Topic: Are fine artworks in European museums deemed “NSFW” by forum rules? (Read 655 times)

Nullius

A few things in reply to your post here..

1. Tman was a moronic slobbering fool who spewed out profanity and nonsense. Who also went over the line with child sex abuse filth. Jokes or not that is a step too far. Also caught scamming in his auctions.

Bring me a collection of his posts that were original insightful and made a real difference here.

2. Lauda was a deliberate sneaky plagiarist and scammer

You tried the old ..lauda simply changed his mind defense which was smashed.
You didnt once rebuke his plagiarism after your bullshit about it being something you hated with passion.

3. Mentioning those truths does not damage my credibility it has never been damaged since I have never had a point debunked on anything important. The clear insightful and undeniable rebuff I gave robovac was entirely valid and I see that you have jumped upon that legitimate point. You're welcome. Don't add public ingratitude to your repertoire.


So to be clear.

1.  Yes they will legitimately remove your pic on NSFW grounds.  I dont agree with it being removed but I dont make the rules.
2.  They must keep to those grounds not start crying it was because their kids prefer to read about pajeettwatwanktardcumguzzlingskankfuckingwindowlickingspazcunts or other more serious filth from tman that they collate and celebrate.

So next time photoshop a little leaf or picture of a kitty cat over the pussy lips and you'll be okay. I hope a naked asshole is allowed but you cant be too sure. As you have noticed I'm an ass and skat enthusiast.

I would have liked to defend your side of the argument more and would do if you post images of classcial statues (either sex or them xxy ones)bending forwars and away whilst reaching around spreading their ass cheeks ready for a good felching. I've already provided you with what you have adopted as one of your main retorts so that's more than you deserve considering your historical wrongdoing towards innocents here.

Looks like you're getting the old cold shoulder treatment now.  So you'll have to just wait for me to get around to you and keep you company. Since my vast fortune is becoming a distraction what with all the pleasures it can afford me now that may not be as frequently as would like. Once I hit 50M I may shout you a free cyber sex session with thepharmacist since his rates are the most economical and provides the depravity it would take to ease the pressure of those blue balls lauda/alia left you with.

For mop up I'll call in " the guzzler" he has been parched I hear since lauda turned off the fountain.  That load should quench him nicely.

What's 50 bux all in between 2 outcasts like ourselves when 1 has so much the other.... a little less In many various ways.

So about those statue pics I mention.  Now when posting you can get around the NSFW by using this method.
Super impose a hedge in front of them so you just see their heads and upper torso ( from behind obviously) now make it super high res.
Okay then remove a few leaves on the hedge layer just big enough to see the anus. Then unless they download the image and remove the hedge layer or super zoom in on the little gap of leaves only we will enjoy the image fully as it was meant to be enjoyed.
The others who prefer to just read about pajeetwanktardfucknozzlejizzslurpingbuttmunchingpeasantspazoids will just think it's two lovely statues  sitting beside each other behind a low hedge.

I hope this post has given you both a way to back down without quitting the forum and an excellent plan from which we can both benefit going forward.  You would be a great loss to the forum and I cant take being prevented from another goodbye world thread just now.  I'm suffering a major hangover and other complications related to overly spicy food.  You get the picture. If not I can send.  


TLDR

they can delete your pic because a lovely juicy hairy pussy will likely be a clue that they are not cracking on with the designated rat run chores at work.
Dont worry a workaround provided ...mutually beneficial.
Pics if you're up for it.
Dont leave the forum. I'm warming to you.

Foxpup, on looking back over the thread, I think that my last post came off toward you in a way that I did not intend.  I don’t quite apologize, because I was sincere in what I said, itself; I was simply being candid, not trying to criticize you personally.  See below for a further note on that.^*


Zeroth of all:  Now, I am asking!  —And not receiving any clear, authoritative answers.  —And being criticized by some people for asking, as if I were asking a stupid question.  Observe that the topic title ends in a question mark.

And first of all:  I would ask, if I were doing something that I thought was questionable.  I did not think that an art-museum piece was questionable; and in the first instance, I would not choose to participate in a forum where it was.  As you can probably tell by now, this is an important issue to me.

