|
Post by RandiKthxxx on Apr 27, 2010 15:08:31 GMT -5
TreyWhen you went to Busch Gardens did you ride The Griffon? Yes, I did, and it was epic! Thanks for asking! ;D Haha no prob. I haven't been since the ride was first built so the line was ridiculous and I wasn't trying to wait around all day
|
|
|
Post by rialvestro on Apr 27, 2010 15:29:40 GMT -5
Just chill for a sec. Nude art is not rated R, or even PG-13. It's very appropriate for children to see, actually. It's not like we're sending links to kids that depict sex. I imagine you are one of those people that would shield a child's eyes when you see Michelangelo's "David"? I went to Busche Gardens Europe last summer, and there were tons of nude statues in the Italy part. Nobody seemed to be appalled by that, and there were children everywhere! Maybe you should take a minute to watch Dan Brown's "SEX" video. Wait, I'm sorry. Is "Sex" a grown up word? Sorry... Maybe you should grow up before you scold people for using words and posting appropriate pictures that you are afraid of. If you were truly mature, you would've laughed at my little comment about porn instead of bitching about it. You should reread my original post. It was never about what I think is or isn't appropriate for a child to see. Just what I think is best to keep this topic mature and civil. I saw my first play boy when I was 8 years old and really don't see anything wrong with it but I'm not going to force my views on the rest of you by posting images of play boy pin up models.
|
|
|
Post by click3tyclick on Apr 27, 2010 15:50:53 GMT -5
I agree with the rest of your post, but this doesn't make sense at all. My point is saying a comment like, "Porn is something to jack off to" is something mature people shouldn't get offended by. He didn't get offended. But what you said was: mature ppl laugh at sexual jokes and immature kids get annoyed that ppl tell jokes about fapping in a srs diskushon!!!
|
|
|
Post by Lex on Apr 27, 2010 16:00:50 GMT -5
We weren't born with clothes on. I really could care less about nudity. I think there's an obvious line that separates nude art from pornography.
|
|
|
Post by rialvestro on Apr 27, 2010 16:18:32 GMT -5
Also, while I can appreciate that you are trying to keep this thread clean, it seems like you're spending more time trying to moderate what's said than actually discussing the topic. This forum isn't PG. That doesn't mean people should go crazy and post porn pictures (and, that picture posted wasn't porn), but it doesn't mean phrases like jacking off should be completely removed. Maturity doesn't come from REFUSING to use these phrases, it comes from HOW you use them. Yeah I kinda figured this would happen when I posted at least for the first couple pages. The problem with using certain phrases like that is I can't tell if the person posting is being serious or just rude. It's like typing sarcastic comments. I can tell when someone is being sarcastic in real life by the change in the tone of their voice but when I'm reading a comment that was posted online it's impossible to tell if they're being serious or not. And please keep in mind three things about the pictures. 1. I personally do not see anything wrong with the content of the pictures. Like I already said, I saw my first play boy when I was 8 years old and don't see anything wrong with it. That wasn't my reason for not allowing pictures to be posted. 2. The act of posting the pictures after it was made clear that no pictures were to be posted is disrespectful. Even if you don't agree with the rules you should still follow them. You'd get mad at me if I came in your topics and started posting stuff you asked not to be posted not that I would do that. I'm just asking that you be respectful not that there's anything wrong with the photos. 3. To leave the picture up and argue with me after I politely asked to removed the pictures is immature and disrespectful. If people can't be mature and respectful enough to follow 2 simple rules I laid out for this topic they're really not discussing the topic as I intended.
|
|
kadie
Moon
"You don't need a licence to drive a sandwhich!"
Posts: 240
|
Post by kadie on Apr 27, 2010 16:39:44 GMT -5
the thing that always stikes me about nude art in comparision to pornography is that the models always look so real whereas women in pornography always look, for want of a better word, plastic.
|
|
|
Post by stephen5000 on Apr 27, 2010 16:53:28 GMT -5
We weren't born with clothes on. I really could care less about nudity. I think there's an obvious line that separates nude art from pornography. Is it really so obvious? (Maybe I haven't watched enough porn) The main difference that I see is that the quality of the art in porn tends to be rather poor.
|
|
|
Post by rialvestro on Apr 27, 2010 17:07:57 GMT -5
the thing that always stikes me about nude art in comparision to pornography is that the models always look so real whereas women in pornography always look, for want of a better word, plastic. I think that the "plastic" look has more to do with breast implants than it just being porn. I did some research on implants a few years ago because I heard they were hard and unnatural looking compaired to real breasts. Of course I can't really tell if the hardness is true just looking at pictures but I did notice a big difference in the appearance of the breasts in the before and after shots and lets just say the after shots looked disgusting. I don't really know if that kinda thing has improved sense then but I still think it's grose. Real breasts tend to change their shape depending on the position the girl is in for example if she's lieing on her back her chest is supose to flaten out. With implants they constantly maintain their shape so when the girl lies on her back they're still big and round. I don't really think that huge fake tits makes it a porn, there are women with real breasts in porn. There are even web sites devoted to small chested women so obviously not every guy cares about how big a woman's breasts are. Personally I just care if they're real or not because the fake ones creep me out.
|
|
kadie
Moon
"You don't need a licence to drive a sandwhich!"
