|
Post by NewSkool101 on Feb 17, 2008 12:01:13 GMT -5
Am I the only person here who realizes that absolutely nothing is going to come out of this argument other than a bunch of people being mad at each other?
It's not gonna get Lev reinstated on DA.
It's not gonna get pr0n (animated or any other kind) stricken from internet existence.
And last, it is definitely not going to change anyone's opinions on the subject.
So...yeah. Why is this argument still going on?
|
|
|
Post by The Legend that is KPCrusader on Feb 17, 2008 12:03:40 GMT -5
Am I the only person here who realizes that absolutely nothing is going to come out of this argument other than a bunch of people being mad at each other? It's not gonna get Lev reinstated on DA. It's not gonna get pr0n (animated or any other kind) stricken from internet existence. And last, it is definitely not going to change anyone's opinions on the subject. So...yeah. Why is this argument still going on? You could then argue the point of this whole thread and other threads like. They arent going to do the above mentioned stuff either.
|
|
|
Post by Tsaalyo Phoenix on Feb 17, 2008 12:03:59 GMT -5
Am I the only person here who realizes that absolutely nothing is going to come out of this argument other than a bunch of people being mad at each other? It's not gonna get Lev reinstated on DA. It's not gonna get pr0n (animated or any other kind) stricken from internet existence. And last, it is definitely not going to change anyone's opinions on the subject. So...yeah. Why is this argument still going on? I'm not the one who somehow took this from Levelord drawing pictures of Kim Possible to why men shouldn't rape women in the workplace, i'm just defending myself and the rights of artists to draw what they want without people insulting them. I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it. - The Friends of Voltaire, by Evelyn Beatrice Hall
|
|
|
Post by The Legend that is KPCrusader on Feb 17, 2008 12:12:32 GMT -5
Am I the only person here who realizes that absolutely nothing is going to come out of this argument other than a bunch of people being mad at each other? It's not gonna get Lev reinstated on DA. It's not gonna get pr0n (animated or any other kind) stricken from internet existence. And last, it is definitely not going to change anyone's opinions on the subject. So...yeah. Why is this argument still going on? I'm not the one who somehow took this from Levelord drawing pictures of Kim Possible to why men shouldn't rape women in the workplace, i'm just defending myself and the rights of artists to draw what they want without people insulting them. But artists will always have critics and what they do will always be judged. I'm not going to be so ignorant as to ask if you find thats some of his work was offensive because you've made your views quite clear, what I am going to say is that it is foolish to believe that they arent to someone else. You say you're defending yourself from insults, ever thought that the pics are seen as an insult to women? Showing woman as nothing more than objects to be used and discarded can be easily seen as insulting. You may not find it to be but others do, a lot of others do. Why not direct such wonderful talent in a different direction where you'll not be getting people's backs up, by choosing something less offensive you'd eliminate most of the people who dislike your current works and would gain more fans and appreciation. Edit: That quote may seem great but are saying that you'll defend hate speech? Cause that quote can be used for that just as much as for what we are talking about now.
|
|
|
Post by LS on Feb 17, 2008 12:25:58 GMT -5
I have to say, this whole issue has sparked a lot of debate. DA's enforcement of it's rules has been very lacking in some places and extreme in others. A lot of Levelord's work has been hanging around the line for a while. However, it was borderline. If it was that bad, it should've been deleted a long time ago. DA needs to work on it's rule enforcement instead of decimating someone's gallery that's been filled with work that has been around for a long time without complaint. Why not direct such wonderful talent in a different direction where you'll not be getting people's backs up, by choosing something less offensive you'd eliminate most of the people who dislike your current works and would gain more fans and appreciation. But by doing that you're alienating your current fanbase in an attempt to appeal to those that don't like your current work. You'd gain fans, but you'd also lose fans. It's impossible to find a happy medium where you have only supporters and no haters.
|
|
|
Post by KillerBebe Obeys Zita on Feb 17, 2008 12:28:57 GMT -5
De gustibus non est disputandum (There is no accounting for taste) and Saepe creat molles aspera spina rosas (Often the harsh thorns create tender roses)
The problem is as simple as what is art to one viewer is trash to the next viewer, depending on how one sees the world. Art should make you think and if it offends your senses then it worked, I have found nothing highly offensive with his work. There is eroticism with the one most bring up here is the “cream shot on conveyer belt,” but it is left up to the viewer to fill in the blanks of what happened. As we all have seen the episode “Odds Man In” we can assume that this was the inspiration for the above mentioned; now was she splashed with whipped cream from Drakkens’ factory or is the viewer (us) ejaculating onto Kim.