(As I expected that it would be to others.  Where are all of the ACLU types?  Doesn’t the ACLU raise hell if some church ladies cover up a nude statue in a public park, or whatever?  I am pretty sure that if I look on ACLU.org, I can find plenty of long wall-of-text essays about the social and cultural importance of protecting artworks.)

I consider the prohibition of fine art to be disgraceful.  Disgusting.  I wouldn’t significantly involve myself in any site where I knew that it may happen.  Yes, it is a private forum that I am free to leave at any time.  I was also free to not sign up here, if I knew that something like this could happen.

(That is not difficult:  I have never been so deeply involved in an Internet forum; and other than some fire-and-forget throwaway accounts, I have not really participated in any forum since perhaps around 2003 or so.)

People who have praised me when I stood up for principles that they agreed with, should understand that I am being principled here.  I need to explain that—not to make the topic about myself personally, but rather, because I am even puzzled at why people seem not to understand why I don’t just shrug, forget it, go back to business as usual.  Not going to happen.  The deletion of those posts was major turning point for me.

Deleted:

It is usually a matter of principle to me that one who values his own work should never give it away as “user-generated content” (a) to any site not under his own control, (b) without compensation.  Hereby, this forum’s primary general topic is important to me.  I thought that I understood the forum rules, that the rules were acceptable to me, and that the rules would be applied consistently.  Whoops.

The past few days, I have almost regretted ever signing up here.  —Not quite, because of some of the people whom I never would have met otherwise.  And today, on the third anniversary of my very first “Brand New” post, I have been having some dark thoughts about this:

Boldface, italic, and underlining are in the original; highlighting is hereby added:

I will probably seek a solution that is more constructive.  —Or more destructive.  —Or both.  I am talking about this to make a point; if I intended to do a drastic action, I probably would not announce it beforehand...  But for those who are wondering why I don’t just blow this off and move on, I think that that adequately illustrates how seriously I take this issue.


I didn’t “know perfectly well what [you] meant”; I took what you said at face value.  Doesn’t that succinctly sum up the problem whence arose this thread?

Anyway, I thought that you would appreciate discussing art history.

At this juncture, in reply to the remainder of your post, I began an earnest reply that went way off-topic...  Never mind.

---

* Part of the problem is that the post was stitched together from pieces of a much longer draft, in an attempt to make it more “succinct”.  The red-lettered warning about things offensive to Foxpup was originally in a discussion about how workplaces differ; and reductio ad absurdum, office employees at AVN, Pornhub, or for that matter, Slixa could probably be fired for reading my posts (unless it is only to demand that I be cancelled and deplatformed from the Internet).  Obviously, actual porn is acceptable in those work environments.  (I speak here as to non-sex employees; such companies have office staff, too!)  In the original draft, it comes off very differently.

I don't suppose it ever occurred to you to simply ask what is and isn't appropriate, as I did when attempting to determine whether my contest entry was acceptable.

When I said "Western society", you know perfectly well that I meant current Western society, which I'm well aware has been negatively influenced by religious conservatives. You can spare me the art history lesson.

I'm only offended by your apparent confusion about how drag performance works: Conchita Wurst is not a man in a dress; she is a fictional bearded lady, who is played by a man in a dress (Thomas Neuwirth) - and the dress itself is merely a stage costume. It just makes it really hard to take you seriously when you start conflating actors with the roles they play.

Bottoms first:

I noticed.


I was partly showing some evidence that I had indeed downloaded the image, as you have now confirmed.  I see too many liars and two-faced twisters on this forum.  Just in case you may have been suspicious that I was only pretending to ask to see it, I wanted a succinct way to demonstrate that, at least, I have in my possession the data without which I could not have produced a hash which, to my knowledge, has not previously been published.

Cryptography solves many problems!


I don’t doubt that you usually enjoy being caught between a rock and hard place—and that you don’t, here.  I appreciate that your evident willingness to discuss this topic fairly, and to express consistently the same principles as you have elsewhere.

For reasons that you have succinctly described from your own viewpoint, I really do not understand the “NSFW” rule.  Rules are supposed to be understandable to the ordinary intelligent person.  I believe that I meet or exceed that description; and yet, I seem unable to use my usual mind-reading powers to guess what a moderator will declare “Not Safe For Work”, vague as the term is.

