(23-10-2010 04:11 )Krill Liberator Wrote:  I doff my cap, bow, and step aside for Addison in response to, frankly, an extraordinarily well-informed and insightful puncturing of my pitiful pissed dribbling. Fabulous stuff, sir! (I have now deleted all those full-frontal snaps of Vito from my hard-drive.) I thank you.
And yes, I am still very drunk.
PS - I much prefer 'Olympia' to 'Dejeuner...' that Victorine is pretty hot for a dead chick.
pps - even after the money shot, it's still a great painting and, bizarrely, I still watch the babeshows. Such a loser...

(23-10-2010 23:33 )Addison Wrote:  Thinking about it some more, a few artists down the years have notably produced drawings 'on the side' that qualify almost totally as 'outright erotica' (nudes striking blatantly suggestive poses),while their beautiful economy of line also makes them lovely works of art. You can imagine the artists who produced them doing a roaring behind-the-counter trade selling these things to the randy, monocle wearing, cigar puffing, malacca cane wielding set during the early years of the 20th century (would sure knock collecting Panini stickers into a cocked hat )
People have been deliberately trying to blur that line for longer than you might think!

(23-10-2010 23:33 )Addison Wrote:  Thinking about it some more, a few artists down the years have notably produced drawings 'on the side' that qualify almost totally as 'outright erotica' (nudes striking blatantly suggestive poses),while their beautiful economy of line also makes them lovely works of art. You can imagine the artists who produced them doing a roaring behind-the-counter trade selling these things to the randy, monocle wearing, cigar puffing, malacca cane wielding set during the early years of the 20th century (would sure knock collecting Panini stickers into a cocked hat

(24-10-2010 16:48 )Intense1 Wrote:  

(23-10-2010 23:33 )Addison Wrote:  Thinking about it some more, a few artists down the years have notably produced drawings 'on the side' that qualify almost totally as 'outright erotica' (nudes striking blatantly suggestive poses),while their beautiful economy of line also makes them lovely works of art. You can imagine the artists who produced them doing a roaring behind-the-counter trade selling these things to the randy, monocle wearing, cigar puffing, malacca cane wielding set during the early years of the 20th century (would sure knock collecting Panini stickers into a cocked hat

I do agree that there is no real distinction between nudes as portrayed in paintings, or nudity that is depicted on screen in erotica. So, yes, the public has every right to demand that OFCOM justify their acceptance of one and rejection of the other. But what I am trying to convey is that the general public will always badger the censors whenever nudity is broadcast before their eyes, until they break free from the shackles of ignorant convention, which sees women as having an evil influence over men (misogyny which stems from their religious culture.)...... Instead of seeing women for what they actually are: Real delights to behold!!

The moral issue surrounding the dignity of personal behaviour has nothing whatsoever to do with how desirable a woman is to a man. So, a man should never ever deny that desirability; regardless of associated behaviours which may be deemed offensive.

(27-10-2010 01:03 )eccles Wrote:  The British Board of Film Classification (BBFC) lowered its rating for The King's Speech, starring Colin Firth, from a 15 to a 12A...after the cast and director complained...and distributors launched an appeal...

(28-10-2010 00:58 )Scottishbloke Wrote:  Heres a link for you referring to job cuts at ofcom, lets hope more follows for the bastards.

http://www.bectu.org.uk/news/1034