What's going on with Lit Art?

[LargoKitt]

Maybe time for a long term fantasy of mine. I've always wanted to have a totally abstract art show; but on those intriguing little cards next to the picture...a very raunchy title: "Dripping organ plunges into hot spot", "Tongue on magic bead", "Wedding night exhaustion", "Mouth & spurt" "Twisting in ecstasy." Perhaps we could do that here. Submit a story with that theme and include half a dozen abstracts from the show. Don't cheat. Image can't even be hidden sauciness. Maybe one obscure element that might prompt the question: "Is that his...?"

 

[KimAwakened]

And then you'll get the site owners banning ANY kind of artwork on the grounds that, "yes, it might just be his..."

 

[ThievesLikeUs]

I am sure that there must be a politically based forum somewhere on Lit, please don't use this platforms policy change in order to push your pathetic anti-Trump rhetoric on here.

There is and this is what started this. Not from the aforementioned “right” but a petty, pious, and self righteous admitted leftist.

Started a whole crusade against nudes on the Political thread and the owners/ mods had no choice.

 

[GeppettoNoir]

This is the result of the same movement that spurred payment processors to attack Steam and Itch for NSFW games--and I don't mean Collective Shout.

There is a heavy push to control information from developing minds and it's hiding behind a facade of "protect the kids" as if you haven't been able to access unlimited adult content for 20 years by simply clicking an "accept" button.

It's also related to the Adult Entertainment Industry's struggle against AI and the rise of independent and personalized adult content.

Expect new laws and more hoops to jump through.

 

[manchesterred]

I wonder if they intend to take down my existing nudes. Something screwy here. Erotic art is an ancient form of erotica. Is it that A.I. created images might be 'learned' from real human beings who don't wish to be depicted 'en desabille'? And it's almost impossible to prove, "This art was created in my studio with a fully consenting, of age, model" and/or "This nude performing fellatio was created entirely from my imagination (but as realistically as possible.)"

Separate question: If we post links in a forum like this to a website with nude content, are we going to be censured or redacted?

I live in the UK - it's worse than China now here

 

[ThatIrishGirl]

I live in the UK - it's worse than China now here

You think pushing through age verification to stop children accessing porn makes the UK worse than China?

 

[Reenigam]

You think pushing through age verification to stop children accessing porn makes the UK worse than China?

You miss the point. The thing is wholly inconsistent. When does wretched, dastardly, child-corrupting 'porn' become praiseworthy, oh-so-virtuoso, sought-after 'art'? Tell us all that. Where's the dividing line?

Answer: there is none.

On your basis, children would be accessing porn by being taken into the National Gallery or the Royal Academy.

Oh look, here's another piece of prime porn nudity:

View attachment 2564648

 

[ThatIrishGirl]

From someone who works in child protection for a living, your argument really is a poor one and painfully one sided. I to have had many photos removed here from photosets I've provided for authors. It sucks but I 100% understand why any website won't stick their neck out.
A site like lit won't have the finances to moderate every photo posted and it seems they just took the all or nothing approach. It's also very easy to post photos via photo hosting sites. For some it's easier to complain rather than try something new

 

[Celticlight]

From someone who works in child protection for a living, your argument really is a poor one and painfully one sided. I to have had many photos removed here from photosets I've provided for authors. It sucks but I 100% understand why any website won't stick their neck out.
A site like lit won't have the finances to moderate every photo posted and it seems they just took the all or nothing approach. It's also very easy to post photos via photo hosting sites. For some it's easier to complain rather than try something new

I agree. The line probably will be inconsistent; I think that’s basically inevitable. But for my part I think it’s important that they have one. If that means some sites choose between to show less rather than more, then I fully understand that. And if anyone wants an absolute free-for-all, I’m sure there are sites behind the age verification divide that can cater to you. The notion of 18+ content isn’t being censored out of existence, it’s just up on the top shelf.

It's annoying and hasslesome - for each of us, let alone for sites like this. And yes, a vanishing amount of things simply won’t exist because of the deterrent effect it causes (whether those things would qualify as art… well I guess we will literally never know). But ultimately it's a small price for a broader goal.

Definitely straying towards the politics thread now though, so I’ll leave it there!

 

[Reenigam]

From someone who works in child protection for a living, your argument really is a poor one and painfully one sided. I to have had many photos removed here from photosets I've provided for authors. It sucks but I 100% understand why any website won't stick their neck out.
A site like lit won't have the finances to moderate every photo posted and it seems they just took the all or nothing approach. It's also very easy to post photos via photo hosting sites. For some it's easier to complain rather than try something new

Couldn't agree less. You leave the question unanswered because you know it is unanswerable.

And to try to somehow assume the moral high ground on account of your alleged work is virtually an admission of paucity of argument.

So you work in child protection, do you? Well, that places a greater burden of duty upon you than most - and obviously, we can assume you will follow your sense of duty through to the logical end point of the case you were making...

... and the next time you go to "work", you will clearly be contacting the appropriate authorities concerning the outrageous, criminal activities of all those art galleries, museums and private collectors. I mean: what is the world coming to, allowing minors to access porn in that way?

We wait to hear your news with bated breath...

 

[desperado1089]

@Reenigam is, for those who cannot tell, intentionally and artificially inflating the absurdity of the hypothetical situations they are presenting in order to illustrate a point in which the absurdity of the laws in multiple jurisdictions and countries prompting this change in Literotica rules is, not to put too fine a point on it, laid bare.

 

[Reenigam]

Indeed. Slegehammer irony rules, ok.
Sometimes it seems only this will get through.. .

 

[ThatIrishGirl]

Couldn't agree less. You leave the question unanswered because you know it is unanswerable.

And to try to somehow assume the moral high ground on account of your alleged work is virtually an admission of paucity of argument.

So you work in child protection, do you? Well, that places a greater burden of duty upon you than most - and obviously, we can assume you will follow your sense of duty through to the logical end point of the case you were making...

... and the next time you go to "work", you will clearly be contacting the appropriate authorities concerning the outrageous, criminal activities of all those art galleries, museums and private collectors. I mean: what is the world coming to, allowing minors to access porn in that way?

We wait to hear your news with bated breath...

Alas the mind of of stubborn can never be changed or altered. Ones first mistake is trying to do so and that is on me, you are completely entitled to your view, however blinkered it may be. This is the internet and you do seem a little flustered over what could have been a good discussion. On that note

 

[Reenigam]

Indeed. Slegehammer irony rules, ok.
Sometimes it seems only this will get through.. .

But obviously it didn't...

 

[gsnowpainter]

I haven't heard of any recent pushes from DC in that direction.

So, just anti-Trump paranoia?
Or it it being driven by anti trafficking groups?
Or promoting a unpopular agenda to incite anti-Trump feelings?
I do recall when a feminist democrat had Playboy magazine removed from military PXs in the '80s.

Risking banishment here...but to make this stance even more ludicrous or hypocritical... at the bottom of story pages, some of the photos for "X is online now" models show them topless. The website doesn't ban those.

Finally banning drawings of fictional characters seems overboard.

I seem to recall a lame explnanation that sexplicit art was being banned because of complaints that, with the pages of illustration opnened, some peiple might get caught looking at them and suffer embarrassment. Who would have thought that on a site full of sexually explicit writing ? You can write about it, think about it, but please, no actual images.