Conquer Club

Posted: **Fri Sep 15, 2017 6:22 am**

What are the restrictions on nudity concerning art?

MOD EDIT: Image removed

Lovely sculpture, but I believe nudes are forbidden even if they are just artistic impressions. Sorry...

(duk)

Posted: **Fri Sep 15, 2017 6:45 am**

It's un-American.

Posted: **Fri Sep 15, 2017 6:55 am**

Is it me or are those models butter faces?

Posted: **Fri Sep 15, 2017 10:27 am**

You mean here?
It's been so long ...
I remember no nipples, but that was never defined for the abstract.
I assume it meant no pubic areas, (I mean to allow that but not allow nipples is silly), but again, that was never defined for the abstract.

In short I have no idea if a naked Barbie would be permitted. The marble statue might be borderline. I'm glad I don't have to make that call, because well I would be flat out permitting it.

Posted: **Fri Sep 15, 2017 10:48 am**

For this forum I would be just as hard core in suppression of nudity and for the same reason as the owners have been.

For most different sites I would allow full frontal.

As much as I love to look at nipples etc. there is a whole www to do it on. No need for it here. Having said that I also don't mind it here and would never report it.

Posted: **Fri Sep 15, 2017 12:13 pm**

2dimes wrote:As much as I love to look at nipples etc.

The question, at least in my mind, is what is a "nipple" ... Obviously a photo of a real person's nipple is a nipple. What about an oil painting that includes a rough painting of a nipple. What about a marble statue that has an indentation of a nipple that is probably more indistinct than the impression of a nipple under a bra or bikini (never mind a wet T shirt).

This isn't an easy question. It's not a "moral" question. One of my best friends from Key West used to be a Art Professor who served in the military. He is a strict Roman Catholic in every way you can think, but he has a whole series of nudes in his house, which he had painted himself. Because, in the question, isn't really about nudity but about sexuality and pornography. Supreme Court justice aside, it's not easy to make fair statements on what is and what is not. Trust me because I was of the generation that saw National Geographic as a young man's porn book. (I was a little too young for all the Africa issues, but there was a number of series on Native American tribes that were particularly erotic to a young teenager.)

Posted: **Fri Sep 15, 2017 2:30 pm**

Well since we are confessing how we wasted sperm I was an avid underwear ad fan.

... I digress, as the site owner I would have shut down the picture up top and given Burn a couple of days off to consider his crime. Anyone complaining could be risking a vacation too. Sure it cuts down on traffic but along with censoring f*ck, it keeps the google ads people happy and they pay better than the premiums.

Posted: **Fri Sep 15, 2017 6:51 pm**

there was a text of restrictions i saw a few times regarding cc nudity guidelines, and it included art. This means that if anyone reports the first post it's gonna be edited and the image removed. Something I never really understood really... how far american puritanism can go.

Posted: **Fri Sep 15, 2017 6:54 pm**

tzor wrote:
2dimes wrote:As much as I love to look at nipples etc.

The question, at least in my mind, is what is a "nipple" ... Obviously a photo of a real person's nipple is a nipple. What about an oil painting that includes a rough painting of a nipple. What about a marble statue that has an indentation of a nipple that is probably more indistinct than the impression of a nipple under a bra or bikini (never mind a wet T shirt).

This isn't an easy question. It's not a "moral" question. One of my best friends from Key West used to be a Art Professor who served in the military. He is a strict Roman Catholic in every way you can think, but he has a whole series of nudes in his house, which he had painted himself. Because, in the question, isn't really about nudity but about sexuality and pornography. Supreme Court justice aside, it's not easy to make fair statements on what is and what is not. Trust me because I was of the generation that saw National Geographic as a young man's porn book. (I was a little too young for all the Africa issues, but there was a number of series on Native American tribes that were particularly erotic to a young teenager.)

there you go... you end up with sorry ass frustrated guys such as this fellow wanking on Trump, Le Pen, the bible, computer weekly and national geographic.

Posted: **Fri Sep 15, 2017 7:23 pm**

Bernie Sanders wrote:What are the restrictions on nudity concerning art?

MOD EDIT: Image removed

Lovely sculpture, but I believe nudes are forbidden even if they are just artistic impressions. Sorry...

(duk)

Posted: **Fri Sep 15, 2017 7:58 pm**

I guess the little kid pissing at the fountain would be rated xxx

Posted: **Fri Sep 15, 2017 9:25 pm**

So stupid, so un-free, so Duk...

