Risque Images and Writing on the Forums

[DaveM]

Re-rail! (?)

(...)

Too Far:
1. Detailed descriptions of sexual organs in RP. (And, of course, detailed nudity in art.) This includes female breasts/nipples. And usually butts too.
2. Blatantly over-blown/over-sized sexual organs in art. This, again, includes female breasts. Even when covered, as this goes into over-sexualized depictions or bodies only found in porn.

Not Too Far:
1. "Cartoon nudity." If I'm not seeing anything, I'm not seeing anything. Such a style is usually used for cuteness rather than an attempt to arouse.
2. "Sexy" characters, with all appropriate naughty bits covered, with believable proportions. A certain amount of sexualizing is just going to happen in art, and there's nothing wrong with that.
3. Non-described nudity in RP. Sometimes nudity is funny, that's hard to deny. The classic scene of someone dreaming about going to class naked, anyone? As long as nothing is described or seen, that's fine.

Other than people suggesting other things for this list of standards without actually being explicit about their proposal, the thread has come down to jabs (deserved or not) for the most part, be they at people or social trends.

So I think that if people want to post more, they should explicitly formulate things that they truly rationally believe can be tracked objectively after addition -to this list-. Does anyone have constructive criticism for the above points? Would anyone propose a new distinct one for either list?

My first suggestion, for example, is that Too Far #2 be explicitly expanded to include excessively sexualised depictions of either gender. I find it insulting to ladies for big lady bits to be bad and big gentleman bits to be fine. And I do believe "bits" are defined socially and not biologically and so think "bits" should be the things most people tend to be attracted to and are taken to unrealistic proportions.

(Either that or allow for peer reaction to inch out stereotypical RP - or find that it's awesome and get at it in the circles in which the groups enjoying it will enjoy it.)

(Edit: I know Too-Far2 refers to art, but people will invariably QQ about double standards if the same doesn't apply to RP so I assumed a similar standard applies.)

[Saiyuu]

Re-rail! (?)

(...)

Too Far:
1. Detailed descriptions of sexual organs in RP. (And, of course, detailed nudity in art.) This includes female breasts/nipples. And usually butts too.
2. Blatantly over-blown/over-sized sexual organs in art. This, again, includes female breasts. Even when covered, as this goes into over-sexualized depictions or bodies only found in porn.

Not Too Far:
1. "Cartoon nudity." If I'm not seeing anything, I'm not seeing anything. Such a style is usually used for cuteness rather than an attempt to arouse.
2. "Sexy" characters, with all appropriate naughty bits covered, with believable proportions. A certain amount of sexualizing is just going to happen in art, and there's nothing wrong with that.
3. Non-described nudity in RP. Sometimes nudity is funny, that's hard to deny. The classic scene of someone dreaming about going to class naked, anyone? As long as nothing is described or seen, that's fine.

Other than people suggesting other things for this list of standards without actually being explicit about their proposal, the thread has come down to jabs (deserved or not) for the most part, be they at people or social trends.

So I think that if people want to post more, they should explicitly formulate things that they truly rationally believe can be tracked objectively after addition -to this list-. Does anyone have constructive criticism for the above points? Would anyone propose a new distinct one for either list?

My first suggestion, for example, is that Too Far #2 be explicitly expanded to include excessively sexualised depictions of either gender. I find it insulting to ladies for big lady bits to be bad and big gentleman bits to be fine. And I do believe "bits" are defined socially and not biologically and so think "bits" should be the things most people tend to be attracted to and are taken to unrealistic proportions.

(Either that or allow for peer reaction to inch out stereotypical RP - or find that it's awesome and get at it in the circles in which the groups enjoying it will enjoy it.)

(Edit: I know Too-Far2 refers to art, but people will invariably QQ about double standards if the same doesn't apply to RP so I assumed a similar standard applies.)

That, or don't use Too Far #2 at all. Plus, something else could be added rather than Too Far #1. For all I've played around so far, everyone that I've seen play nudity did so in a subtle and respectful manner. It's good to be there, but there might be other things to give focus.

I'd also like to suggest a kind of form for the spoiler tags and warnings. One that really acts as a disclaimer, meaning you know what might be coming upon clicking that spoiler tag.

[Xigo]

... Mayhaps League of Legends can aid me.

NOTE, THIS IS A YOUTUBE VIDEO.

