54
Mongolian spot (en.wikipedia.org)
submitted 1 day ago* (last edited 18 hours ago) by merde@sh.itjust.works to c/wikipedia@lemmy.world
20 comments fedilink hide all child comments

They occur in around 80% of Asians, and 80% to 85% of Native American infants. Approximately 90% of Polynesians and Micronesians are born with slate grey nevus, as are about 46% of children in Latin America, where they are associated with non-European descent. These spots also appear on 5–10% of babies of full Caucasian descent. African American babies have slate grey nevus at a frequencies of 90% to 96%.

all 21 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] Dav@lemmy.world 4 points 7 hours ago

Both my son and daughter had Mongolian spots when they were really young.

The daycare my son goes to pulled me aside one afternoon while I was picking him up and accused me of hitting him. They thought the mogoilian spots he had on his arse were bruises from me hitting him.

I told them, no they are in fact moglian spots, and him being part asian means it's a very common thing.

I got up her for not having noticed this before. My son had been going to the same place with the same workers since he was 6 months old, he was 3 when they thought it was bashing him. This woman and her co-workers would have changed his nappy 100's of times.

[-] Nuke_the_whales@lemmy.world 13 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

What's wild is us humans are stripped and spotted, like cows, but you can only see it in ultraviolet.

They're called Blaschko's lines and they're invisible to our eyes.

[-] M137@lemmy.world 1 points 1 hour ago

This is false information, and easily found to be so. Just searching "blaschko lines uv light" gives several results saying it's not true, and that there is never a source for that information in the articles, videos etc. that say it. It should also be obvious it's not true just by most people's experience, seeing people under UV light, via everything from clubs, movies, art, etc. isn't rare at all, and you never see these lines.

Check anything you say before doing so, we are all bombarded with misinformation from malicious intent already, no need to pile onto that with misinformation from ignorance.

[-] starbrite@lemmy.zip 4 points 7 hours ago

Wtf i want a checker pattern, is there a way to tell which one you got without giving yourself skin cancer?

[-] M137@lemmy.world 1 points 1 hour ago

It's not true, it took 10 seconds to make that obvious with a quick search.

[-] NateSwift@lemmy.dbzer0.com 19 points 1 day ago

Maybe flag this as NSFW?

[-] TheEighthDoctor@lemmy.world 9 points 1 day ago

Calm down Jeffery Epstein

[-] merde@sh.itjust.works 19 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

i'm guessing that you're not writing about the article but the photo used in that Wikipedia article.

what's nsfw about a photo of a 6 months old baby, used to demonstrate the birthmark that's the subject of the article?

are even baby bums nsfw now?

[-] NateSwift@lemmy.dbzer0.com 54 points 1 day ago

It’s a bare bum? While not at all sexual, it isn’t something I’d want my boss to see me looking at while at work. Hence the not safe for work tag

[-] Habahnow@sh.itjust.works 28 points 1 day ago

Not ther person you responded too, but people at work should be considered very conservative with any kind of nudity. At least that's my opinion. Yes, you're right its not sexual, but that image is not something I would want to be looking at during work.

[-] southsamurai@sh.itjust.works 22 points 1 day ago

People still take nsfw as the point of the tag, since they scroll at work. Which, that's kinda on them if you ask me, but the nsfw tag is a courtesy originally intended for people at work so they could avoid rings that may cause issues in that setting, rather than specifically for sexual images.

[-] RedditWanderer@lemmy.world 18 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Youre mistaking NSFL and NSFW.

I wouldn't open any baby bum at work with my boss beside me.

[-] Plum@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

NSFW it or I'll nuke it. The community has spoken. Nudity is generally covered in things NSFW.

[-] Mojave@lemmy.world 5 points 1 day ago

Cringe

[-] Plum@lemmy.world -5 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Super cringe. I'll take the hate, though, if it means I don't have to look at an exposed ass unless I want to.

[-] Wrufieotnak@feddit.org 10 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

That's not what you wrote originally though? Don't write "the community has spoken" immediately followed by "I don't care what you all do, I do what I like". That's kinda the opposite of what you postured as in the beginning.

Or was that the royal We and you are the community?

And that's regardless of the fact that I agree that the photo falls under the original definition of NSFW.

[-] Plum@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago

Members of the community have made their opinions known to me, and asked specifically that this instance of nudity be marked as Not Safe For Work. It's a reasonable request and an easy fix that I cannot do myself. The buttons I have let me lock posts, nuke posts, and ban people, but all I need is a button that lets me NSFW the thumbnail of an otherwise cromulent post.

I personally want to consent to view a NSFW/NSFL thing, whether it's as innocuous as a baby ass or something of a greater magnitude. We just have to all come to an agreement on where the boundaries are. Full resolution ass cracks seem to set the lower boundary.

And I do care what you all do. I misspoke if it came across that I'm only out for mine, or I'm drunk with banhammer power. I care. Deeply. Especially at 2:14am. The Fediverse is still so very small and tenuous, and we (royal and otherwise) are still figuring out how to navigate and interact and exist in the space. So now we know something new. And Royal We have to fix the sidebar again.

[-] Wrufieotnak@feddit.org 5 points 10 hours ago* (last edited 10 hours ago)

Thanks for the elaborate answer, I somehow took your original posts in a more aggressive tone than you probably meant them.

Just some short remarks:

  1. OK, that is seriously lacking in mod tools then

  2. Ah okay, if other people reported it as well, that makes it more understandable, but we as non-mods can't see that (at least I don't know how)

3.Thanks for the mod work! It is a thankless job and you need to interact with people like me. I see from your response that your heart is in the right place.

[-] Plum@lemmy.world 1 points 8 hours ago

And thanks for the kind words. I'm sure there's a mod tool suite out there that does everything I want it to, but I'm just not that sort of tech literate, so I work with what I have. And yell in the comment section from time to time.

♡

this post was submitted on 19 Nov 2024
54 points (85.5% liked)

Wikipedia

1548 readers
375 users here now

A place to share interesting articles from Wikipedia.

Rules:

Recommended:

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
dantheclamman@lemmy.world
Plum@lemmy.world