So are the prudes offended every time they open the poser library and see the nude figures?

BEGIN QUOTE In the real world, I can choose to go into a gallery or a museum. I get a little brochure and it tells me whether or not what is inside is something I want to view. If I am not interested, I can leave again. There is a big difference between that and the intrusive world of the Internet where things appear on my screen that, given any choice, I would not view. END QUOTE What do you do with museums such as Mus d'Orsay in Paris? I don't think a brochure or even a book of it exists, that represents or mentions ALL of the thousands of paintings and statues exhibited. Also because there are regular turnovers to what is exposed. The Orsay Museum pullulates of nude pictures and statues. There is no nudity warning on them, no screen to hide them from casual viewers. Amongst the paintings exposed, there is also the famous "Origin of the world" by Courbet. I don't describe it here, I think it's famous enough for most people here to know of it. Well, that painting is exposed in a very well lighted room where everybody can see it. There are many young students and even children visiting the museum. You can meet them everyday, every time. I haven't noticed any of them to be shocked or scandalized by what they can see. Also, I go to Paris regularly, and I haven't noticed any particular moral decay in the costumes of this city which is daily exposed without "protection" to many of the most beautiful, most naked, and most uncensored depictions of artistic nudity ever made. I think that places like Renderosity are much MORE "controlled" (I won't use the "other" word for peace's sake) ;-) than most of the art museums worldwide. That equals to say that I think it's much less probable to be hit by "intrusive nudity" here at Rosity or at DAZ than it is in any of the major museums of modern art all over the world.

The difference has to do with a place I go to knowing what may be inside, and a place that comes into my house whether or not I know what it will bring with it. I block out popups. I block out spam. I should also be able to block out graphics that have no interest to me. And that is all I am going to bother to say on this tired out subject. You can dance all you want...but you will not answer the quesiton of why a simple courtesy is so hard for you and so easy for other people. I'm not stopping you from doing anything you want to do. I'm asking, in a polite manner, to respect the fact that I may not want you to do it in my house, and so I want the ability to lower the shades. Nothing more than that. A simple courtesy. An act of politeness. Not censorship. An act of respect toward another human being. That's all. End of me on this thread. Those who do not listen will never hear.

"So are the prudes offended every time they open the poser library and see the nude figures?"

I don't know? Are the sleazy crazed with lust every time they open the poser library and see nude figures?

(and did my point go over heads) ;)

"Crazed with lust" is my default setting, so seeing the nude figures' thumbnails in the library window has no effect.

I made a question on a specific comment regarding museums, that I disagree about, not a statement that I do not agree on the nudity flag. Actually, I do agree on the nudity flag. But to come back to the "museums vs. internet comparison", which is the point that interests me: BEGIN QUOTE The difference has to do with a place I go to knowing what may be inside, and a place that comes into my house whether or not I know what it will bring with it. END QUOTE It is very simple: is it a choice, to go into the Orsay museum? It is also to open the browser on Renderosity. Nobody forces you to do that. When you open Renderosity, you should very well "know what may be inside". If you have a problem to do that in front or certain people, or in certain places... just don't do it. Exactly as you choose not to enter an art museum. Once you are inside, you may have "casual contact" with nudity images. And you knew you may, before you entered. Sorry, I still can not see any difference between the two.

I think that the other thread got locked because it went on too long (like this one).

Yeah, they should lock this one, too. The old battle between the prudes and the sleazoids ain't gonna be settled here or anywhere else, as long as the race exists. Too many bad feelings on both sides.

Un-offended by nudity = sleazy? It seems intolerance has become rather popular. Maybe a good civil war is the only answer.

"Un-offended by nudity = sleazy?"

Why not? Wanting a warning for nudity appears to = prude. That was the point of my comment. To present to you the mirror of your statement.

Intolerant people? I`d kill them ha ha ha

That's "Mr" Sleazy if you please :P Hey Compiler, is that your name flush against her leg (thinking sleazy thoughts - oh darn it let me rephrase that warning nudity okay, for those of us who are threatened by reality please close your eyes for the next sentence - it made me think sleazy thoughts). Okay you can open your eyes - the big bad wolf is done eating Little Red Riding Hood OH SHUCKS...there I go again warning bad adult pun that causes a sleazy visual The Big Bad Wolf EATING Little Red Riding Hood. Okay frightened villagers, the sleazy phrase has passed. I can now see some artists vigorously working away at making a freebie pak of thumbs of clothed poser people to replace the naked thumbs - the sad thing is, it's probably already in the free section.

Finister, that IS offensive. Nudity is fine by me, but putting oral sex and children into the same context is perverted. Bidding this thread goodbye.

Don't make this thread number four this week .. locked threads is depressing Finister ... that was remarkably tasteless and over-the-top. You talk to your mother with that mouth? Lyrra the Irritated

btw - I never said using the nudity warning is a bad thing. I support using it if called for.

wakes up blinking after his nap what? is this arguement still raging.. oh well.. starts to hand out weapons to each side, then grins to lyrra

Err, the red Riding Hood joke has been around forever. The trick is not to assume that she's a child. A lot of English classes discuss the Wolf as 'Man' in general, and Little Red as a Young Woman. Very interesting stuff. Of course the Grimm Fairy Tale versions are always much darker than the Disney'fied ones we're familiar with. I mean, in Sleeping Beauty, the Prince comes along, finds a sleeping princess, and rapes her! And of course in Cinderella the step sisters get their eyes picked out. That's after they chop off their own toes trying to fit the shoes. A variant on Red... Little Red Riding Hood goes into the woods. The Wolf jumps her, growling. She waits a moment as he snarls and shows his claws. And waits. Then finally pulls a gun out of her basket. "Now you better get on and Eat Me like the story said you would!"

Well I must ask forgiveness and apologise most earnestly. In my mind Red Riding Hood is an adult woman. I did not mean to suggest she was a child nor do I condone any such activity with minors. I sincerely apologise. But, ironically your reaction and mental imaging proves my point better than any words ever could. You all thought what YOU wanted to think I was saying. Therefore whatever I say from now on should have the nudity warning on it because how am I to know what you will THINK I'm saying? Okay I'll put a cork in it. No more spamming from me here.

And I apologize for my hairy butt.

Well my butt ain't hairy but I'll apologise anyway... for whatever :o) :] Fish NB "Crazed with lust" is my default setting - lol connatic! Yeah, mine too. NNB runs naked thru the thread lol Lucy Fur!! And HEY - you didn't put a nudity flag on that one!!