by Tinker » Wed Jul 13, 2011 12:16 pm
I don't personally see why Endo's picture is any more suggestive than any other others. You can see the woman's mound in both the pic that Colonel Sun posted and Endo posted. I don't even have a problem with straight up porn to be honest, but I would prefer that this thread be about beauty. In this case showing a woman's breasts is no less lewd than showing her pubes, which isn't lewd at all IMO. As Colonel Sun puts it though, it's not about a lesson in gynaecology, so I think that shots that peer into the vagina fall outside the realm of the 'artiness' of the thread, in which case if people want to post straight up porn they should do it in Hell and not in this thread. That woman is pretty, and she has a pretty bush, but the picture of her showing off her Bush is as Colonel Sun says, not a particularly artful picture. You can't actually see the labia or anything in that picture, though IMO the labia are some of the most beautiful parts of a woman.
So I think the line I am doing to draw are at acts of penetration, whether it's the camera lens penetrating and peering into the vagina itself, or images of a woman being penetrated by an object. As far as I see it a little bit of bush and lips is not really that much different from a little bit of nipple and breast. The criteria in this case for this thread mean that the impulse to post should come from a sense of an appreciation of beauty and not from pure lasciviousness. So it's ok to show a fully nude woman, but the shot should be one that appreciates the woman, and not merely a part of the woman.
Obviously part of our view of what makes a beautiful woman stems from eros, but as long as we are appreciating beauty and not sex, it's fine.
The canary didn't die because this mine is dangerous, it died because it's lazy and wasn't raised with a proper work ethic.