Before further attempts to define that term, I will step back and examine the potential cultural origins of this dispute.


You are unfair to “Western society”.  It is a Christian issue, and most of all an issue of the persistent influences of certain denominations of Christianity—not a Western cultural issue.

When Popes have bought nude statues of mythic Greek heroes (who worshipped non-Christian gods and goddesses), they were not getting that from the Bible!  They were Renaissance men—culturally European, and sometimes not very good at being Christian.

Of course, what you want is not to be a Renaissance man.  I am not really one, either; but modulo a few of my own freethinking adjustments, it is an ideal for which I strive, so as to rise beyond my own modern corruptions, weaknesses, and failings.  Properly considered, I am not an “Antihero”, but rather, a Byronic hero (and a Don Juan).  —A hero in the original sense, but with tragic flaws inasmuch as I am assuredly not an Achilles.  Anyway...  I despise “virtue”:  I seek virtù.

You probably disagree with me about many things; for example, I infer that you would hate this post of mine and its followup.  (← ⚠ WARNING:  Links contain artistic nudity—i.e., a nude statue of Napoleon’s sister as Venus Victrix—and are likely offensive to Foxpup!)  And some of the forum’s right-wingers, who oft concur with me politically, are probably upset by my Nietzschean attacks on Christianity;—

^^^ This is Western culture.  Only a subset of Puritanical Americans, and a few mutant Englishmen, could ever have a problem with it.  Their problem is that they are mentally ill, and unfit for survival in this world.

On that note, I do understand that this is a very American forum; and its policies are thus subject to the cultural influences of a country that was partly founded by

Perhaps my expectations may be too high here.

---

This post is getting too long even for me.  —To be continued, with further discussion of “NSFW” as I attempt to understand what it means here.  Because I really don’t.

Verified. The forum proxy is not doing any weird alterations/conversions/optimisations.

Thank you. "Distasteful" is exactly what I was going for with that piece. Though if tasteful nudity is more your thing, I've done that too: IsFoxpupStillANSFWVixen.today (even more NSFW) (Graciously hosted on loyce.club, so no Cloudflare nonsense, unless there's something LoyceV's not telling me.) Again, I've never posted that link on this forum without a NSFW tag, which is how I get away with this sort of thing; tastefulness counts for nothing.

Dishonest debate tactics severely annoy me.  Stop switching back and forth between “NSFW images” and “think of the children!!!!”  —Or do you suggest that only images can ever be allegedly^* unsuitable for children?  —By the way, do you let your kids listen to Cardi B?

---

* Although I have not checked, I seriously doubt that the Musée d’Orsay has an 18+ policy.  The very suggestion is one of those eye-rolling-emoticon things.  Their website, which displays the same image as I posted, is not age-gated; and if porn filters were to block it, the censorware companies would immediately be hit by professors, museum curators, et al. with a firestorm of the same protest that I am raising in this thread.  Oh, and your boss would look dumb as a brick if he fired you for looking at a museum’s website at work:  https://www.musee-orsay.fr/en/collections/index-of-works/notice.html?nnumid=069330

NSFW doesn't necessarily mean work only. But feel free to join a family gathering wearing that picture on your shirt.

If you don't understand the difference between NSFW images and text, I give up.

---

Thanks.  Neat trick.


Now, this is why I wanted to see it:

• The image does not depict nudity, not even cartoon nudity.  I had assumed that it did.  Beneath the black bars, I could not see that the genital area and nipples are (barely) covered.
• The image is what I myself consider to be distasteful.  I already knew that; but I could not say by how much, without seeing the uncensored image.  Now, I can say that I have seen worse elsewhere on this forum.  Furthermore, I can state that I often see other things freely posted which I would consider to be much more harmful to children.  See below for an example.
  
  Not that I want to ask for those to be deleted—to the contrary, it is an argument in my mind of:  “If this is permitted, why is that forbidden?”  The rules do not make sense to me; and I do not think that I am on notice of how I can follow them.

---

^^^ Thus began my reply to Foxpup, which I set aside because it takes time and tedium to locate suitable examples, etc.