From a level of 1 to 10 we rate but most of us have a sliding scale, what may be a 4 or 5 to me and others can be a 8or a 9 to some and vice versa. I see objectifying when the image is hash and straight forward (women in dog collars and the such, or being abused.) and then there are some on the site that can not stand the slash threads or non canon pairings, must we give in and have a IMO a rather dull board.
In the same episode “Odds Man In” near the end Shego is knocked into the chocolate frosting bag and chocolate is released, are we going to now say that it was not chocolate but (use your imagination) and Shogo is being objectified by this now or also in the show every time Kim was splashed with water we (well you know.)
|
|
|
Post by The Legend that is KPCrusader on Feb 17, 2008 12:30:08 GMT -5
I have to say, this whole issue has sparked a lot of debate. DA's enforcement of it's rules has been very lacking in some places and extreme in others. A lot of Levelord's work has been hanging around the line for a while. However, it was borderline. If it was that bad, it should've been deleted a long time ago. DA needs to work on it's rule enforcement instead of decimating someone's gallery that's been filled with work that has been around for a long time without complaint. Why not direct such wonderful talent in a different direction where you'll not be getting people's backs up, by choosing something less offensive you'd eliminate most of the people who dislike your current works and would gain more fans and appreciation. But by doing that you're alienating your current fanbase in an attempt to appeal to those that don't like your current work. You'd gain fans, but you'd also lose fans. It's impossible to find a happy medium where you have only supporters and no haters. But choosing something that you know is controversial and can be found offensive isnt that smart. Yes you'd lose some of your current fans, but then were they fans because of your art or the fact that they were getting aroused? Your true fans would stay and with a less contraversial subject matter you'd be appealing to others who would normally be put off by your previous artwork.
|
|
|
Post by The Legend that is KPCrusader on Feb 17, 2008 12:32:55 GMT -5
De gustibus non est disputandum (There is no accounting for taste) and Saepe creat molles aspera spina rosas (Often the harsh thorns create tender roses) The problem is as simple as what is art to one viewer is trash to the next viewer, depending on how one sees the world. Art should make you think and if it offends your senses then it worked, I have found nothing highly offensive with his work. There is eroticism with the one most bring up here is the “cream shot on conveyer belt,” but it is left up to the viewer to fill in the blanks of what happened. As we all have seen the episode “Odds Man In” we can assume that this was the inspiration for the above mentioned; now was she splashed with whipped cream from Drakkens’ factory or is the viewer (us) ejaculating onto Kim. From a level of 1 to 10 we rate but most of us have a sliding scale, what may be a 4 or 5 to me and others can be a 8or a 9 to some and vice versa. I see objectifying when the image is hash and straight forward (women in dog collars and the such, or being abused.) and then there are some on the site that can not stand the slash threads or non canon pairings, must we give in and have a IMO a rather dull board. In the same episode “Odds Man In” near the end Shego is knocked into the chocolate frosting bag and chocolate is released, are we going to now say that it was not chocolate but (use your imagination) and Shogo is being objectified by this now or also in the show every time Kim was splashed with water we (well you know.) But the conveyer belt pic shows her with a ribbon, like a present that can be used, is that portraying her as an object?
|
|
|
Post by Tsaalyo Phoenix on Feb 17, 2008 12:36:49 GMT -5
Seeing as how several women enjoyed his work, no. It has nothing to do with insulting a gender, it has to do with a few prudes who read way too much into a simple picture, who claim to be against censorship while at the same time wanting sexual pictures to not exist.
Oh my god... wow. Ask Levelord if he thinks that's what women are for. That has absolutely NOTHING to do with his drawings. You've once again equated a woman wanting to be sexy for her man to women acting like sl*ts. Used and discarded? Are you serious?? I've never heard such a horrid exaggeration. I mean... wow.
I defend hate speech so far as to accept that people shouldn't be punished for having personal opinions - for just being themselves. However, I do not defend it when it enroaches on other people's rights and freedoms. It's a fine line, but it's there. Freedom of speech and freedom of expression is PARAMOUNT, end of story. Anything less is dictatorship.
