I get why this would be incredibly annoying to a nudist, but I can’t really see a path forward that works for nudists and non nudists in this context.
The very comment thread your comment is in describes a method that would work for both.
> on the sender's side, show a warning before sending that the image appears to be in bad taste and asking for confirmation, then on the receiver's side, hiding the image behind a warning that it may be unwanted and showing two buttons, "show image" and "unmatch".
I’m just saying that it would be mightily nice if those in decision making positions with regard to these issues and initiatives took the existence of this small and derided demographic into account occasionally.
So what you're looking for if you want something like that is a developer that is not optimizing to get 100% uptake. That's tricky to find, because the people with money always want 100% uptake.
That’s the bombastic reply anyway.
The more subtle and nuanced response is this is not a comparable situation because it’s not that developers are ignoring a small demographic, it’s that they’re deliberately working to make the environment actively hostile for that mini-demographic.
Targets are always aspirational. "100% uptake" just means "As many users as possible."
> they’re deliberately working to make the environment actively hostile for that mini-demographic.
Yes. This is because the larger demographic has made clear that they don't want to share the room with the other demographic and they will leave if forced to.
Individual pages and sites (even the mega-sized ones, like Facebook and Twitter) don't.