To be continued, with whatever adjustments may be needed as the thread evolves.

---

Mutual.  And you are severely mischaracterizing TMAN here.  It is a shame that that undermines your credibility, because you raise a good and fair point about LoyceV:


You forgot that LoyceV also runs didtmansayabadword.tk, which I found sufficiently amusing that I suggested that it should count whenever TMAN said the word “fork”.  (← ⚠ ACHTUNG!  The screenshot of Jihan’s infamous tweet is NOT SAFE FOR WORK!)






Does “not raising them to be snowflakes” include teaching them to use language that would make a sailor faint?  Admit it, you shitcuntarsedicktwat, you reported my posts because you disliked my masterful counterstroke against suchmoon’s middle-schooler grade potty-mouth trolling of me.  As I alluded above in this thread, one of my deleted posts seriously-sarcastically documented suchmoon’s prior history of pride in not wearing a paid signature—hah, hah, only serious!^*  Loyce, I think that that probably offended you more than the Courbet painting.

...and then, you rhetorically hid behind your wife and kids.  Classy.

---

* For the record—a I have said before, repeatedly—I am quite ambivalent about paid signatures.  I strongly dislike them myself.  I have spent the past few years reserving the right to take a paid signature from a reputable, no-spam campaign, if I really need it to avoid starving.  I have not done so, because I cannot stomach putting an American-style ad billboard on all of my posts.  Ugly!  Crass!  Whereas Lauda thought that I was stupid for spending so much of my time here, with zero compensation—effectually devaluing myself; and I don’t think that she did anything wrong by wearing a paid signature.  Anyway, none of that is the point here.  suchmoon used to be so very proud of not wearing a paid signature, and now she has one; so...

Old robovac the Absolute Imbecile here to entertain.
I have no issue with the post being deleted but this outrage at your kids seeing a female body when you actively draw attention to and compile a list of posts with far more worrying content and keep bumping it.

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/poetry-by-tman-5138619

I mean the sexual deviant tman who's posts often detail child s3x abuse filth and other obsessive drivel surrounding cunts ?
Do read those out to your kids ?

You dont raise them as snowflakes, I hope you're not raising them to read either.

Yes sure delete the post but dont come all butter wouldn't melt.
I don't even like nullius for obvious reasons but he is just the latest person the DT colluding mass of corrupt scum are now hunting as a pack.  I'm not sticking up for him I just like to bring some reality and context to these threads.

I don't buy the reason for your horror of this terrible sin of posting image of a vagjna whilst compiling and revelling in other obsessive and far more deviant filth that tman spews out of his retarded skull to the point of being creating an appreciation thread.

Report fine ...deleted fine...coming crying you kids start looking on your computer and seeing what's on there lol

Little Johnny- hey some dude posted a pic of a pussy on a thread on that forum moms always on

Little Johnny : hey mum created a thread celebrating cunts being fisted and assholes being fucked hard or kids being abused. Err moms a bit different to what we thought robbie keep child protection on speed dial.

Lol I think little Johnny would be far less damaged by the former.

Fine you don't wanna see snatch without warning but dont start pretending its cos your kids would be more offended by his actions than your own actions.

Report..delete ...shut up and stop your bogus crying.

If you claim your kids are not old enough to read then fine what about parents that have kids that can read ? They do on your thread and then have a piss and their kids see what list of filth you're compiling.

I dont have kids but if I did I would really be terrified if they saw a naked image like the one in question,  I sure wouldn't want them to known that I'm a huge fan of tmans sexual deviant spew.

Also I dont like all this spite and hate being wasted on nullius. Let him stay on your side. There will be no challenge at all if you expel those that can put up a semi fight. I'm doing my best to unite you guys again.

Chill.

In light of recent events, I don't think the Catholic Church should be held up as an example of what kinds of genitalia are appropriate to look at.

NSFW is not, and never has been, a euphemism for porn (or anything else). It has the plain meaning of the words: anything that is not safe to look at in at least some workplaces because it could get you fired. That category includes a lot more than just porn (but often does not include text regardless of content, because everyone knows that managers are functionally illiterate too polite to read over their employees' shoulders.)