Posted: **Fri Sep 15, 2017 9:35 pm**

There is no freedom here Moran, this is a place of business. Go to Wisconson if you want freedom.

Someone MS paint some swim suits on them and put them back up so we can discuss wether or not anyone likes their faces.

I'm glad I got to see their marvelous figures before Duke got here. Did you save them to your hard drive or bookmarks before deleting?

Posted: **Sat Sep 16, 2017 3:53 am**

I d be curious to know if someone actually reported the op or if duk just came by.

Anywho... I guess this is just to avoid leaving a grey area to mods, so that users don t start trolling with art nudity that could get out of hands for them.
I ve always been shocked to see how americans censor private parts of art pieces if shown on tv or whatever. It s absolutely revolting. Wtf gives the right to censor those kind of things? "Think of our childrennnnn" really? Is that really going to f*ck a kid's mind to see a naked statue?
Did they really nee to put some underwears on barbie cause before we could see her ass?

You end up with frustrated teens such as tzor wanking on national geographic. Well done america.

Posted: **Sat Sep 16, 2017 8:42 am**

betiko wrote:I d be curious to know if someone actually reported the op or if duk just came by.

Anywho... I guess this is just to avoid leaving a grey area to mods, so that users don t start trolling with art nudity that could get out of hands for them.
I ve always been shocked to see how americans censor private parts of art pieces if shown on tv or whatever. It s absolutely revolting. Wtf gives the right to censor those kind of things? "Think of our childrennnnn" really? Is that really going to f*ck a kid's mind to see a naked statue?
Did they really nee to put some underwears on barbie cause before we could see her ass?

You end up with frustrated teens such as tzor wanking on national geographic. Well done america.

Nude sculptures from over 2000 years ago is so revolting as to be banned from CC forum?

I find some views on race relations and politics far more disturbing than looking at old classical Greek sculptures.

This is why America elects idiots for office....to protect our youth from masterbating to 2000 year old sculptures.

Thanks Duk, I'm glad you are here to defend our youngsters.

Posted: **Sat Sep 16, 2017 8:53 am**

The rules say no porn, not no nudity. Apparently those two words are synonyms in the United Emirates of a-Merica though.

Posted: **Sat Sep 16, 2017 9:08 am**

mrswdk wrote:The rules say no porn, not no nudity. Apparently those two words are synonyms in the United Emirates of a-Merica though.

Define porn.

Posted: **Sat Sep 16, 2017 9:16 am**

Porn is made for the purpose of being sexually arousing. Are you so old you're starting to forget your own language?

Posted: **Sat Sep 16, 2017 9:30 am**

mrswdk wrote:Porn is made for the purpose of being sexually arousing. Are you so old you're starting to forget your own language?

The U.S. Supreme Court is having a HARD time trying to define porn.

Duk thinks nipples are porn and sculptures made of stone are too.

I get aroused looking at beer....is that porn?

Posted: **Sat Sep 16, 2017 9:40 am**

Bernie Sanders wrote:Thanks Duk, I'm glad you are here to defend our youngsters.

I highly doubt Dukasaur wants to delete any pictures of ladys, naked or otherwise unless they have yucky piercings.

I am pretty sure he is just following directions and protecting the site's monitization.

Blame Google and some of those paying for ads, for imposing over strict anti-bare skin/naughty word policies. Though they are only acting a bit like insurance companies, whom are usually just trying to save money by finding ways to refuse to pay.

Posted: **Sat Sep 16, 2017 10:49 am**

Either way surely there can't be more than like 5-10 people on here who don't have an ad blocker.

Posted: **Sat Sep 16, 2017 1:44 pm**

test
MOD EDIT: Image removed

Posted: **Sat Sep 16, 2017 1:47 pm**

Bernie Sanders wrote:I guess the little kid pissing at the fountain would be rated xxx

You requested child pornography.

MOD EDIT: Image removed

Conquer Club

Nudity restrictions

Nudity restrictions

Re: Nudity restrictions

Re: Nudity restrictions

Re: Nudity restrictions

Re: Nudity restrictions

Re: Nudity restrictions

Re: Nudity restrictions

Re: Nudity restrictions

Re: Nudity restrictions

Re: Nudity restrictions

Re: Nudity restrictions

Re: Nudity restrictions

Re: Nudity restrictions

Re: Nudity restrictions

Re: Nudity restrictions

Re: Nudity restrictions

Re: Nudity restrictions

Re: Nudity restrictions

Re: Nudity restrictions

Re: Nudity restrictions

Re: Nudity restrictions

Re: Nudity restrictions

Re: Nudity restrictions