um, Gabe? The perverts like myself that like to do explicit erotica, we didn't run to Poser Pros, we ran to Renderotica, long long long before Poser Pros was ever on the radar screen. I have been through two site closings of Renderotica and I'm still hanging in there, over there, posting my artwork there that cannot be posted here. I've done quite a few of these crotch shots... quite explicit work. I've even modeled a low poly vulva for a game. I've been told my labia are beautiful too... even considering recreating them as a model. Heh. Won't that be something. g I am actually quite proud of the genitalia I was born with! And its art when I portray it. I don't like obscenity, but I see that my yardstick for obscenity is a lot more liberal. And genital props can be used for porn. But porn can be art. In fact, quite beautiful art. One of my very favourite Poser artists of all time is an erotica artist going by the handle IlGeco, he posts at Renderotica. Porn doesn't have to be obscene. I prefer to call it erotica, as that's what I really do. I do take offence to people mischaracterising what I do as obscene, as it is NOT. However, Renderosity has rules governing what is allowed here on this site, and I follow them to the letter. I do not post sexually explicit art here. I'll repeat what I said over there, though. "Personally, I don't see why there's this us vs. them attitude anyway, I spend time happily participating at Renderosity, Renderotica, Commune, Gayposerart, and Poser Pros... and I'm very happy at all of these places." That means, I'll continue buying from you Gabe, right here at Renderosity. I'll continue buying from merchants at Poser Pros, too. And I'll continue buying from Renderotica, Daz, Commune... I have no beef with any of these places. I think its unhealthy to have one, too... And I will CONTINUE to be happy at all of these places I mentioned. I am just as happy at Renderosity as I am happy at Poser Pros. No need for stoking any site war flames. take care, Robin (aka bijou)

Robin, I second you opinion on Il Geco's talent. It's really rather a shame that more people can't see it because the subjects are beyond their definition of art. As for your contemplated recreation, Playboy's been claening up for years with "The Girls of the Ivy Leage," "The Girls of Hawaiian Tropic," and who knows what else. "The Labia of Poser Girls" would probably be a great hit in the Renderosity store - oops! excuse me, some other depraved internet sleazepit.

Okay, I'm just getting sick of being notified. I thought this thread was dead now, since the mods SAID for everyone to just stop...

Uncheck email notification and pray. I'll do the same and if we meet here again, it didn't work :-)

I came here off an offsite link, I had left the thing long ago but as I saw that it had been posted elsewhere... I figured it was time to throw in what I thought about it, as I happen to be one of these members that do erotic art, that post at many sites, including Rotica and Poser Pros as well as over here, and say it here so its seen in the right place. As most of the members of these sites are actually happy members of many different sites like me, I believe its unfair to make people think they should feel they are somehow 'disloyal' or 'unartistic' just because they happen to do a different kind of art or visit more than one site. Its simply untrue that people that find themselves booted by the tos here regarding erotic art go to Poser Pros. I regularly see these people crop up at Renderotica! And I welcome them with open arms. That's the truth. I see genitals as simply another part of my anatomy. I'm not smooth between the legs like Victoria, and neither is any other real woman... how much as some of us would like to pretend we are. Its not sleazy, its simply natural. I guess I subscribe more than a little bit to the Betty Dodson style feminism. glad someone agrees with me about IlGeco :) He rocks! I'm telling ya, that guy has a fan club!

It didn't work, dimmit!

do what I do, just delete the emails if its something you don't want to read. I personally don't see my reply as anything problematic. If you don't want to read what I have to say, I suggest - don't. as for me, I have every right to reply when its my kind of art being diminished, in fact... someone with our interests (and I do mean our... khrys... you're on another erotic site I visit) should reply sanely and quit pretending we have interests in erotic artwork... only way it becomes accepted as a legitimate artform ...and maybe these threads will become a thing of the past. As nobody will care about the busybodies anymore. Live and let live, I say.

quit pretending we DONT have interests in erotic artwork... argh, where is the edit button when you need it. I won't be replying anymore, I just wanted my thoughts in the right place, as Gabe and others wouldn't see anything I wrote on PP, as they don't go there. and again, don't read it if you don't want to see what I have to say. Thats what your delete key is for.

Bijou... I think the topic is dead. Please let it die. Deleting the emails doesn't work when they're filling your inbox.

I have read the threads here and there on this. I have not taken the time to read every single opinion. I do not feel I need to. This whole converstation is based on one original statement and therefore it is to it that I reply. Blackhearted is one of my all time favorite merchants anywhere for Poser items. Some of my best and favorite work has come from using Aeris and Nia. Both extremely fabulous products, both very real. Now as for the current complaint, why does this bother anyone? There are the conservative right wing people who claim that it's all about what it is, there are the liberal arguing that its all natural and/or freemarket, and there are those in the middle of the road stating that it was totally how it was promoted. Blackhearted, you seem to fall in the middle from what I've read. Why? What's the problem? Do you think even for one second I would have purchased Aeris, or begged for Nia as a birthday present if I had not seen extreme detail in your product shots? Nope, not on your life. And look what I'd be missing out on. I would have bought the old Genitalia morph hip replacement for Vicky or V3 if I could have seen how well it worked and looked. Not because I am a perv or want to do explicit images, simply because when you do a natural nude pose and the Genitalia should be atleast somewhat exposed on Vic, you see a crease in the mesh and that's it. Not very realistic, and those of you that know me know I push Poser as hard as I can to avoid post work, and I'd rather not post work a gental region anyway. So now, rather than the customer simply being able to go to the product, see what it is, how it works, what it can do... We all have to go chasing after the creator and get an image emailed and wait till all of that goes through before making a purchase. Alright. Fine. So be it. Guess from here out we should have to email every merchant for mor detailed images of what their product is? We should have to go through hours of waiting for reply emails and IMs so that we can make up our mind if we want to buy their product? shakes head So why do we have a market place if this is what it ends up coming to? Because, it shouldn't be that way! The market place is there so we CAN see EXACTLY what we are buying. We work dilligently to create a product. Work even harder to make sure we properly represent it so that it actually sells. And then... It get's slammed for properly representing itself? I actually think this is the worst part of the whole problem. Not that it was shown for what it was, or that it was what it was, but that because of everyone thinking their thoughts on it were more important than someone else's work, it has been altered in it's marketing. I have yet to buy it, and I may or may not, but now I have to go through the hassle of finding out what it is before I can even make up my mind. Cheers insomniaworks, kudos on being as kuel about all of this as you have been. I myself may have come unglued. Blackhearted, I still love your work and will continue to purchase, but your reasoning seems a bit askew on this one.

The market place is there so we CAN see EXACTLY what we are buying. We work dilligently to create a product. Work even harder to make sure we properly represent it so that it actually sells. And then... It get's slammed for properly representing itself? this was soooo not the point of this thread. we are not sayin thats wrong or anything at fault with that or him or anyone who makes genital props and such and blah blah blah. NOT. its about the ethics, for lack of better locution, of products like this being here. some feel a line should be drawn. we are NOT sayin you are wrong so do NOT tell us we are. gabe was just expressin a concern, a community concern, not pointing fingers, not starting a witch hunt, not singling out anyone, not starting a war, not saying theres anythign wrong with the products or people who make them or why they are made, just that some of us feel that they might not be appropriate for the image of rosity, the avg rosity member, or future member or whatever...we are not criticizing you for your opinion, so you should not be doing so to his. not everyone is as liberal as some of you are. you need to remember that. and remember this is a community where the majority of people here may not think genital props or images acceptable at this particular site. its nothign personal. stop twisting things around and let this stupid thread die.

Marty,

Please consider marketing your more "explicit" products at Renderotica. Our market isn't small. We have over 80,000 members. And you can show your products in as much detail as you need to to sell them properly.

Everyone else,

I know everyone wants this thread to die, but I do have to make one comment. It seems to me that there indeed should be some standard here. If products like genital props are going to be allowed in the Marketplace here, then their features should be allowed to be shown. If it isn't OK to show them, then it seems extremely hypocritical to sell them. Yeah, sure, they make money for this site. But how is it OK to sell something you won't allow to be shown in simple ad renders, let alone in the galleries?

I own two sites. Renderotica and AniMotions. AniMotions is geared to the comic, video game and anime audience and we do not sell sexual content there, nor do we allow nudity in the galleries or the thumbnails in the store. We do allow nudity on textures and characters where it is a selling point of the product and we have a warning on the storefront to that effect. On the other hand, Renderotica is a site that caters to adults and contains mostly erotic content. Because we do not allow postings of children on that site, we don't sell anything made from the milkids or for the milkids there.

Sure, we could probably make more money by selling sexual content on AniMotions and milkids on Renderotica (the audiences are different), but we choose not to sell things that don't represent what we see as the image of each site.

I don't buy the, it's OK because it makes money, but it's not OK to show the product features because, well, someone might be offended. I saw those product shots, and while I was shocked that rosity allowed them considering the general image of this site, I was not offended by them. And I'm a woman.

As another woman, I had no problems with the promo image. I totally agree with DTHUREGRIF- "If products like genital props are going to be allowed in the Marketplace here, then their features should be allowed to be shown. If it isn't OK to show them, then it seems extremely hypocritical to sell them.....I don't buy the, it's OK because it makes money, but it's not OK to show the product features because, well, someone might be offended." That is what Renderosity really needs to think about. If you're going to allow this stuff, it should receive the same treatment as everything else- the promo picture was not porn, just a promo picture showing the morph details. If you're going to have problems with the Promotional images then you shouldn't allow it to be sold at all, and take your financial losses.

As long as people are polite and don't violate the TOS, there's no reason for the thread to go away as long as anyone cares to keep posting to it. Tired of reading it, don't click on the links in the ebots. Aagain, a simple answer - don't want to see it, don't click. Rio, I appreciate your thoughts. Ypu've neatly summed up the issue. I really see this as no different than smoking or loud music or any of the fractious issues people in a community deal with. Usually after some (often contentious) debate, they reach some kind of compromise - smoking/non-smoking, no lud music after 10 pm, etc. I think that's the way things should work. As a "liberal" (your characterisation) on the issue my ONLY problem with the "conservative" side is that their idea of compromise usually means not reasonable regulation or restriction but banning that with which they disagree.

Gab, I really enjoy work, you're one of my favorite artists here, but you and I have both, in fact, been in violation of the TOS several times: The TOS states: 1)No Rape. 2)No Torture. 3)No Sexual acts. 4)No Physical arousal. 5)No Genital contact with ANY object, other than sitting or clothing. 6)No depictions of young humanoid characters in erotic, seductive, provocative poses or context. 7)No character attacks, which could be interpreted as defamation of character, slander, and libelious. (I think they meant libelous - to my knowledge libelous is not a word) Anyway, take Nia for example. Someone could easily say that she looks like a 14-16 year old (young humanoid). Of course, I don't see it and obviously you don't, but once we begin stating what we deem is acceptable we enter difficult territory. Such judgments are always based on personal bias and, therefore always open to a gaping field of interpretation. Here's an example from my own gallery: http://www.renderosity.com/viewed.ez?galleryid=404367&Start=1&Artist=Omadar&ByArtist=Yes Is she in violation of the TOS? To some perhaps, by the definitions set by the TOS she: 1) Could be aroused. 2) Could be making contact with her genitals (whether it's visible or not - one could look at the image and claim why else would her hand be in the vicinity). I'm not knocking you at all, but I am trying to prove a point. We cannot possibly follow the TOS as it is written. The TOS is, simply, far too vague. Renderosity needs to clearly define what is and what is not acceptable on their site. That said, you have to consider that every other image in the Poser gallery is an expressionless, stock V3 showing her breasts to the world. Is there really a point to having a TOS on this site? A few people were discussing what is and what is not considered pornography. For the record, here is the correct definition: Webster's defines pornography as: 1) writings, pictures etc., intended to primarily arouse sexual desire. 2) the production of such writings, pictures etc. That's the simple definition. There is nothing profound or complicated about it. You could be looking at photo of a fully clothed woman/man and if you are the least bit aroused it becomes pornography; this too is a matter of choice. I get turned by looking a woman's feet; most people would not find this the least but pornographic - but according to the correct definition it is. I, in fact, made it pornographic. People often confuse pornography with what they find personally find sexually offensive or distasteful - the two couldn't be further apart. Anyway back to your post. I personally blame DAZ for this mess. I cannot fathom why they did not include female genitalia in their products; it's beyond absurd. Many people use Victoria for purposes other than creating pin-up's. Medical illustrators rely on such products to expedite their work. I'm sure all them are wondering why Michael comes with all his parts, but Victoria is somewhat sexless. Alas, consumers have little choice but to buy the extra parts. Certainly they have a right to see what the product looks like before they purchase it. Cheers

"The TOS is, simply, far too vague. Renderosity needs to clearly define what is and what is not acceptable on their site." Sadly that's impractical. In all areas I've ever seen this kind of incredibly specific detail put in place it simply leaves gaping holes to work around - allowing people to follow the letter of the "rules" whilst completely abusing the spirit of such "rules". Take the age thing as a prime example - who is to say whether a certain V3 morph is 14,16,or 18? They're ALL under one year old, the mesh being designed last year. As a further illustration of how difficult it is to capture in words the content of an image - even whilst remembering that a picture is worth a thousand words - try describing your own face relative to Michael 2 / Victoria 3 base face. Very few facial features have ever even been named! Which make sit terribly difficult to describe a human face without imagery. And that's just one face, rather than trying to describe what Renderosity might find distateful about image sin general. You're right that, strictly, many images already violate the TOS because they seem, fairly blatantly, to be cheap attempt at tittilation and therefore pornography. Some may even be "good" tasteful attempts at "promoting a sence of arousal", shall we say. Renderosity seem to lean on the side of allowing rather than banning images, but their TOS provides the legal backing they may feel they require to allow them to remove images which are felt to "overstep the boundaries of good taste". That human judgement is involved also means that there WILL be disagreements on interpretation :( "1) writings, pictures etc., intended to primarily arouse sexual desire." You don't make images of feet pornography because you cannot change the INTENT of whoever produced the image. As to deciphering the intent of the artist, that's naturally going to be difficult and down to a judgement call. Cheers, Cliff

Mental note: 1) buy insomniaworks' vagina 2) buy blackhearted's Nia texture 3) convert Nia to fit V3 4) Use Nia texture on V3 with conforming vagina prop 5) post a render of same character naked wielding a sword 6) look for cat model with tits

Not everyone feels that sex and sexuality are obscene. Sex is what makes us. It is a good thing.

If I make a "Clint" morph will someone missread it and force it to be removed? LOL... Just kidding Clint... Joe

Very very funny Joe! (grin) Clint

Very very funny Joe! Clint

I like vulvas and viginas, and I like to look at them! I also buy such 3D obects here at osity and appreciate the ability to do so. The female anatomy is beautiful in every detail. Let's face it, women have couchies and guys have slongs, vaginas and penises if you want PC terms. If you don't like them, don't look at them and go on. I for one find all the angel post here annoying and often offensive but I don't complain. So simple skip over it if you don't want to see it, but in all fairness it should be allowed to be there for those of use who want to look! Wolfman pro couchie and anti sensorship;')

Me personally: I do not post here and I do not sell nor share here because of the way the duddley do-rights say and do things on this site. One day not to far off there will come something that will shadow these whinners.

THIS IS THE MOST MAGNIFICENT RESPONSE AND FREE MARKETING PLOY I HAVE SEEN HERE YET. YOU CAN BE SURE IM RUNNING TO THE DESK TO CREATE THE NEXT GENITAL MORPH, ILL MAKE SURE TO WRAP IT WITH ABSURD PACKAGING SO CLINT CAN REMOVE IT, AND WHILE YOU GUYS ARGUE OVER MORALS, ILL BE SWEEPING $20,000 UNDER THE BED...:)..GOOD GRIEF..

I'll buy that for a dollar;')

Daz should have included better genitalia in the first place. And while there at it, how about some articulations in the figures backs? I haven't been able to get V3's legs apart in a realistic way unless its small movement. I think Renderosity is just too G rated, take a look at what usually wins a renderosity "art contest", then don't be surprised at reactions about anything adult oriented. Candy canes and lolipops, that's what the TOS is all about. Renderotica has an entire check list of "yes/No" to different categories. That would be a good idea for Renderosity. Its all just another example of the hipocrasy of american society - horses farting in peoples faces is a-O.K., people eating intestines and rat eyeballs, pissing on each other, no problem (survivor series, I wonder when they will finally just make them eat shit), murder, black mail, rape, all show up on broadcast TV on a regular basis. All that said, if a picture offends you, JUST DON"T LOOK AT IT! Flogging a dead horse, ~WD

