Options

Do you consider this painting pornographic?

Regis MagnaeRegis Magnae Posts: 6,810
Forum Member
http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2014/jul/07/painting-pornographic-pubic-hair-outrage#
Leena McCall's Portrait of Ms Ruby May, Standing ... was removed from the Society of Women Artists' 153rd annual exhibition at the Mall Galleries after being deemed "disgusting" and "pornographic", according to the artist.

...

The Mall Galleries have issued the following statement: "As an educational arts charity, the federation has a responsibility to its trustees and to the children and vulnerable adults who use its galleries and learning centre. After a number of complaints regarding the depiction of the subject and taking account of its location en route for children to our learning centre, we requested the painting was removed."

Click on the link and then the picture for the full painting .

A complete overreaction in my opinion.
«13456

Comments

  • Options
    degsyhufcdegsyhufc Posts: 59,251
    Forum Member
    Maybe if she stuck that pipe somewhere else
  • Options
    deev1ne0nedeev1ne0ne Posts: 2,161
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    degsyhufc wrote: »
    Maybe if she stuck that pipe somewhere else

    Oh, lawdy! Get me ma' smellin' salts!
  • Options
    [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 4,091
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    a beautiful painting, what a shame it´s not on display
  • Options
    henrywilliams58henrywilliams58 Posts: 4,963
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Here is wikipedia on Vagina (with images)

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vagina
  • Options
    maidinscotlandmaidinscotland Posts: 5,648
    Forum Member
    deev1ne0ne wrote: »
    Oh, lawdy! Get me ma' smellin' salts!

    :D:D:D
  • Options
    duckyluckyduckylucky Posts: 13,861
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    I personally think its horrible
  • Options
    [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 36,630
    Forum Member
    No.




    "PHWOAAAR"
    FAP, FAP, FAP, FAP, FAP.
  • Options
    Nat28Nat28 Posts: 2,949
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    It would be ok without the pubic hair on show
  • Options
    feckitfeckit Posts: 4,303
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
  • Options
    maidinscotlandmaidinscotland Posts: 5,648
    Forum Member
    Nat28 wrote: »
    It would be ok without the pubic hair on show

    That's just personal taste though and doesn't make the painting pornograph, it's merely a depiction of the natural female form. Could be worse, at least she keeps her lady garden well pruned.
  • Options
    R82n8R82n8 Posts: 3,656
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Looks like my Uncle.
  • Options
    Raquelos.Raquelos. Posts: 7,734
    Forum Member
    It's very mildly pornographic I suppose, more in the category of a little bit naughty than disgusting though.

    I don't think we should be judging what art to display by the lowest common denominator of what is okay for children. It's about time that adults were treated like adults and parents were allowed to exercise their own discretion about what they take their children to see.

    Personally I wouldn't have problem with a child seeing that picture, those who disagree are welcome not to show it to their children
  • Options
    agrainofsandagrainofsand Posts: 8,693
    Forum Member
    Doesn't look like my Uncle...
  • Options
    zx50zx50 Posts: 91,270
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    The painting's about as pornographic as the grass is pink. The most it can be accused of is a woman trying to look sexy.
  • Options
    degsyhufcdegsyhufc Posts: 59,251
    Forum Member
    Raquelos. wrote: »
    It's very mildly pornographic
    Don't see how it is at all.
    zx50 wrote: »
    The painting's about as pornographic as the grass is pink. The most it can be accused of is a woman trying to look sexy.
    and failing miserably.
  • Options
    SaturnVSaturnV Posts: 11,519
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Can't see that it's "erotic or lewd and designed to arouse sexual interest"

    Some people need to get a grip.

    Perhaps a bit saucy, cheeky or suggestive but certainly not worthy of particular comment.
  • Options
    CLL DodgeCLL Dodge Posts: 115,865
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭✭
    It's because of the pipe.
  • Options
    [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 1,256
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    I don't think it's pornographic but I don't think it's suitable for exhibition to children. If the children are sensible (can't believe I'm typing this) 14 year olds and above I have no issue with them seeing this painting.
  • Options
    DadDancerDadDancer Posts: 3,920
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    who are these ultra prudes who keep getting so offended by every little thing? They need to be reigned in and given some counselling
  • Options
    DadDancerDadDancer Posts: 3,920
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    I don't think it's pornographic but I don't think it's suitable for exhibition to children. If the children are sensible (can't believe I'm typing this) 14 year olds and above I have no issue with them seeing this painting.

    Why?:confused: What do you think it will do to them?
  • Options
    dee123dee123 Posts: 46,271
    Forum Member
    Oh FFS. This is seriously reminding me of the Simpsons episode where Reverend Lovejoy's wife wants the statue of David banned from Springfield because he's naked.
  • Options
    JurassicMarkJurassicMark Posts: 12,871
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    At most, it's mildly erotic art, but not porn.

    There has always been nudity and eroticism in art and this example is nothing exceptional or extreme.
    DadDancer wrote: »
    who are these ultra prudes who keep getting so offended by every little thing? They need to be reigned in and given some counselling

    This country does seem to have a long history of such prudes and the problem is that they are very vocal. It only takes a few of them to express offence and it can result in the offending article being removed, as happened here, potentially spoiling it for others.
  • Options
    WolfsheadishWolfsheadish Posts: 10,400
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Nat28 wrote: »
    It would be ok without the pubic hair on show

    Adult women, and men for that matter, have pubic hair. Get over it.
  • Options
    WolfsheadishWolfsheadish Posts: 10,400
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    And I don't think it's pornographic OR disgusting.
  • Options
    [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 32,379
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Absolutely not, mildly erotic though.:)
Sign In or Register to comment.