alilbleedingisnormal t1_j9zpjco wrote
If you posted all the historical art ever made in r/art the prudes here would whine that there's so much nudity (gasp! a nude woman in art??) Grow up, y'all. In a world full of actual porn a classical, platonic appreciation for the human body would not be remiss.
stillfumbling t1_ja0kneq wrote
It’s not about being prude. It’s that most of the nude women pieces on here are like bad 70’s pinup girls. Objectified, lifeless, and badly drawn.
tammias OP t1_ja0qpfl wrote
Are you suggesting that this one is?
Because I feel I managed to neither make it a pinup or objectified or, if I might say so, badly drawn... even if I (as always) feels there is room for improvment.
stillfumbling t1_ja0wrks wrote
No, not at all. I was replying to a comment about r/art and nudity in general. I think this one is well done and actual art
[deleted] t1_ja9lw05 wrote
I'll be honest. Where are people seeing this? I can agree that Frank Frazetta style women are just bad (not dissing him, but I think he turned to sex and violence later in his career to make a living), but I really don't see the oversexualized women on this page that everyone is rioting about. At this point it seems like artists could just draw a photo realistic copy of a figure and have people complain that they are porn afflicted minds.
alilbleedingisnormal t1_ja0voh8 wrote
I'm not talking about those posts. I'm talking about this one.
Djinnwrath t1_ja1ivtl wrote
You didn't mention this post at all in your first comment.
alilbleedingisnormal t1_ja1vg5q wrote
I was on this post in my first comment, dude 😂
Djinnwrath t1_ja1x3t5 wrote
Yes, but you made a meta-comment about the sub as a whole.
alilbleedingisnormal t1_ja1y912 wrote
Based on what I saw on this post.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments