It's certainly an interesting debate.  I should probably go back through my gallery, because I'm sure I've got at least one of those dickless metal men in there somewhere, and I never thought of it as a "nude" simply because there is no depiction of genitalia -- or skin for that matter.

The "David" ... great piece of art, and definitely a nude -- stone or not.  The "Oscar" statuette ... to me not a nude, but I suppose minds could differ on that point.  However, I certainly wouldn't think to put a nudity flag on an image that contained an Oscar.  It just wouldn't occur to me .... not until now anyway ... and it really wouldn't make much sense to me.

Not a matter of whether or not it's "art" ... there's a lot of wonderful artwork out there depicting nude or partially nude characters ... and I agree, some of it is such that you wouldn't want to accidentally spring it on a small child (at least not without an explanation of why the nude is historically important in art ... and good luck with that with a really young child), but getting back to that Oscar, that image is pasted all over the TV screen here in the US at least once every year, and no one thinks twice about it being a "nude."

So, I don't envy AS his job, because I think it's a bit of a gray area.  Wawadave's image seemed to me to be more along the lines of Oscar ... statue with no genitals.  Crazy Dawg's image seemed more like a true nude to me, if only because, as an alien character - I can't honestly say whether there are any genitals showing .... whether that is plain flesh or tattos ....I have no experience with that alien species. 

Seems like it's just a judgement call for everyone.  Artists and AS alike.  And .... people's opinions are going to differ about it. 

 

Could be worse, could be raining.