Sorry. In my defence, it's becoming increasingly difficult to find image hosting sites that a) allow NSFW art; b) allow hotlinking; c) don't resize/recompress/otherwise mangle the original file; d) don't use Cloudflare or anything worse; and e) don't do anything even more obnoxious that I haven't listed. Here it is via the forum's image proxy: ip.bitcointalk.org/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fd.facdn.net%2Fart%2Ffoxpup%2F1572178064%2F1572178017.foxpup_btcntlk10yrs.png&t=619&c=82s3t2f-vi7JLA (NSFW)

My objection to forum policy is not so much that it reflects Western society's unhealthy obsession with genitalia and "female-presenting" nipples, but more that it's applied inconsistently and even in cases where it makes no sense, such as in the art contest.

Oh 🤬forking🤬 h—, have I now been also been fired by Sarcasm?  😭

(New users, my apologies.  I cannot link to the post that gives the context for this in-joke, because it was one of the posts that was deleted.)

---

I must ask, are you hereby speaking officially in your rôle as Global Moderator on behalf of the forum, or expressing only your personal opinion?


If I ran a business that was publicly represented in the manner in which you have now reacted to me here and in the other thread, then I would promptly fire the employee who had tarnished my business’ professional image—whether or not that employee was expressing my own policies by such means.

I have always addressed forum staff with due courtesy (except for that Bcash shill HostFat), including in my hereby discussion with you.  Your behaviour toward me is unwarranted.  Internet flamewars between myself and random parties are one thing—but it is quite another, when you are entrusted with the responsibility to execute forum policy judiciously; whereas you have chosen to reply from the gutter and hurl personally insulting innuendo at a party who has addressed you with polite (if impassioned) discussion of official forum policy.

(I will set aside your arguments for the moment.  I reasonably want to know whether they are official policy or your personal opinions, so as to know how properly to reply—and whether even to bother.)

---

At least the other person who told me so (in much gentler terms) was an honest person, and thus meant it sincerely.  (—And knew why I waste my time kicking around on the Internet, but that is none of your business.)

I'm sorry, I forgot to use the BBCode for sarcasm

And who here is attacking culture? If you fail to realize that there's a place and time for everything, including art, then you may need a speleology team to go take your head out of your ass.

I fail to see how anyone could reach such a conclusion. They are simply 2 different things, with different objetives.

And seriously, if you are going to open a thread for every post of yours that gets deleted, you should consider growing some thicker skin

Do you really have to ask? Forum rules don't care where the images come from.

I reported your post. You posted it in my topic. In work-from-home-year-2020 it's more of a Not Safe For Wife but worse than that, I have kids walking around here too. And even though we don't raise them to be snowflakes, they don't need to see all hairy details either.

Great! All this helps you grow a thicker skin.

I didn't remove it but ask yourself this: would that artwork or something like it belong in the workplace, or would you feel comfortable looking at a picture like that at work? I doubt it. Just because something is 'art' or in a museum doesn't mean it's SFW.

What an unexpected reaction to a predictable action

Getting a bit more serious, yes, it is indeed art and that particular one displayed in museums. But this is a forum, not a museum; and the fact that it's art doesn't imply that it's SFW. Not only that, but also when you visit a museum, you do so willingly, knowing or at least expecting what you are about to see; if you happen to open a thread while you are having your morning coffee, it's safe to assume you are not expecting to see a big drawn cunt on your screen, and I can think of a couple more scenarios in which it wouldn't be the best thing to have at a screen. Rules are there, and they are for a reason, although we may not completely agree with them or their enforcement.

This whole situation would have been avoided with a simple tagged link instead of embedding the image.

Unless you're the curator of an art gallery, your work does not involve looking at pretty pictures, so get back to it! In all seriousness, the forum's puritanical (and somewhat hypocritical) approach to moderation forced me to censor my entry in the 10th anniversary art contest even though the contest explicitly allowed NSFW entries, resulting in this travesty:


(NSFW version) (Hopefully Cloudflare's stopped being a bastard about these links.)

(Okay, admittedly not all the travesties depicted are the result of forum moderation. Incidentally, I never did get an answer to the question of what kinds and/or genders of nipples are allowed.)