Spoiler:

http://youtu.be/GoKaO-PT2c4

^This is the recent art spotlight done by Riot, the company that runs League of Legends. It's a woman wearing very little riding a boar. Yup, there's cleavage there. I want you to notice something though if you dare look at the video (skip to the end if you wish). The fact that she's a woman isn't the central focus of the image. Seriously, they could have made that a guy and it wouldn't have seemed awkward at all.

vThis, being my example for an image that we wouldn't want on CotH, is fanart of League of Legends. Take note if you dare look at this image (this is my example for what not to be posted, be wary of what is coming). The fact that she is a woman -is- the central focus of the image. Seriously, if they made that a guy it would just make you raise an eyebrow.

http://static.lowyat.net/uploads/attach-..._thumb.jpg

If you guys looked at what I posted, can you see what I'm getting at? Can you tell what -is- and what -is not- allowed?

BLATANT ADVERTISEMENT BELOW.

Spoiler:

If you're interested in League of Legends, sign up here, because I wouldn't mind getting some referrals.

http://signup.leagueoflegends.com/?ref=4...6421535377

Hey, I'm hopeful.

[Saiyuu]

... Mayhaps League of Legends can aid me.

NOTE, THIS IS A YOUTUBE VIDEO.

Spoiler:

http://youtu.be/GoKaO-PT2c4

^This is the recent art spotlight done by Riot, the company that runs League of Legends. It's a woman wearing very little riding a boar. Yup, there's cleavage there. I want you to notice something though if you dare look at the video (skip to the end if you wish). The fact that she's a woman isn't the central focus of the image. Seriously, they could have made that a guy and it wouldn't have seemed awkward at all.

vThis, being my example for an image that we wouldn't want on CotH, is fanart of League of Legends. Take note if you dare look at this image (this is my example for what not to be posted, be wary of what is coming). The fact that she is a woman -is- the central focus of the image. Seriously, if they made that a guy it would just make you raise an eyebrow.

http://static.lowyat.net/uploads/attach-..._thumb.jpg

If you guys looked at what I posted, can you see what I'm getting at? Can you tell what -is- and what -is not- allowed?

BLATANT ADVERTISEMENT BELOW.

Spoiler:

If you're interested in League of Legends, sign up here, because I wouldn't mind getting some referrals.

http://signup.leagueoflegends.com/?ref=4...6421535377

Hey, I'm hopeful.

Lame Xigo, stop advertising random games that tend to be awesomely addicting.

Jokes aside, the way you suggested is a good one to help artists see what could be posted and what couldn't, but there's just a small problem in it, I think. (Don't murder me please.)

Pinups, that's the problem. I, as one of the artists around that draw pinups, can pretty imagine a drawing of Celes wearing a bikini and striking a pose being replaced by a male equivalent wearing speedo bathing shorts and it'd still work nicely.

What do, Zeego?

[Xigo]

The image I used as an example was sexual. If you want to post an image and it's sexual, don't.

I refer to my previous post.

[Zarquon]

Risqué, such a lovely, elegant word.

My personal belief is that in a liberal arts society, anything that is not downright pornographic is fine. It is the responsibility of each individuals to decide for themselves whether or not to view certain contents. A sibling of mine utterly detests and cannot stand horror movies, and had never, no matter how pressured, watched one for close to half-a-decade. Yet he doesn't put a ban on any other of his (my) family watching it while he's at home; he just don't watch it. We are a family here; let's respect each others rights, be it the right to show others our work or the right to not see such works.

As matured members of a community, it is entirely within our ability to ignore something or someone, should we so dislike his or her product and attitude. To publicly condemn or vilify somebody or his work in front of others is nothing more than an imposition of one's individual beliefs or opinions, by force and coercion, upon another.

I personally feel that this serves no purpose whatsoever and creates a lose-lose scenario that is antagonistic and hostile. The only conclusions that I believe can stem from this are all fairly negative, will lead to future grudges, form schism in our beloved community and encourage OOC drama.

As such, I conclude with the assertion that this thread should be locked and buried, with the various individuals coming to term with the fact that we are all a community, and that we can find better ways of going about what is seriously nothing more than peeves.

With that said, I apologize sincerely if I should offend any, and remove my humble presence from this thread.

[Saiyuu]

Ahh, alright. Misunderstood the reference a bit and thought it was applicable to all cases. Sorry~



^

I also second this wise man over there.

[Harmonic]

I think it's reached a point there where anything else is just struggling against a descision that's already made. Don't bash people for making something sexy, but don't rub their noses in it either.

The only thing that's in the back of my head though, in regards to drawing women... what's acceptable? I mean, at what point are breasts considered -too- large for artwork?

