Forums | MacLife

What's wrong with the naked human form?

the law says its wrong

Jeez... somebody had better tell the Metropolitan Museum of Art -- they've got naked ladies all over the place! Those lawless bastards!

Next thing, they'll try to ban anything from the masters.

I'm still trying to figure out why it's ok to have a gallery devoted to penises but it's not ok to have a masterful work depicting a female human form.

you have a problem seeing the obvious dont you? Those are all on the inside of the building where people have to pay to see it. This is on the outside where *everyone* can see it. Can you see it?

http://www.dallasnews.com/localnews/sto … 4f928.html  (requires login)

I don't see what all the fuss is about - the mural is graphic, but in a 2 tone, line art, illustrative, graphics-y sort of way - hardly obscene. it resembles God creating Adam (Michaelangelo? - I'm too lazy to check) in tone.

Some people will get their knickers in a bunch about anything. I find it more offensive when public display art is just plain bad or plain-ole-plain - this is seems well done to me.

"The world would be a better place if more breasts and fewer bloody corpses were shown on television."

Parents can turn off the TV, but to stop their children from seeing a naked woman in that town they would have to refuse to allow them outside the house.

"God forbid kids actually see a painting of breastisies."

Do you have kids? Do you allow your 6-year old child to see naked pictures? You liberals really have a way of glossing over major issues.

"How about instead of "Censored" they put a black bar that says "Covered for the protection of the weak-minded""

Again... 5 and 6 year old children? I'm sorry, but pictures of nudity do not belong on the sides of buildings.

"No I don't, but these are conservative Christians who are complaining about it, I can almost guaranty you that."

Talk about prejudice. I'm not suprised. One set of rules for yourselves, and a set for everyone else.


All the liberal comments I've seen in this topic are ridiculous potshots, none of which have any bearing on reality. Just smart-assed comments that take the situation out of context and try to paint the defenders of decency as backward witch-burners. I wonder what the liberals would say if somebody painted a picture of aborted fetuses on the side of a building...

You can spin spin spin it all you want, but the simple fact is that a parent should not have to worry about covering their small childrens' eyes every time they drive by a building. If this was a high-school art show and people were complaining about "protect the children", I'd think it was ridiculous. But you have to draw the line, and a large painting of a half-nude woman in the middle of a town crosses it.

What's the phenomenon that happens between the time an infant actually feeds from breasts and the period he/she can't look at them until 17 or 18?  When does the breast change from essential to "harmful material"?  This never made sense to me.

Here ill make it easy on everyone

user: macaddict@macaddict.com
pw: macaddict

"The world would be a better place if more breasts and fewer bloody corpses were shown on television."

Parents can turn off the TV, but to stop their children from seeing a naked woman in that town they would have to refuse to allow them outside the house.

"God forbid kids actually see a painting of breastisies."

Do you have kids? Do you allow your 6-year old child to see naked pictures? You liberals really have a way of glossing over major issues.

"How about instead of "Censored" they put a black bar that says "Covered for the protection of the weak-minded""

Again... 5 and 6 year old children? I'm sorry, but pictures of nudity do not belong on the sides of buildings.

"No I don't, but these are conservative Christians who are complaining about it, I can almost guaranty you that."

Talk about prejudice. I'm not suprised. One set of rules for yourselves, and a set for everyone else.


All the liberal comments I've seen in this topic are ridiculous potshots, none of which have any bearing on reality. Just smart-assed comments that take the situation out of context and try to paint the defenders of decency as backward witch-burners. I wonder what the liberals would say if somebody painted a picture of aborted fetuses on the side of a building...

You can spin spin spin it all you want, but the simple fact is that a parent should not have to worry about covering their small childrens' eyes every time they drive by a building. If this was a high-school art show and people were complaining about "protect the children", I'd think it was ridiculous. But you have to draw the line, and a large painting of a half-nude woman in the middle of a town crosses it.

What a load of crap.

Get it through your head already: there's nothing  HARMFUL or DISGUSTING about the human body or about seeing it. That seems to be the point here, which you clearly can't seem to really grasp. A naked person in and of itself is not "lewd and obscene". Under your clothes, even YOU are naked right now.

This idea that children MUST NEVER, EVER SEE A NAKED PERSON is insanely puritanical, and not too much different from the same mindset the TALIBAN and other Middle-Eastern cultures hold when they force women to wear Burkas.

Now if you want to argue the issue, you'll have to quit whining about "the liberals" (like every liberal thinks exactly alike, right?) and come up with a logical and believable reason why seeing a naked human being is somehow damaging to anyone, kids included. What IS damaging, on the other hand, is perpetuating the idea that "Oh my GOOD GOD!! Johnny! Don't look at that picture, there are BREASTS!!" is an appropriate reaction.

I repeat: there is nothing EVIL, WRONG, DISGUSTING or OBSCENE about the human body. Pretty much everybody owns one. Teaching kids that it's HORRIBLE and BAD is, indeed, horrible. Not to mention pretty damn twisted.

Now, explain why YOU feel the mere sight of breasts is so disgusting that it will corrupt children and you might have a point to discuss.

Do you have kids? Do you allow your 6-year old child to see naked pictures? You liberals really have a way of glossing over major issues...  Again... 5 and 6 year old children? I'm sorry, but pictures of nudity do not belong on the sides of buildings.

Do you realize that there are nudes all over our country's capitol in various artisitc forms?  Do kids leave D.C. damaged because of it?

Explain how this Eve is "harmful material."  What's the harm?

<filthy smut>

Ahhh! Now thanks to you KF, I will be spending the after-life in a firey purgatory!

But seriously guys everyone getting mad about this is totally over-reacting.

Can someone please tell me why calmly explaining to a kid that those "round thingies in the picture" are breasts which are used to feed babies would cause the child to suddenly become totally corrupted?

Do you realize that there are nudes all over our country's capitol in various artisitc forms?  Do kids leave D.C. damaged because of it?

No...they leave there damaged for a whole different set of reasons.

Now that we've all seen it, it begs 2 points:

1) this thing is huge - did the artist paint it overnight?
"look Maudie, that wasn't there yesterday"

- or did authorities wait until the owner had gone to the expense of having it finished before complaining about it, so he can spend even more covering it up, or 'fixing' it, so it meets their approval?

2) Most towns have laws regarding approval on what murals a business can paint on its building - for good reason. A poorly painted/designed one, or say 4 20' TMNTs on the side of a building would be offensive to some as well (that would be me).

What's wrong with the naked human form?

the law says its wrong

Jeez... somebody had better tell the Metropolitan Museum of Art -- they've got naked ladies all over the place! Those lawless bastards!

you have a problem seeing the obvious dont you? Those are all on the inside of the building where people have to pay to see it. This is on the outside where *everyone* can see it. Can you see it?

Someone better tell the St. Louis Art Museum, then!  It's free, and they don't check IDs at the door! Anyone regardless of age can walk right in and see BOOBIES and PENISES!

Oh, and KingFred...

Don't post that filth here.