mannor = manner?
me gets nervous w/ my spelling over here w/ that Jafo guy lurking... hehe

OK....we'll set ONE thing straight....'hentai' will NOT be accepted...

I remember a run-in some of us had with a photographic image posted on Devart....the final determination was that the model was pre-pubescent, ergo it was 'child' pornography.

Had a hard enough time convincing people THAT had to go....[bloody egocentric artists].

Anime tends to depict child-like figures in often questionable poses...and those won't be accepted...not on a family site...even a 'hint' of soft-core kiddie-porn is still too much....

Good gracious, you know, it's hard to believe that there was a time when I was constantly being called a fascist or worse.

As a community, we have control over the direction this site goes. Do you people really want to slowly turn this site into some elitist, snooty, G-rated site? This is a PG site. Between the calls for taking away people's posting rights for "incorrect opinions" and censoring screenshots because it has a female with cleavage, to demands that we remove fan artwork, I have real fear that this place, left to its own devices, could end up like some sort of elitist art club.

Let's mellow out a bit and enjoy ourselves. This is supposed to be for fun, you know?

I agree with KarmaGirl again.

I think the decision that needs to be made is whether this site is suppose to be a G-rated site, a PG-rated site, a R-rated site, or ... Personally, many adults visit this site, and its true that many parents think this site is artistically minded and a good way to get their children involved in new technology art. I don't think anyone wants a G-rated site. It would be flat and unimpressive to the adults, 100% of who pay for object desktop. Everyone knows that one needs to supervise children on the net. So, a PG-rated site is more appropiate.

With that said, I didn't find the first link outside of that rating. The second one could probably be in a Disney Cartoon rendition of Tarzan and Jane. So, I don't think that one was inappropiate.

Sexuality isn't something that I feel needs to be feared with children. It's the expression of certain sexual acts. Neither of those images expressed any sexual acts. Those images did express decrete sexuality and because of that I felt that they were okay for a PG-rated site. We can't cover our childrens eyes on the net. Almost any site they randomly view will 50/50 be a sex site. What I'm saying is that the name of the link guarantees nothing. It is part of the net. Most children would probably think that both images were cute. I could see of no uncomfortable questions that they could propose for parents.

We see babies nude on TV commericials and we don't think that is sexual. If I saw two babies nude in a wall on this site, I wouldn't think that was sexual or inappropiate. A expecting mother might like it very much. Unless, we are thinking about perversion. And, I don't think that way.

If those two images were the worse, I think that there is much more to worry about in society for our children. Like many here have said concerning pregeant teenagers, and child violence. None of those images illicited to any of those problems. They were discrete and cute. Surely, they were not R-rated images. Therefore, I have no problem with them.

I too had more of a problem with the word S - - -, a R-rated or worse word, and parents having to explain to their children what that word meant. >

hmmm... it still borderline to me. way too much cartoon cleavage with a 'laid down' look come hither type... but it still is just borderline.

I know a little about the history of japanima and girls tend to be uyoung looking and very leggy. I'll never forget Saloir Moon cartoons. One day I was like, 'wait a minute... she's naked!!! and she is going out with this guy who is like 10 years older than her!!!'

still boderline for me this one though... a little less hanging 'chads' would be prferred.

speaking of perception, percieved and setting... does anyone know of a therory call the Attrubution Therery??

this sounds like a new thread to me!!!!

/me goes off to make a new thread

Joetheblow: if it was a real woman and not a cartoon, it would still be accepted in the screenshot section. Of course if it were submited as a wallpaper, as a cartoon or as a picture, it would greatly depend on the actual quality of the artwork itself and how valid we feel it is as a wallpaper.

Yes, indeed, there are some porn cartoons. And they wouldn't be accepted here. But frankly, personnally, I find cartoon pron as exciting as a car engine.  And I actually find totally funny that some guys fantacize on a cartoon character. But then again, it seems some guys like are into shoes, socks, or all sorts of funny things.  But anyway, we're not even close to that here. Heck, Disney shows more curves in their female characters than this one. Esmeralda or Pochahontas have a figure almost impossible for a normal woman. Even Barbie's figure is more a male dream than any child's. Yet nobody seems to be outraged by it.

Not true paxx...I'm sure there is an active anti-Barbie cult...

 

BTW....I often find car engines 'exciting'....

Bring on more of Norman Lindsay's work I say!
And NOT that 'Magic Pudding' drivel either ....!




[Message Edited]

Now THERE was a competent salute to the female form....I'd rather Lindsay over Picasso any day of the week...

I thought Pochahontas was pretty curve too... and Disney's little mirmaid caught my eye... but it was within a specific context and other than that it was mostly covered curves or beach like covering curves.

you know what I mean???

like the image in question is bigger, showing more and Disney would not have her in a cartoon for a PG rating.

But since it is a cartoon and has a context of being within a catogoey and it is not actually showing any specific acts or parts I say its ok... but borderline because of how much is showing and the proximity of breast hanging and possible closness to, dare i say, nipps



And I don't like Barbie. what is that? 36 12 26??? give me a brake.


I think its ok to have it here. but its really borderline.

ooohhh let not talk about artist!!! I forget his name but basically he went to Barbados to paint the 'natives' and explore the healthy tresurs of the islands



the paintings wouldn't be considered p0rn today, but it was defianatly p0rn then. Only fit to be bought by men who put it in the private rooms.

Gosh I wish I could remember who that guy is. One painting had a native holding a platter and her breasts where sitting on it with fruits and vegetables.

For the time it was clearly erotic in nature and for mostly one purpose.. nudey stuffus.

I find this thread highly amusing.....thank you for the laughs...

MHO? Using the word "slut" in the title of this thread is more offensive than any drawing displayed here.

Agree 100% with Knattz. When I visited the message board earlier, the subject title on this thread stuck out like a sore thumb

ooh ooh
nobody mentioned the iMac anime chick

joe, are you talking about Vincent Van Gogh? He cut his ear too. He was schitzo. :/

And by the way, I understand what you mean by the lack of clothing, but this is the 21st century. I've seen women walk down the street with less cloths than that cartoon girl.
It's the Miss Universe contest next week. Prime time on national TV, and throughout the world. Watch their bikini's and come back saying that the cartoon is borderline for kids and the pageant is family entertainment...
Just gotta put things in perpective sometimes.

Exactly so paxx.... just a matter of perspective....

But I must admit, there is one little thing that bothers me about that picture, and it has nothing to do with the amount of clothes she has. It's the fact that she is crying. Can't help but wonder: what is she crying about? Something in me can't help thinking of maybe abuse. Then again, it's only cartoon, so nobody was actually harmed as a model. But still, it's a bit disturbing.

Just two little water drops in her eyes make me much more uneasy than if she was showing off her breasts completely.

no it wasn't Van Gogh. some other artist cat. I have to look in my art history book. when the class saw the images it was clearly art... and also a nudy picture. to sell back home as a sort of penthouse magazine for the 1700's

it's sad to say, but I agree that in this day and age that cartoon like that is nothing... Try walking around my school and [almost] no matter how perverted you may be you'll have seen enough. (which is a lot more than those cartoons show)
[Message Edited]

(paxx doesn't mind is there were breasts showing???)



I wouldn't mind to much myself. But the position, context, and other factors would play into my desition.

and yes that iMac girl was borderline too Doomgaze. Borderline but allowable.

That's not what I said, joe. Please re-read my post.
The thought of a woman being abused is worse to me.

I see those tears in the eyes as an extremely common element in Anime pics........

I know paxx I was just jokin. I should have been more specific in my post.