Sta.sh
Theme
.
But of course there are always the rules......
Please please please fave the journal!
Make another journal about this giveaway and provide a link of that journal in the comments (this will help spread the word about this giveaway)
this journal 
oints:
, comment and watch!
Rules
Should be about School Times!
Personally, I don't find them funny but I accept that everyone has a different sense of humour, and whether you find them funny or not is kind of an invalid point, hehe. But I DO have an issue with them being on this site. I'd hate to see DA become a dumping ground for screenshots, and I think it's about time DA took measures to filter what's permitted and what isn't.
My second point is that DA is doing very little to prevent the sudden occurence of porn material leaking onto the site. Some pass it off as 'artistic nudity', which it clearly isn't, because more often than not there's a link to some site in the artist's comments. An excellent example of this is a 'deviant' who stole pictures from Playboy, posted them, received hundreds of faves and STILL DIDN'T GET KICKED OFF THE SITE. Another example is of a girl whose blurry picture of her ass got front page. She insisted it was 'artistic', but as a fan of (genuine) artistic nudity, I would beg to differ.
I totally appreciate that what is art and what isn't art is a matter of perspective. But tell me... what do you think? Should DA allow motivational posters? How would you class artistic nudity anyway?
I'm not looking for an argument, but I'd love a good discussion and to hear everyone's opinions
Annoyed 
Nude=Artistic nude.
There can not be porn in still photos, only videos.
Get over it people. It doesn't matter how much you twist your body, it doesn't matter if it's in Black & White. It doesn't matter if you blur the photo in some parts to make it look more stylish. Nude is nude
But yes on occasion the de-motivators have made me laugh.
As to the artistic nudes... I think dA has to straddle a very fine line (ouch) or it might have to toss out a pile of actual artists along with the porn merchants. I think it's one of those horrid catch 22s like freedom of speech. Occasionally you also have to hear and see stupid things.
There's a decidedly sexist and homophobic aspect to it as well; those who post pornographic photos/drawings of women can get away with a lot more than people who post simple erotic drawings of men. Lubricated genitalia, graphic sexual content, all that's fine if you've got a woman, two women, or a heterosexual couple. But one erect penis, and you'd think the damn sky was falling, no matter how artistic the shot is compared to that Photobucket-posted porn.
I've decided that it boils down to two things: first, the mods base what's allowed to stay and go on personal bias and what they happen to want to masturbate to today, and second, they won't remove anything they see as drawing potential paying customers to the site. Someone gets an account to see the mature "goodies," maybe they'll just buy a subscription. deviantART has become, first and foremost, a business venture for its owners. The decisions that are made are, I honestly believe, the ones that they think will bring in the most revenue, not the ones that will uphold whatever integrity this community has left.
Honestly, my big issue (aside from the rampant official sexism and homophobia) is that there are rules that supposedly ban the pornographic content, but they are enforced arbitrarily and at whim, rather than consistently. Either eliminate the rule about explicit content and allow ALL explicit content (and maybe provide a functional filter system), thus validating the response of "suck it" that is given when people report inappropriate content, or actually ENFORCE the rules and enforce them EQUALLY.
/rant
(P.S. Your art is fucking amazing and I am eight hundred shades of green right now. ;A; I'm inspired by Mucha, but damn, do I ever do it wrong.)
I respect dA as a business venture. It's inevitable. I know I'd do the same if I was in their shoes. And while i know NOTHING about the work involved to run the site, I'd like to think I'd put integrity and quality over money, especially if it means keeping out the weirdos.
The problem with removing all explicit content comes with finding that line. Does that mean absolutely no uncovered female breasts and no uncovered male or female genitals? Are artistic nudes preserved, opening the gateway for "but it's ART!" when someone takes a blurry camera shot of their own labia? I won't lie, I would not mind seeing the boring, cookie-cutter DDs of women in corsets/blindfolds/bondage/etc. that seem to get featured every day going the way of the dodo, they're frankly repetitive, uninspired, and dull. At the same time, a lot of groups that I enjoy would get eliminated. It's one of those things that's going to piss a lot of people off, wherever that line is drawn. I'm far from a prude, I enjoy erotic art a great deal. But if allowing it on dA means allowing this site to degrade as much as it has in the short months I've been here, maybe that erotic art doesn't really belong here.
I, too, can respect the business side of dA. The site requires money and effort to maintain. My problem comes when I pay for a particular environment, and that environment is not delivered -- kinda like paying to visit a well-known art museum and walking in to find people leaning against all the statues and smoking. If dA is going to be selling subscriptions and making money, then it needs to be following its own terms of service and delivering what people give them that money for.
Not, y'know, enforcing the rules at its whimsy and allowing people who make decisions to make them based on personal bias and prejudice, punishing legitimate artists while leaving the doors wide open for porn site thieves and people willing to abuse the laxness about certain things to post flagrant violations of conduct codes.