Posts: 240
|
Post by kadie on Apr 27, 2010 17:31:31 GMT -5
rialvestro I wasn't talking specifically about breast implants in my comment. I admit, i worded what I was saying rather badly. What I meant was the look of the women in pornographic pictures is always "perfect", not just features like her breasts but also her hair, teeth, make-up. I know I havn't explained this very well but just open the sun newspaper and you'll see what I mean.
|
|
|
Post by Joey on Apr 27, 2010 17:44:30 GMT -5
The bottom line for me is that art depicts the body as a beautiful, natural thing.
Porn on the other hand shows the body as a thing to gain sexual pleasure with, and in a demoralizing way.
|
|
|
Post by rialvestro on Apr 27, 2010 18:28:05 GMT -5
The bottom line for me is that art depicts the body as a beautiful, natural thing. Porn on the other hand shows the body as a thing to gain sexual pleasure with, and in a demoralizing way. I really don't see what's so demoralizing about it. Women who go nude for the sake of art give their consent before the photos are taken and in most cases women who go nude for the sake of porn also give their consent before the photos are taken. rialvestro I wasn't talking specifically about breast implants in my comment. I admit, i worded what I was saying rather badly. What I meant was the look of the women in pornographic pictures is always "perfect", not just features like her breasts but also her hair, teeth, make-up. I know I havn't explained this very well but just open the sun newspaper and you'll see what I mean. The same could be said for photos that aren't porn. In fact the same has been said about photos that aren't porn. Just look at any celebrity magizine. And not all porn is filled with lots of make up and photo shopping to make the girls look more attractive than they really are. In fact that's really rare that ever happens. It's mostly in professional photo shoots for the sake of art that they alter the images. At least that's how it looks from my perspective. There are cases either way where something ment as art is altered or unaltered and cases where something ment as porn is shown the exact same way which is the main reason I'm so confused about the difference between the two. I've seen pictures that were made to be porn that look exactly the same as pictures that were made to be viewed as art. This is what got me to wander where the line was drawn between the two or if there even is a line. From the replys I'm getting it seems like it's just a matter of personal oppinion. I don't see where there's any socially acceptible line drawn between what is art and what is porn. Everyone who has posted seems to have their own personal view. Not saying that's bad, that's actully what I was trying to find out so we're doing good.
|
|
RabbitWho
Star
Rebecca - How 'bout we all put or real names somewhere in our signatures or titles? [SKB:]
Posts: 808
|
Post by RabbitWho on Apr 28, 2010 2:10:47 GMT -5
Just chill for a sec. Nude art is not rated R, or even PG-13. It's very appropriate for children to see, actually. It's not like we're sending links to kids that depict sex. I imagine you are one of those people that would shield a child's eyes when you see Michelangelo's "David"? I went to Busche Gardens Europe last summer, and there were tons of nude statues in the Italy part. Nobody seemed to be appalled by that, and there were children everywhere! Maybe you should take a minute to watch Dan Brown's "SEX" video. Wait, I'm sorry. Is "Sex" a grown up word? Sorry... Maybe you should grow up before you scold people for using words and posting appropriate pictures that you are afraid of. If you were truly mature, you would've laughed at my little comment about porn instead of bitching about it. You should reread my original post. It was never about what I think is or isn't appropriate for a child to see. Just what I think is best to keep this topic mature and civil. I saw my first play boy when I was 8 years old and really don't see anything wrong with it but I'm not going to force my views on the rest of you by posting images of play boy pin up models. I thought those pictures were absolutely appropriate for a child to see. They'd see far worse in a fashion magazine or an art gallery. You're being very immature. Edit: i inserted a warning for people who are terrified of photographs of fully clothed people and oil paintings of nudes.
|
|
|
Post by Trey on Apr 28, 2010 7:23:08 GMT -5
Just chill for a sec. Nude art is not rated R, or even PG-13. It's very appropriate for children to see, actually. It's not like we're sending links to kids that depict sex. I imagine you are one of those people that would shield a child's eyes when you see Michelangelo's "David"? I went to Busche Gardens Europe last summer, and there were tons of nude statues in the Italy part. Nobody seemed to be appalled by that, and there were children everywhere! Maybe you should take a minute to watch Dan Brown's "SEX" video. Wait, I'm sorry. Is "Sex" a grown up word? Sorry... Maybe you should grow up before you scold people for using words and posting appropriate pictures that you are afraid of. If you were truly mature, you would've laughed at my little comment about porn instead of bitching about it. You should reread my original post. It was never about what I think is or isn't appropriate for a child to see. Just what I think is best to keep this topic mature and civil. I saw my first play boy when I was 8 years old and really don't see anything wrong with it but I'm not going to force my views on the rest of you by posting images of play boy pin up models. Lol, this is a discussion that is definitely going to involve balls and wieners. You can't spend the entire time moderating us. It's like starting a conversation about whether or not oral sex is moral, and expecting us not to mention anything about blow jobs or carpet munching. Just participate in the conversation, stop moderating us, and realize that this forum doesn't have as strict rules as you're making.