|
|
|
Post by LS on Feb 17, 2008 12:37:00 GMT -5
I have to say, this whole issue has sparked a lot of debate. DA's enforcement of it's rules has been very lacking in some places and extreme in others. A lot of Levelord's work has been hanging around the line for a while. However, it was borderline. If it was that bad, it should've been deleted a long time ago. DA needs to work on it's rule enforcement instead of decimating someone's gallery that's been filled with work that has been around for a long time without complaint. But by doing that you're alienating your current fanbase in an attempt to appeal to those that don't like your current work. You'd gain fans, but you'd also lose fans. It's impossible to find a happy medium where you have only supporters and no haters. But choosing something that you know is controversial and can be found offensive isnt that smart. Depends. Controversy gets more attention, pulling in quite a few people that are appalled by it, yes, but also pulling in some people that like the work itself. Different people, different opinions. Some people watch it for the subject matter due to an artistic preference for the work, some watch it solely to get aroused. However, people don't tend to accept change that well. Indeed, suddenly switching your subject matter would turn away some of your current fans and some people who were aware of you before would be unwilling to support your art due to your reputation. Again, your previous artwork would still have a reputation. Potential supporters of the new artwork would be turned away because they don't want to be accused of supporting someone that was 'pervy' or 'disgusting'.
|
|
|
Post by Tsaalyo Phoenix on Feb 17, 2008 12:40:08 GMT -5
No, it's not. It portrays her as wanting to be sexy for her Ron, because it makes her feel good. Stop using this cliche "it makes women objects!", because it doesn't. If the majority of women felt this way, the world would be much much different. You're trying to say that all those women are bad, just for being themselves, and that all men are bad just for acting as is normal. No wonder Dr. Phil lives in a solid gold mansion.
|
|
|
Post by Tsaalyo Phoenix on Feb 17, 2008 12:46:42 GMT -5
I happen to be a fan of Levelord both for his talent and for his subject matter, as are the vast majority of his fans. The difference between you and I/the majority is that we are accepting of all art, while you want some artists shut down or forced to only depict things that you enjoy. I and my "kind" may be disgusting perverts in your eyes, but at least we're far more accepting of others than you.
|
|
|
Post by The Legend that is KPCrusader on Feb 17, 2008 12:47:08 GMT -5
Seeing as how several women enjoyed his work, no. It has nothing to do with insulting a gender, it has to do with a few prudes who read way too much into a simple picture, who claim to be against censorship while at the same time wanting sexual pictures to not exist. Oh my god... wow. Ask Levelord if he thinks that's what women are for. That has absolutely NOTHING to do with his drawings. You've once again equated a woman wanting to be sexy for her man to women acting like sl*ts. Used and discarded? Are you serious?? I've never heard such a horrid exaggeration. I mean... wow. I defend hate speech so far as to accept that people shouldn't be punished for having personal opinions - for just being themselves. However, I do not defend it when it enroaches on other people's rights and freedoms. It's a fine line, but it's there. Freedom of speech and freedom of expression is PARAMOUNT, end of story. Anything less is dictatorship. So now you're saying that that pic of KP with cream is for her man. We all know what was implied and to deny that is a blatant lie. The fact that you cant admit what is obviously implied shows your immaturity in debating this topic. You have just shown that you are neither debating nor defending anything, you've just shown that you are willing to ignore the obvious and are only looking for an arguement. At first I thought that you were really serious about your opinion and defending your views but your blatant disregard show that you're nothing more than blind and deaf to anyone elses opinion. How can you expect others to respect your view when you obviously dont respect anoyone whos views contradict your own. It is pointless arguing with you. If I'm wrong then tell us what is implied in the pic.
|
|
|
Post by The Legend that is KPCrusader on Feb 17, 2008 12:48:52 GMT -5
I happen to be a fan of Levelord both for his talent and for his subject matter, as are the vast majority of his fans. The difference between you and I/the majority is that we are accepting of all art, while you want some artists shut down or forced to only depict things that you enjoy. I and my "kind" may be disgusting perverts in your eyes, but at least we're far more accepting of others than you. Is the fact that you referring to yourself as the majority out of a need to feel that right or do you have proof? If so please show me the statistics.
|
|
|
Post by The Legend that is KPCrusader on Feb 17, 2008 12:50:42 GMT -5
No, it's not. It portrays her as wanting to be sexy for her Ron, because it makes her feel good. Stop using this cliche "it makes women objects!", because it doesn't. If the majority of women felt this way, the world would be much much different. You're trying to say that all those women are bad, just for being themselves, and that all men are bad just for acting as is normal. No wonder Dr. Phil lives in a solid gold mansion. Show me an instance where she has done this in the episode. I believe you brought up referring to episodes earlier. She isnt being sexy for her man and to say she is is a blatant lie.
|
|
|
Post by Tsaalyo Phoenix on Feb 17, 2008 12:52:34 GMT -5
Find them yourself by typing Kim Possible into dA's search and seeing what you get. If the majority opinion wasn't mine, there'd be no Levelord style pictures. There'd be no freedom and fetishes in the bedroom. There'd be no clothing or accessories to make women feel sexy and good about themselves, because they wouldn't want to wear that stuff to begin with. People don't draw stuff or create fashion lines because they have nothing better to do, they market for the majority demand as to make the most profits ot gain the most fame. Want a statistic? Look out the window, there's my proof.