I feel very, very awkward for being the one asking that, mostly because I don't want to piss people off, but for the same token I want to know on behalf of people drawing characters. (Most of whome, I'd assume wouldn't even bother posting pictures since they'd have to comprimise, and change how they did that.)

---

Edit: Also.. how would that be determined? Like on a case by case basis? I'm just worried what would be considered flirting the line.

[Saiyuu]

I think it's reached a point there where anything else is just struggling against a descision that's already made. Don't bash people for making something sexy, but don't rub their noses in it either.

The only thing that's in the back of my head though, in regards to drawing women... what's acceptable? I mean, at what point are breasts considered -too- large for artwork?

I feel very, very awkward for being the one asking that, mostly because I don't want to piss people off, but for the same token I want to know on behalf of people drawing characters. (Most of whome, I'd assume wouldn't even bother posting pictures since they'd have to comprimise, and change how they did that.)

---

Edit: Also.. how would that be determined? Like on a case by case basis? I'm just worried what would be considered flirting the line.

Warning: Incoming joke. It's no offense. I repeat, it's a joke.

We could use fruits and objects to do it. Works in a lot of character descriptions you see out there... I hope to never find pumpkins though. xD

[Grakor456]

My personal belief is that in a liberal arts society, anything that is not downright pornographic is fine. It is the responsibility of each individuals to decide for themselves whether or not to view certain contents. A sibling of mine utterly detests and cannot stand horror movies, and had never, no matter how pressured, watched one for close to half-a-decade. Yet he doesn't put a ban on any other of his (my) family watching it while he's at home; he just don't watch it.

Yet this leads to the ultimate problem. What is "downright pornographic" is not, in fact, so cut and dry as you make it out to be. Hence why this thread exists, your apples and oranges comparison aside.

As I said in my first post...I'm not anti-ERP. I'm not anti-fetish, and I'm not anti-porn. I simply believe that these things should be kept to places that better cater to such desires. To put your comparison into perspective, I would not bring a horror movie to the home owned by someone that I know hates horror movies, and expect him to be okay with me hijacking his TV to watch it. Certainly, I could do it in my own home, where it's more appropriate.

Edit: For reference, "pornographic" is described as something erotic intended to bring about arousal. This could mean any number of things, and does not necessarily include/necessitate nudity. If you don't believe me, I need only point out things like underwear and uniform fetishes. And crotch bulges.

[ImagenAshyun]

I can bring up something worth considering as far as definition goes: large breasts. To some, a fetish and fanservice, regardless of how much is covered. To some, it's the ultimate sign of oppression of all that is female. To some, it's a broken spinal cord and overabundance of fat. To others, it's a fact of life.

In all honesty, as much as we'd like to keep implications of overt sexuality on women toned down, outright banning large busts is silly. I'm all for keeping it clean and family-friendly, but banning large-breasted women altogether is like banning a man with 40 lbs of muscle or banning women with wide hips or large butts. Yes, you ought to keep a picture of a half naked super sexy bikini woman away from the eyes of a 10 year old... but what does that say when that boy's mother happens to be of a very large bust herself? It happens all the time. I even live with one.

[TwilightDisciple]

Edit: For reference, "pornographic" is described as something erotic intended to bring about arousal. This could mean any number of things, and does not necessarily include/necessitate nudity. If you don't believe me, I need only point out things like underwear and uniform fetishes. And crotch bulges.

And foot fetish material. Good god. It's always interesting to tell people about Quentin Tarantino's incredibly blatant foot fetish. "Wiggle your big toe" just isn't the same anymore.

[c0rzilla]

I brought this up earlier, Immy. Art about the symbolic Earth Mother is usually very large chested. But, there is a difference between that and typical "cute 'n sexy 'n bouncy" art that balloons the female form into cartoonish depictions.

There are tons more good examples of art like that, but Earth Mother comes to mind first.

[Xigo]

(WARNING, IMAGE IS MY EXAMPLE FOR 'LARGE BREASTS'. YOU'VE BEEN WARNED)

There's a point where it gets rediculous, though.

Spoiler:

LAST CHANCE.

Spoiler:

AH MEAN IT.

Spoiler:

ALL RIGHT, JUST ONE MORE.

Spoiler:

OKAY, MAYBE TWO MORE.

Spoiler:

OR TWENTY.

Spoiler:

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-Snzl76bfaJQ/Tm...Bboobs.jpg

EDIT: I'm just waiting for the always insightful post from Krent to save the thread.

Still. This is really silly how long this has gone on, and I'm backing out.

[Saiyuu]

Because every artist must draw breasts thinking of the great Earth Mother first~

And... Xigo...

I want to murder you with a rake.