okay, I've given it some thought, and I think that the two drawings are representative of the article pretty well, and I'm not sure anything else is necessary.
My guess at how others may perceive the photo you prefer is that erotica is in the eyes of the beholder, and some others might consider it obscene.
Svartulfr1 02:38 (UTC) I find it strange that Wikipedia contributions are judged by whom they come from rather than on content.
See topic "Real Picture" above.I think the second picture came out better anyway; I had more of an erection this time and I grasped further down, so you get a better picture of what is happening.Masturbation is not something erotic or shameful.I nude camp pain don't know how something done to your genticals can have an effect on your eyes.Actual photographs are controversial and could have the taboo of someone performing a sexual act; enactments of someone demonstrating the pose are less controversial (though I do admit there are still probably some who would find it offensive and next comes drawings, which are not.Therefore, it is wrong to say that they should expect what they get.Nigelj 21:23, (UTC) The Wikipedia article mentioned that moderate obesity is associated with increased masturbation.
Obesity IS associated with earlier sexual development (early puberty) so masturbation would then start earlier.
It is up to an individual to follow the beliefs or the facts.
37, 20 September 2006 We really should continue to show only the illustrations.
Haiduc 03:06, (UTC) I followed the advice of some of the users that intervened by sending me messages encouraging me to upload my photo to commons.
shrugs* Maybe try a drawing of your favored photo?User:aenertia - June 2006, it's "articles" like these that make Wikipedia a laughingstock as an alleged "encyclopedia." What a joke!Johntex talk 00:18, (UTC) People go to dictionaries for definitions and encyclopedias for in-depth information.You need to lobby the senior policy-makers of the whole WP project if you want them to change that policy.If a broadway show is "Unmissable" do you understand that to mean that it should be missable, but manages to escape missability?It seems a bit of a red herring.I've removed the sentence completely.