Co-50ft admins, this may lead to an increase in traffic. Also, apologies for the potential offensiveness of this post. This will offend some people. I apologize to that. If this gets a negative reaction, or if an editor feels strongly, please remove this post.

A friend texted me that he was hanging out with a group and they were debating the meaning of the term ‘bukkake’. He asked if I could look it up and I gladly did so. I was happy to find some helpful Wikipedia articles (who knew there was such a thing as Bukkake Udon, and for a sensible reason?).

In my response, I sent a link to the image for the article (extremely NSFW), which I loved for its “airplane emergency manual” style and its matter-of-fact-ness. I was maddeningly curious who provided such an image, and I found out that a user by the name of Seedfeeder had provided similar illustrations for a variety of sexually-themed articles.

On his user page, he talks about how his images have been edited, removed, and attacked. He also quotes the Wikemedia foundation:

“Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in the sum of all knowledge. That’s our commitment.” -Wikimedia Foundation

His images (monumentally NSFW gallery) are undoubtedly informative. They’re also salacious in the minds of many, and Wikipedia is a site for knowledge for all people. So how does this play out? How would you approach such a situation?

My libertarian side sparks to life here, thinking sexuality is not evil, and censorship just makes a taboo out of what should not be.

P.S. The image above is the only “clean” one in the set. A second one which could be considered “clean” (if you have no context, or imagination), is after the jump.