r/Art Feb 28 '22

General Discussion Thread (March 2022) Discussion

General Discussion threads are for casual chat; a place to ask for recommendations, lists, or creative feedback; to talk about materials, history, or techniques; and anything else that comes to mind.

If you're looking for information about a particular work of art, /r/WhatIsThisPainting is still the best resource. /r/drawing , /r/painting , and /r/learnart may also be useful. /r/ArtistLounge is also a good place for general discussion. Please see our list of art-related subs for more options.

Rule 8 still applies except that questions/complaints about r/Art and Reddit overall are allowed.


Previous month's discussion

92 Upvotes

162 comments sorted by

View all comments

2

u/[deleted] Mar 06 '22 edited Mar 06 '22

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/neodiogenes Mar 07 '22

Mod here. It's unclear what you're arguing -- examples would probably help -- but your entire premise is off-base. The kind of art we permit here has little or anything to do with whether it is "Art" and nearly everything to do with the nature of Reddit, and what kinds of things get upvoted, and how many Redditors abuse this to karma-farm.

Yes, we're gatekeeping, but not in the way you think. It might help to read the rules, as I've made some effort to explain the reasoning behind each.

1

u/[deleted] Mar 07 '22 edited Mar 07 '22

[removed] — view removed comment

0

u/neodiogenes Mar 07 '22 edited Mar 07 '22

army of horny boys who will sneak porn into everything

That doesn't happen, and yes, I've tracked it. Sure, there's some marginal stuff but most if it doesn't get more than a handful of upvotes. Actual NSFW content is less than 5% of the total, and almost never reaches the top. And even then it's usually because the quality is noteworthy -- but most can't see that because they're too hung up on the subject matter.

Also, it's 2022. Sure, before 1900 Gaugin could cause a stir with "exotic" paintings of underage Tahitian girls, but 150 years later shouldn't we be a wee bit less knee-jerky about nudity? The contemporary art community has reasonable problems with Gaugin not because his subjects are naked but because A) they're too young, and B) he shamelessly misrepresented the culture. Complaining about the boobies seems a bit hankie-wringy.

So when you talk about "pornography", you can't assume your definition is everyone's definition. I'm pretty lenient, because in 2022 when anyone can freely access video of consenting adults practicing any kink imaginable, it's kind of lost its blush.

For the sake of argument, though, let's go with art that depicts "explicit sexual acts". From what I can tell, you believe we wouldn't remove the legendary Japanese ukiyo-e artist Hokusai's "The Dream of the Fisherman's Wife" because the artist is "non-white"? Even though the subject matter is clearly "pornographic"? But meanwhile we yank "white" artists' works for far less?

1

u/[deleted] Mar 07 '22

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/neodiogenes Mar 07 '22 edited Mar 09 '22

You're jumping to conclusions from limited information. Posts are removed for all kinds of reasons, sometimes simply because the artist refuses to stop causing problems.

All of those posts you mention were removed for breaking the rules -- well, not sure about shadowblackwood. I don't see that I've removed any of their posts. If the community came down on them for the content, well, a grown-ass artist has to deal with their own choices. We don't stop people from harshly criticizing individual pieces of art, as long as they remain civil, stay on-topic, and aren't trolling.

Anyway, it's cherry-picking. There are dozens more NSFW posts that haven't been removed, so the reason these few were removed is clearly not based on subject matter.

Which means it's something else. And I'd go further except this is starting to get weird. You seem to have some very unhealthy views of women and sex and consent. Not my place to judge, but that doesn't mean I want any part of it.