|
|
|
Post by rialvestro on Apr 28, 2010 7:38:43 GMT -5
I thought those pictures were absolutely appropriate for a child to see. They'd see far worse in a fashion magazine or an art gallery. You're being very immature. Edit: i inserted a warning for people who are terrified of photographs of fully clothed people and oil paintings of nudes. Did you even read my post at all? How are you getting the exact oppisite of what I actully wrote. Before you call me immature again how about actully reading what I said instead of putting words in my mouth that have nothing to do with it. Lol, this is a discussion that is definitely going to involve balls and wieners. You can't spend the entire time moderating us. It's like starting a conversation about whether or not oral sex is moral, and expecting us not to mention anything about blow jobs or carpet munching. Just participate in the conversation, stop moderating us, and realize that this forum doesn't have as strict rules as you're making. Dude, I started the conversation. If you're not following the rules that I set out, you might as well not participate in the conversation because you are not discussing the topic as intended. The rules are more there like in sex ed when the teacher says you're only allowed to refer to the parts of the body by their proper names not with the slang terms. And honestly it's just the 2 of you who are going off topic and derailing this topic away from it's intended discussion. If you don't like the rules then don't post, if you want to contribute to the topic as I intended then follow the rules and stop argueing about it.
|
|
|
Post by jmejia1187 on Apr 28, 2010 9:17:57 GMT -5
Just to be fair, no one actually posted a picture. They linked to a picture. Here is posting a picture: Here is linking to a picture: DroseraIf your wondering, it is a carnivorous plant, called a sundew, in the genus drosera. Also, you said not to post any questionable photos. 1. no photos were posted, only linked, and 2. in the photos that were posted, no one was naked. You will see that the ones that did have naked people were clearly paintings and thus did not constitute a photo. Technically, no one broke the rules... As for the discussion at hand, porn has the intent of bringing out sexual desire within a person. Art doesn't have that intent. Nude art is supposed to inspire people. It is a visual image of the beauty of the human body, and freedom. Porn is more like, wow that woman, (or man), is hot! They are made to get different reactions. And yes, I would use this language in a sex ed class.
|
|
|
Post by Trey on Apr 28, 2010 9:56:46 GMT -5
Lol, this is a discussion that is definitely going to involve balls and wieners. You can't spend the entire time moderating us. It's like starting a conversation about whether or not oral sex is moral, and expecting us not to mention anything about blow jobs or carpet munching. Just participate in the conversation, stop moderating us, and realize that this forum doesn't have as strict rules as you're making. Dude, I started the conversation. If you're not following the rules that I set out, you might as well not participate in the conversation because you are not discussing the topic as intended. The rules are more there like in sex ed when the teacher says you're only allowed to refer to the parts of the body by their proper names not with the slang terms. And honestly it's just the 2 of you who are going off topic and derailing this topic away from it's intended discussion. If you don't like the rules then don't post, if you want to contribute to the topic as I intended then follow the rules and stop argueing about it. Lol, I don't care if you start the thread or not; I'm following the forum's rules, not yours. I may participate however I'd like as long as I'm obeying the rules that the admins have set out. Also, don't tell us we're going off topic. I put my two cents in, and you sparked the fire. Don't accuse us of derailing the subject when you're the one that made a problem out of it.
|
|
|
Post by click3tyclick on Apr 28, 2010 9:59:27 GMT -5
He asked people not to say stuff like fap or jack off. He asked people not to post porn. People did both. I don't agree with his rules, I think they're way too strict for a forum discussion, but if you're going to participate in his discussion, try to show some respect?
|
|
kadie
Moon
"You don't need a licence to drive a sandwhich!"
Posts: 240
|
Post by kadie on Apr 28, 2010 10:29:05 GMT -5
He asked people not to say stuff like fap or jack off. He asked people not to post porn. People did both. I don't agree with his rules, I think they're way too strict for a forum discussion, but if you're going to participate in his discussion, try to show some respect? The pictures posted were not porn.
|
|
|
Post by click3tyclick on Apr 28, 2010 10:31:20 GMT -5
Porn is something to jack off to. I can't think of any other use for those pictures.
|
|
kadie
Moon
"You don't need a licence to drive a sandwhich!"
Posts: 240
|
Post by kadie on Apr 28, 2010 10:44:10 GMT -5
okay - but they wern't explict. Like rabbitwho (I think it was) said, you see worse in fashion magazines.
|
|