""This issue regarding nudity annoys me, not just here but in life generally. All I want is for someone who is offended by this to tell the rest of us just WHAT is so wrong, all I want is an explanation, maybe then I can try to understand.""
Stormchaser:

I was one of the people who initially had a problem with the way the gallery looked.   No I didn't complain.  I just didn't look at anything labled content advisory (since Im wicked smart like that and clicked the filter) unless I knew the artist.

I feel though that the way the policy was implimented was asinine beyond belief.  Not to mention moderators refusal to comment on various magazine covers to clear up confusion.  I have heard and seen the extremes that some works were taken down due to the fact that the viewer could "imagine" that the subject might be nude beyond the scope of the viewable work.
that one gets a big 0.0 from me.

I've seen both sides of the issue.  There is some work on this site that is just beautiful - my own preference is nude art (NOT porn).  But my suspicion was raised when a member had a problem with one of his pics being removed because of a poke through nipple.  It was really no more than a really large breasted woman half naked.  I asked what meaning he was trying to convey with this and he said "none" - um ok.  Count me among the few but I don't consider a giant boobed woman standing half naked  - art?  Alas put on the other shoe and who am I to judge.

Anyway that's the perspective of someone who somewhat saw the need for some change.  Though I don't think the change that was necessary is possible, and I don't think that the change that was implemented is the one that best suits the situation.

I also shudder to think of all the works past and present we would lose if all nude children were banned.  Unfortunately I think the pervert lies in the minds of those who don't want it rather than those who do, they are the ones who see a cherub and think child porn - very unfortunate.

In the end I think the site was in a pickle - some of the work was previously very questionable and the gallery was being cluttered with gianted boobed mannequins.  Great art getting cluttered in with that.  I think they chose to err on the side of least damage and you can probably guess that no one solution would have pleased everyone.    

On the other hand - they could care a little more about members confusion and articulate the guidelines more clearly (imagining she might be nude so therefore she is ~wtf~)  And buttcheeks are nudity?  As a great man once said (Robert Barone)  "Its not my butt, just the fatty tissue at the top of my thighs"

I am:  aka Velocity3d