Thank you for your report!
We have received your report and it is currently under investigation by a forum moderator.
Site Messaging
Welcome to the forum.
Here you can discuss all things art with like-minded artists, join regular painting challenges, ask questions, buy and sell art materials and much more.
Make sure you sign in or register to join the discussions.
Hang on Studio Wall
This is a Studio member-only feature!
Join our Studio membership and save your favourite Painters Online content, from gallery artwork to step-by-step guides, to your own online mood boards. Create your go-to place for inspiration and learning. Plus, members can also enjoy a range of exciting features including monthly art videos and a digital magazine library.
If you are already a Studio member, simply login to your account.
Not a Studio member? Why not try our free 30-day trial - no commitment, no credit card required
Message
Posted
Lately I have noticed a number of post that feature full frontal male nudity with penis out on the site... None of these post have gotten any criticism or pushback even though I have been told a couple of times, that certain post that exploit sexual themes or could be seen as exploiting the human form, are inappropriate on a site visited and viewed by small children or grandchildren... Perhaps they are not painted with the same level of skill, but still the messaging should be consistent.. The messaging of censorship or self censorship that is... Just an observation...
Perhaps the thought is Penis ok... Large Breast not ok...
Posted
Most of the posts, which I've seen, are merely nudity. There is a difference between naked figures and salacious exploitation, which involves a voyeuristic exaggeration or representation. The difference may be hard to explain, but is easy to observe.
Though in the latest case, which I hadn't seen before saying the above, I see your point - the picture is not helped by the relative prominence given to the genitalia as opposed to the less accurately observed torso (unless the figure is supposed to have a withered arm). Aesthetic judgements to one side, however, I think there is a difference between figure studies - of which we have frequent examples; life drawing is a much practised discipline - and is not voyeurism.
Life drawing features study of the human form: no one has ever objected to that. There is another painter on the site who has painted pictures of women with large breasts (about which there have been complaints) which nonetheless seem to me to make an artistic point, and a social and human point; they explore the theme of womanhood but don't seek to eroticize it.
I know there is a fine dividing line, which it's very easy to cross - but a representation which coos "come hither!" at the viewer, as opposed to a representation which strives to be accurate, or is symbolic, is not in my opinion suitable for this site, for reasons given before. The individual reaction of any viewer, of course, is not ours to judge - it may be a long way from the artists's intention; and then again - it may not. But either way, it's not nudity that's the problem, as such.
Edited
by Robert Jones, NAPA
Posted
My paintings of Women are studies of the human form as well... I have spent my entire Art career drawing and painting women to represent them in the most beautiful and perfect way I can.. To honor them not to exploit them, even when it is just a face portrait.. If a painting excites you or turns you on, it doesn't mean it's bad.... I just think there should be some consistency in the messaging as far as censorship goes.. If I had painted Jeffs exact latest painting of the one he calls Air Element that features a full frontal male nude with exposed penis graphically depicted well enough, but I painted it with a full frontal nude woman with large breast or perhaps breast just slightly larger than average for most Women, I would be facing a lot of backlash and criticism.. My Persian Dancer Painting was a woman fully clothed in a bikini, you could not actually see any of the so called naughty bits.. But you Robert called it salacious smut, someone else called it smutty and pornographic and I was exploiting women... What is exploitation to some is not to others... The explanation or excuse if you will, to attack my work or character was that it was inappropriate on a site that is viewed by small children, grand children.. Is male nudity that is graphically depicted well enough or accurate enough acceptable for small children... it seems that it is... so far.
Posted
None of the pictures being discussed are any different from what every art gallery in the country exhibits. I don't think we should censor ourselves because once you begin where do you stop? I don't want to look at the male nudes but that's my choice, others may feel differently. I love Eric's work and it inspires me; that's also a personal choice. We can't run POL with the thought of small children looking at it, we are adult artists producing work for other adults.
Posted
Well said Peter and I agree. I guess the most important censorship if it happens, when it happens, is self censorship and good judgement.. No one can decide for another what is voyeuristic nor can they know intent simply by looking at a picture.. There is always going to be somebody who is unhappy or upset for some reason... Hopefully most won't rush to judgement, there is always a fine margin or degree of error based on personal experiences...
Posted
This has nothing to do with censorship, and frankly I'm disappointed that a couple of you seem incapable of differentiating between soft-core pornography and figure studies.
Eric's view on the subject is self-serving, which - I don't care about: it becomes obvious eventually - and disingenuous.