And god, don't get me started on the demotivationals. Have these people never heard of TinyPic, Photobucket, and ImageShack? Or is it just that dA is a LOT more lenient with regards to hate art and porn? Hmm...
I myself haven't exactly noticed the MPs. They're just not part of what I pay attention to, and that's a me thing. I can, however, say this: If you didn't make the work, you shouldn't be posting it. End of story. Fanart falls into a strange quasi-gray area. Did someone else make the original work yours is based on? Yes. Did you do the work for this image? If yes, then sure, go for it. Fanart is based on an original work. If that's copyright infringment, then Paramount should be sueing themselves for Star Trek copyright infringement. Or the Roddenberry's should be suing them. Star Trek:TNG, "Based upon 'Star Trek,' created by Gene Roddenberry."
Basing your work on someone else's is part and parcel of art. How else do we grow? My art is influenced by all sorts of other artists. They did something I thought was cool, so I set out to mimic it, then incorporate it. We all do that in one form or another. Copying an original work word for word or pic for pic and claiming it as your own? Now there's a problem.
All that said, I myself don't generally engage in fanart. It's just not a big part of what I do.
On AN vs. porn... Okay, loaded subject, but here goes. My basic rule of thumb is "pornography is imagery depicting sexual acts." Sexual suggestiveness...Iffy. Very, very iffy. Composition really plays a big part in which way that goes... But as Ralph Waldo Emerson once said "Every artist was first an amateur." Gotta start someplace, but it may be the way to start with artistic nude is to determine whether the image is sexual in nature. Sort of a "no pink parts" viewpoint, I guess. And no, monochrome or sepiatone does not change that.
Nudity is a useful tool for the learning artist (which has been mentioned many, many times so far, so I'll try not to belabor the point more than I have to). Which, to me, means that nudity is par for the course. Deal. I myself have no problem with nudity, though as an artist, I don't draw nudes. Usually.
Pornography is not as simple as plain old nudity. There's a whole host of actions that fall under it...pardon the pun...Those are just too easy, sorry.
Art, I think, is about getting people to think and feel (emotionally). If the work doesn't make the viewer wonder "what if..." or something, or feel "Whoa, that's really sad" or whatever...Niether you as an artist nor your work is doing it's job.
You've hit the nail on the head, thar. What determines amatuer artists from the pros? Nothing. Unless they have a link to a porn site in the artist's comments, haha. That aside, there's little anyone can do about it.
Think about what, culturally, we teach ourselves and our youngsters. Blood and guts and violence are the norm. It's entertainment, and as a result, desensitized us to the pain and suffering of others.
...
Let me balance that just a little. That was way too "I've got a broomstick up my butt." I, for one, enjoy a good fight. More accurately, I enjoy the challenge. The contest of wills and skills. That, I enjoy. I do not, however, gain any pleasure from causing anyone pain. Contradictory beliefs? Some might think so, but I don't. Why? Because there are things, ideals and people, that are worth protecting. Things such as evil do exist, and there are some forms of evil that simply cannot be handled with words alone. They must be destroyed.
Okay, I'll get back to making my point now that I won't sound like such an ass.
...
However, we hide away nudity like it's the burned remnants of a Thanksgiving turkey we left in the oven a day too long.
Honestly, which of these is actually worse? Mutilation or nudity? Personally, I think mutilation is. I do not, however, think that appreciation of the human form should be so restricted to artists.
Right about now, I suppose that I should point out that an argument could be made that, if one is going to appreciate the human form, then sexuality is logically included. Perhaps this is indeed so...but I think that, for lack of a better term, that's a more mature form of appreciation not suitable for all audiences.
And, uh, no...I haven't thought about this at all. Really, I haven't.
--
Regarding your fighting beliefs, I was a tad baffled as to whether you meant literally beating people up or demonstrating and enforcing what you believe in, haha. I'm hoping you meant the latter! See, I think it's always worth fighting for what you believe in, but I don't preach and wouldn't force someone to see things my way. I hate preachers. Though it's a little off-topic, I don't believe in evil either - I don't actually believe in right or wrong.
--
I don't think I want AN removed from the site... It's a difficult one, I think. It annoys me to see porn on the site, but the reason I would enforce new rules is because I don't want YOUNGER people (or people who generally get upset over it) seeing it. Stashing it away probably isn't the answer, but at least enforcing stricter rules is the best thing to do for the wider audience.
I think the defining line between artistic nude and porn is whether or not the piece is about the nudity. if it's something that happens to be nudity, but really is about something else and the nudity just adds to the content at hand, sure, go for it. if the picture is about form, or represents an idea other than "I'M HORNY," awesome. or hell, even if it represents "I'M HORNY" with some fantastic composition and lighting involved, great! if it's just straight up NUDE though for the sake of being nude without any sort of redeeming creative qualities about it, that is porn, and that should not be acceptable - and there's too much of it that is accepted.
/end overly-analytical rant