>>6
the bizarreness of what we quantify as mundane, as reflected in our comment, is ironically representative content for this board.
for instance look that the image in
>>2
this decayed old carnival piece, once was shocking, playful and fun, but now it is passé and neglected, much like what you describe as "ordinary /b/ style porn". its a poor choice of image to use as an example, as that one has been floating around for a decade at least, but I'm sure you get the point. a time traveller from not too far in the past would consider our attitude towards the content you hold in disdain to be fairly absurd. does that qualify bland pictures of topless women as appropriate content here? well, not really, however it may be closer to the mark than it seems at first glance.