|
|
|
Post by LS on Feb 17, 2008 12:55:52 GMT -5
Seeing as how several women enjoyed his work, no. It has nothing to do with insulting a gender, it has to do with a few prudes who read way too much into a simple picture, who claim to be against censorship while at the same time wanting sexual pictures to not exist. Oh my god... wow. Ask Levelord if he thinks that's what women are for. That has absolutely NOTHING to do with his drawings. You've once again equated a woman wanting to be sexy for her man to women acting like sl*ts. Used and discarded? Are you serious?? I've never heard such a horrid exaggeration. I mean... wow. I defend hate speech so far as to accept that people shouldn't be punished for having personal opinions - for just being themselves. However, I do not defend it when it enroaches on other people's rights and freedoms. It's a fine line, but it's there. Freedom of speech and freedom of expression is PARAMOUNT, end of story. Anything less is dictatorship. So now you're saying that that pic of KP with cream is for her man. We all know what was implied and to deny that is a blatant lie. The fact that you cant admit what is obviously implied shows your immaturity in debating this topic. How exactly is it a blatant lie? The interpretation of it, like any piece of artwork, is up to the viewer. What you have inferred is one of many possible interpretations. Indeed, considering the offense you seem to be taking from it, it's clear that you have taken an adult interpretation of it. There are far more innocent interpretations. This coming from someone who has moved from debating the issue of artwork to insulting someone's capability to develop a coherent argument? Virtually anything. There are no set interpretations to the picture. What you infer from it can be very different to what someone else infers from it.
|
|
|
Post by The Legend that is KPCrusader on Feb 17, 2008 13:03:52 GMT -5
So then say the majority of dA. DA doesnt not represent any majority other than for its member. Show statistics where not all the people involved are from one group. And as for people dont create fashion, do you know how stupid your arguement sounds. People in the real world want to emulate the people in magazines because they want that life. They see the perfect life in those magazines and they want it. They arent produced because people are demanding it. They were produced and marketed, celebs get endorsements to wear a product, people see said product on the celeb and want to be the celeb and thefore buy the product. Thats why people buy the clothes, because they are chasing dilusions, they want to be someone else and they start by trying to emulate what they wear. You've just showed your lack of research by referring to one group of people as the majority, when you have know proof. Saying go check dA for proof proves nothing. I could argue that that majority of white people are racist, dont believe me, go to a KKK meeting and see. Duh, once again when it comes down to an actual debate about whats true, and not about personal opinion, you are seriously lacking.
|
|
|
Post by The Legend that is KPCrusader on Feb 17, 2008 13:07:22 GMT -5
So now you're saying that that pic of KP with cream is for her man. We all know what was implied and to deny that is a blatant lie. The fact that you cant admit what is obviously implied shows your immaturity in debating this topic. How exactly is it a blatant lie? The interpretation of it, like any piece of artwork, is up to the viewer. What you have inferred is one of many possible interpretations. Indeed, considering the offense you seem to be taking from it, it's clear that you have taken an adult interpretation of it. There are far more innocent interpretations. This coming from someone who has moved from debating the issue of artwork to insulting someone's capability to develop a coherent argument? Virtually anything. There are no set interpretations to the picture. What you infer from it can be very different to what someone else infers from it. Innocent? That comment just shows how naive you are if you believe that. Anything implied? Do you seriously believe that? I dont have a dirty mind but I'm not ignorant to what was implied either. Hiding behind its the viewers interpretation when there clearly isnt anything else that could mean is shameful. Edit: This has never been a debate about artwork. A debate is two sides arguing a point they believe in. This aint a debate because one side is deaf to the other side. Coherent arguement? He isnt arguing, he is looking for a fight and I'm in no mood to waste my time with either of you as it is clear that stubborness and immaturity to debate an issue will win. This is my last post on this matter because quite clearly neither of you want to debate.
|
|
|
Post by Tsaalyo Phoenix on Feb 17, 2008 13:07:36 GMT -5
So you think people were all wearing the 1950's clothing, and then some fashion company said "Hey, wear this totally different thing!", and then everyone switched? No. Fashion is dictated by the BUYERS. Take a market research, entry, and distribution course, like the one I took last semester. I'm not even continuing this debate with you, you've said so many stupid things in that post it's not worth it. I'll wait for L7 to respond to my original post. Good day.
|
|