All forums / Whatever Forum
You say it should be banned?
Opinions.
Started by Kaynine on 22 Feb 2005, 12:21 UTC · 24 preserved posts
75-106196063022 Feb 2005, 12:21 UTC
I was recently approached by a certain friend. Having known I sometimes draw graphically intense stuff (nudity, and the whole shebang), he said it was sick and should be rightfully banned.
Now, where's justice in that? Explicit drawings, in the first place, should never be viewed unless you really want to. Warnings have been given and should you choose to still continue, then just who is at fault?
Furthermore, it is what the viewer chooses to see it as. He or she think it's vile and immoral, then it shall be that. This genre in itself is a form of art, celebrating the beauty of the body. Why can't people then see it so?
Sure, there are irresponsible people out there who exploit this form of art to make money. But are we to let the few destroy it for the rest of us? We who draw simply because it is art, not just to drain money out of the pockets of lustful people? I for one, got really disappointed at my friend's remark. What about you guys? What do you think of this?
76-106196064322 Feb 2005, 13:03 UTC
Beauty of the body is a form of art yes. I myself never was a fan of that stuff. But art is how people perceive it as they say.
My oppinon on whether it should be banned or not is not needed. That disision is up to the powers that be.
68-108707261922 Feb 2005, 21:15 UTC
I'm not into that prono. To a religious freak like I, it is a sin to look at one's body. Unless there's no terrible explictions to it. I like seeing what is in the inside and what's in the facial features. But, I'm not going to say anything futher because I have no clue what I'm talking about. 
Dayami 87-106196078722 Feb 2005, 21:31 UTC
Even though I don't look at nude art and photos, I agree that what people decide to veiw is their own choice.
But banned from what? An art site or just banned in general? Where where you confronted?
70-106196059222 Feb 2005, 23:09 UTC
To a religious person I would assume that if God created the human body then people should marvel in its beauty.
I don't think those sorts of pictures should be banned but it really depends on what the subject is cos some *material* should definately be banned..\n\n
87-110773702022 Feb 2005, 23:12 UTC
From my point of view, i believe that you have the right to draw whatever you feel like. But i do however view your drawings as porno, but i must disagree to the statement of your friend. There is no reason for that type of drawing to be banned, but if you were to show your drawings toward the public, i would however have some agrument over that. But yet agian feel free whatever to draw, but do not cause publicity over it.
Wolfen~ is disturbed. 
112-106196083323 Feb 2005, 00:35 UTC
art is a form of expression, just as any other form of the arts such as music, to take away freedom of expression in art iliminates the purpose of art, as it's purpose is to show how someone see's things from their point of view, i agree that some forms of nude art can be seen as offencive, by that i do meen explicit content art, but i believe that art being a freedom to express yourself in any way you please should not be restricted to the views of individual humans, as those who do not wish to view such art do not have to, after all what is a close of alt+F4 for which is programmed into windows as default for.
Anyway art is a form of expression, alough i do not view such content as described, i see no reason to place a ban on any artist who wishes to draw such art, after all from early day's nude pictures have been drawn, cave paintings, many egyptian hyroglifics had explicit content, and even in the last couple of centuries such as romands had statues of naked people, they were considered beautiful, only those who saw things that would be considered obsene would make such statments about this form of art that has been around since almost when human life began, a ban on such art would be ludicris, and an insult to many great artists.
70-109096490523 Feb 2005, 00:56 UTC
Yes, art is a form of expressing yourself, or just having fun, draw what you feel.
75-106196063023 Feb 2005, 10:59 UTC
Actually, I was thinking more that he meant banned in general. But what is in question is the fairness in saying these sort of artwork is vile.
Some materials, should at most only be shielded from the public, but still viewable at the viewer's discretion. Good art is still good art, and not allowing them to be shared with others is simply not fair.
Fluke> Ironically, it is also those religious people who deem these artwork being 'morally-corrupting' instead of marvelling at it.
68-108707261923 Feb 2005, 22:45 UTC
Like me. I'm too syked on Religion.
76-106196064524 Feb 2005, 04:08 UTC
porn yes, nudity used as an artform, no, And Fluke, nothing could be further from the truth 70-106196059224 Feb 2005, 23:24 UTC
| Quote (LongBow986 @ Feb. 24 2005,4:08) |
| porn yes, nudity used as an artform, no, And Fluke, nothing could be further from the truth |
This is why organised religion is not for me.65-106196054226 Feb 2005, 00:28 UTC
No longer a Christian myself, having lost faith and become an atheist/agnostic, I'm still trying to find myself spiritually. �In the process, I have become very open minded about subjects like this. �I don't think either nude art or porn should be banned, simply because they are both freedom of speech. �Everyone has a right to their own opinions and actions, and neither of these should be suppressed.
On the subject of freedom of speech, the same applies to people who wouldn't want to view these kinds of things. �They have a free will to decide whether or not to view it, and if they don't want to, they should just leave. �What I despise in religion is when the extremely conservative ones label certain things as 'sin' and 'you'll burn in heck' and so on. �To me, that is an extremely irrational argument, when you look at it from a scientific point of view(and my views now often rely on science). �I know that certain things are right or wrong, but that there are a lot of gray areas, thus I don't believe in the concept of 'sin.'
