when obviously overtly gratuitously sexual, I can see how some may object to a painting that can be seen in a public area *musn't burn a child's virgin eyes* but if sweet unknowing Eve, who hath no conscience (well that depends on whether you look at the painting and say, indeed she's eaten the apple all ready or not), cannot bare a breast to the world, why not ban WW2 fighter planes from beiing shown in museums, or prevent pregnant women from breast-feeding in public--which I might add, when done well, and tastefully, is quite a beautiful act. And I say WW2 planes, because they painted Vargas and other delicious (in my opinion) pinup girls so the soldiers would be reminded of home whilst away. What is the world coming to. So damn conservative. They want us to believe SO BADLY that we were created from Adam and Eve, and yet I can't look at Eve's picture in public because her breast's exposed? --Do you know how many unwanted images of male ass and bare chests I have to put up with in this payton place I live? It digusts me. Why not level the playing field? Eve rawks! You go gurl!
Funny, I have sort of the opposite opinion. Seems to me, in this culture, female nudity is generally considered "art," whereas male nudity is generally considered "pornography." Some exceptions apply, and YMMV, of course. This probably fits in nicely with the thriving substrain of the species who couldn't see an attractive line on a male chassis if it were pointed out to them with calipers.
Then again, I'm a terrible curmudgeon and I don't really want to see people breastfeeding in public, either. It falls under the "necessary evil" category, something I'm willing to tolerate, but I don't like it. OTOH, that probably has less to do with my opinion of breasts than my opinion of infants in general. I like breasts just fine, having two of rather copious size. Infants I can live without, and am intending on doing so...
Nevertheless, to censor a Michaelangelo mural? That's kind of weird. If I were that artist, I'd paint a really raucously-coloured, obviously added-in bikini top on the topless Eve, making sure to carefully highlight where the nipples ought to be (but not enough so as to be tremendously overt), and call it good. Maybe paint a banner underneath that said, "Censored by order of the city council" in Latin or something. I'm with Jello Biafra here, where he says that one of the best ways of fighting ineluctable censorship is to make it really, really obvious that it's going on.
(no subject)
(no subject)
Then again, I'm a terrible curmudgeon and I don't really want to see people breastfeeding in public, either. It falls under the "necessary evil" category, something I'm willing to tolerate, but I don't like it. OTOH, that probably has less to do with my opinion of breasts than my opinion of infants in general. I like breasts just fine, having two of rather copious size. Infants I can live without, and am intending on doing so...
Nevertheless, to censor a Michaelangelo mural? That's kind of weird. If I were that artist, I'd paint a really raucously-coloured, obviously added-in bikini top on the topless Eve, making sure to carefully highlight where the nipples ought to be (but not enough so as to be tremendously overt), and call it good. Maybe paint a banner underneath that said, "Censored by order of the city council" in Latin or something. I'm with Jello Biafra here, where he says that one of the best ways of fighting ineluctable censorship is to make it really, really obvious that it's going on.