Wow, nothing like resurrecting a long-dead thread... bonni

Your right, I didn't realize how old the last post was. ~WD

LOL Bonnie! Aye, I never even did see this one, so guess I'll add my two sense. Better late than never. I agree with Gabe (shhhh and we don't always agree). I never saw anything distasteful in his ads or advertising. My daughter's teen mags have friggn Calvin Klein ads that are more revealing and as a father I have to wonder "why the hell!" do they promote crap like that in teen mags? Unfortunately, I understand, sex sells. However, it doesn't always make it artistic and it also has it's place. I believe Gabe was right when he said it should be at R'otica. Now, before those of you who support pornographic images go off on a tangent, let me explain a few things. First, "porn" can be defined as an image (or imagery) that incites sexual arousal. It's full intent is to do just that. I don't see the prupose of creating morphing genitalia unless it's intent is the same. Also, R'osity, is touted as a place that should be able to be visited by everyone unlike R'otica. So such products are more suitable at R'otica in my opinion. For example, although I don't like some of the Calvin Klein ads in my daughter's mags, I can tolerate them. However, if I saw full spreads from Hustler in my daughter's mags, I would friggn blow a gasket! Do I have a problem with Erotica or the sort? Certainly not, but it has no place in front of children who are just discovering and learning about their own bodies and don't need outside influences confusing certain behavioral aspects of their life. As an adult (if we are stable of mind) we are able to discern between things which are right and wrong, fantasy and reality and therefore do not let imagery guide us in our lives. Imagery and music can be powerful influences on the developing minds of the young. So do I shun my children from nudity? Absolutely not. But I teach them to be respectful and responsible. I create products and art which contain nude images, at times, and my children are popping in and out while I'm working quite a lot, but they understand the art behind it and discern between what is tasteful and what can be considered obscene. You wouldn't find me creating a genital prop in front of my kids and saying "hey dear, watch how her %^$* opens wide!" So, how i see it.... if I wouldn't put it in front of my kids, I wouldn't expect it to be viewable on a site my kids could access from my computer. I would expect it at R'otica. Just my opinion. ---Will

Its easy to forget that this is a public site, I realize now that some things should only be on adult sites. I interpted this as a censorship issue, and it is, but I agree that certain people will not want to view images of an adult nature, and probaly shouldn't. The TOS is there for a good reason. ~WD

My 2 cents: 1. Daz3D as well as others should have included genitals in their figures. Male or female or children it doesn't matter. How can they claim that their figures are realistic when they are missing important body parts? Funny how nobody tried to sue them for false claims :-) 2. I have seen the offending image. There are always people that dislike that kind of images but they have "nudity" switch and I don't have "blood and gore" or "zombie" or "freak" or "fetish" switch to prevent me from seeing zombies, freaks and such sh*t. When I am at it there is also no "lousy art" switch and there should be one. If they insist on banning images they dislike then I am sure many people will start insisting on censoring other "art" categories and this place soon won't be interesting to anyone. 3. Is there any money back policy here? Can you return the goods you have purchased if you are not satisfied with quality? How can you judge the texture quality and mesh detail without close-up renders? Will you base your buying decision solely on product title? If so why don't you base your watching decision on product title also? It is simple -- if it hurts your eyes then don't look at the Sun. 4. Quoting keihan: "First, "porn" can be defined as an image (or imagery) that incites sexual arousal." -- so if someone gets aroused by watching lace will you clasify it as porn? 5. The way I see it, only limited people deny existence of things they don't understand or approve and they even go as far as trying to destroy them. They will certainly use every opportunity to raise their "purist" and "awareness" rating by demanding genitals removed everywhere but they will silently ignore things like global warming and pollution or bad state politics. After seeing this thread it is obvious why Jesus was nailed to the tree for asking people to be more tolerant. Now excuse me, I have to crawl back under my stone...

Boy am I glad I could come to Renderosity and find the vagina I've been looking for!!! What a shame that we Renderotica-ers have to come deal with such prissiness, prudishness, and pissiness here to find what we're looking for... THANK YOU RENDEROSITY for selling the best vaginal morphs and props around!!! Now if you'd only let people show em off...
"20. Re: WTF??? whats this place coming to? by lmckenzie on 7/4/03 02:11 Found at Renderotica (I only go there to read the articles):" Funny, I remember someone back in the 70's claiming they read Playboy for the ARTICLES too... Me, I read Hustler for the Articles...
"And if I've offended you, I'm sorry, but maybe you needed to be offended, but here's my apology and one more thing... ........................." from "You can't bring me down", Suicidal Tendencies, "Lights, Camera, Revolution" Message edited on: 06/09/2004 08:47

Wow. This thread was opened in... 2003. Almost a YEAR ago. Actually, in less than a month? It WILL have been a year ago. Let it die.

"20. Re: WTF??? whats this place coming to? by lmckenzie on 7/4/03 02:11 Found at Renderotica (I only go there to read the articles):" Funny, I remember someone back in the 70's claiming they read Playboy for the ARTICLES too... Me, I read Hustler for the Articles... They were making a joke, based on the "I only read it for the articles," line. And yeah, Khrys, I always wonder about long dead threads that suddenly reappear. There are dates on these things, y'know.... ;-) bonni

KILL THIS THREAD!!!!!!! Does everybody have to throw there stinking 2 cents in??? I wish I had never posted on this thread, Please Renderosity, kill this damn thread. Anybody reading this: STOP THE MADNESS: DO NOT REPLY!!!!!!!!!!!!!