I hope I haven't offended anyone, and that I won't get banned for such statements. �If it is warranted, this post may be deleted.
100-109832446626 Feb 2005, 08:19 UTC
I'm not so sure what to say about these intense artworks, and I have no interest in this kind of stuff, after all God created our bodies, I think, ya, warning should be given out first before it is being viewed.
78-110650140327 Feb 2005, 05:20 UTC
Aniu> I also have given up on Christianity.. actually now have more of a Native American outlook...
Art is art. I can take a blank piece of paper, make a single pencil dot, and there are people who would call that art. I can take a blank piece of paper and draw a magnificently detailed animal and there are people who would not call that art. It all depends on how people view things; if they don't like something you draw, too bad for them. It's art as long as someone sees it so. Banning nudity, thus, would be like banning animated movies. This is just an example, by the way. 
I say don't ban ANY type of "art"; if someone doesn't want to see it, they should smarten up and STOP LOOKING AT IT. I will not deny that I have drawn nudity, excessive violence, and worse. Some people may actually consider it porn. But I don't. I look at what I draw as art, and nothing else. *mutters* People... 115-110950221427 Feb 2005, 16:06 UTC
LOL to ban nudity?
I in Romania here i can tell you that a child under 18 has no problem in buiyng porno material.
And lets face it even in america there are some porn sites witch dont even have a age verification sistem.
American legislation is kinda wierd.
And i dont think porn materials are such a "tabu" and i dont even care on this matter.
So what ist nudity does it has something (as a female) that you dont have (if your a female)?
Or as a man dont you think that anyway in your live you will se these things?
Thats my opinion about porno or nudity.
75-106196063027 Feb 2005, 16:39 UTC
Suppose now you're looking at a picture of a naked woman. What would you call that? Nudity for art reason? Porn? Where do we draw the line that separates porn from nudity? Answer: Nowhere. Porn is simply another name some people call what some OTHER people call nudity. So isn't it a little confusing to say that porn should be banned, but not nudity?
Religiously thinking, if we consider these things evil/sinful, would that have meant that the higher powers are evil, giving us the bodies we have now? Pretty ironic.. No offense to them who hold tight to their faiths.. 78-110650140327 Feb 2005, 19:18 UTC
Well, I suppose there are a few outlooks on the human body and all it's naked glory... you can say "We should love our bodies!", "It's sinning!", or "It's BEAUTIFUL! Let's go see more!" -- Seeing it as natural, evil, or an unhealthy obsession. :P lol.
70-110747806802 Mar 2005, 05:32 UTC
I don't exactly look at that stuff, but I do agree, they do have a choice and everything so...
87-111007619519 Mar 2005, 03:04 UTC
| Quote (Kaynine @ Feb. 22 2005,7:21) |
I was recently approached by a certain friend. Having known I sometimes draw graphically intense stuff (nudity, and the whole shebang), he said it was sick and should be rightfully banned.
Now, where's justice in that? Explicit drawings, in the first place, should never be viewed unless you really want to. Warnings have been given and should you choose to still continue, then just who is at fault?
Furthermore, it is what the viewer chooses to see it as. He or she think it's vile and immoral, then it shall be that. This genre in itself is a form of art, celebrating the beauty of the body. Why can't people then see it so?
Sure, there are irresponsible people out there who exploit this form of art to make money. But are we to let the few destroy it for the rest of us? We who draw simply because it is art, not just to drain money out of the pockets of lustful people? I for one, got really disappointed at my friend's remark. What about you guys? What do you think of this? |
Thats so toataly gross dude i'd quit right away.83-106196071625 Mar 2005, 05:55 UTC
Depends on the tastefulness of the subject. Nudity in and of itself should not be considered porn. I personally draw the line at sexual acts, S&M, bloody violence during the intercourse, ect. To be more clear on what I mean, a naked body is fine. But I view an erect phallus, flared vagina, body secretions and acts of masturbation as distasteful art-wise. I don't care if others draw them, I just don't care to see it. The flip side of freedom of expression is freedom not to view, a right I enjoy having. Zealots ought to practice that right a bit more often. 87-111007619502 Apr 2005, 23:34 UTC
I'ts a little weaird
76-106196064303 Apr 2005, 03:01 UTC
From My walks in life I have learned that "weird". is a usless word. It is just a an idea. A set of standerds set by society. anything not fitting those standerds are inherently labeled as "weird."
Alot of the things we do in our country is concidered weird by others outside. Alot of the things others do outside of the US, we concider weird. How much more pleasent things would be if people just learned to respect the differences of thought, and ideas. While not trying to enforce there ideas onto others. I myself am not to much of a fan of this stuff also. But I respect there likes. That is what freedom is all about. The right to free thought, actions and speech provided it does not infringe on the rights of others.
87-110711785806 Apr 2005, 15:03 UTC
In my opinion, it sounds like porn, and I HATE porn. I guess as long as u don't put it on a website, or anything like that and keep it to yourself, it oughta be alright.