Are bare breasts nudity?

2004-08-03 [jobby]: bbbrreeaaastttssss

2005-09-29 [Mr_McEwan]: Breasts are used in art, so I don't see why people can't have them on this site. I mean, this site was created for artists and writers to get in contact with each other, if some cunts use this site to get totty, then so be it.

2005-09-29 [Veltzeh]: Typos: arose, discussing, applies, women's

2005-09-29 [jobby]: I LOVE BREASTS. BREASTS ARE NICE! I WANT TO MIME

2005-09-29 [Grengo]: I say C, but damn is this the most random poll I've ever seen 0_o

2005-09-29 [◊◊!RoWaN!◊◊]: if there used in art then thats fine gut theres no point in putting pics of them up 4 no reason

2005-09-29 [--------------- ---]: as long as its used as art, i cant see the problem people have with it..this place is still for the art..

2005-09-29 [Angels Of San-Angelus]: Personally...i couldn't care where or when there used....people are always bangin' on about how the body is a wonderful thing and then they moan when it's exposed!

2005-09-29 [Angelic nightmares]: *agress with [◊◊!RoWaN!◊◊] and [--------------- ---]* If used in drawings/art then breasts are fine. Just as long as people aren't putting pictures of their bare breasts up.

2005-09-29 [Mom]: Breast are art???BULL!!! Artist use them in art....the girls here aren't artist.Cyber bait is a better name.

2005-09-29 [Black cherry]: artistic photography, drawings, paintings and any other form of art. lol something tells me there are more artists around this place than i first thought! I'm glad we're having this debate. Nothing against breasts, but ive noticed the sudden increase in younger users on elftown lately. it isnt right for bare breasts to be exposed around the place like it's porn. i suppose you could argue with that statement about art, but there is definitely a defined line between porn and art.

2005-09-29 [Shin-Akuma]: well... frankly.. who cares? Breasts are breasts... part of the human body, and originally not intended for something sexual, unlike genials.. So let the people who want their breasts displayed, display them

2005-09-29 [Vesthrix]: I think its not so much a question of whether or not they count as art, but whether people using the site mind seeing them.

2005-09-29 [.+*Visions of Falling Stars*+.]: It should be up to the person displaying them, don't you think? People should be given a choice of wether they want to display them or not. On the other hand, yes I can see how under-aged girls displaying theirs on their house could be an issue. Solution - Any under-aged bare breasts should be deleted (Use the age of concent for each nationality, as if 16 year old British girls want to bare all, they should be allowed). Personally, I don't see anything else a problem. Genitals shouldn't be revealed though... Thats just icky. If you're going to ban all boobs from being shown though, you may as well have a debate on every aspect of revealing breasts - Public breast feeding, for example.

2005-09-29 [Jeed]: there isnt a man alive who doesnt like to look at breasts. as i see it, if its for artistic purposes, let em bare em all. they are hard to draw(correctly), so to see a good pair would be helpful in alot of ways(how to layer clothing over them, shadowing and such)

2005-09-29 [L?se]: Some part of me says that the majority of the people who voted: "No, it's perfectly normal.." are male. I could be mistaken ofcourse ^^

2005-09-29 [Beneath The Howling Stars6664]: i think there should be a warning at the top of houses like the artistic nudity ones, they save me alot fo trouble if my mum comes in teh room XD

2005-09-29 [Angels Of San-Angelus]: and so what if that is true...it's up to people if they wanna go round showing off there boobs it's up to them!!

2005-09-29 [spincrus]: I think I know the reason of this poll >:( It's because of that one particular person...  And I think genitalia is also perfectly fine, as long as it doesn't cross the thin line to be considered Porn.

2005-09-29 [geekinpink]: They're half-nudity. Don't ban, but definitely require a warning on top of a personal page.

2005-09-29 [Lyndarsia]: I don't think breasts or genitalia is alright at all. There are children on Elftown too. There shouldn't be any nudity about. But, if that doesn't happen...all houses should at least have that Nudity warning at the top of the page.

2005-09-29 [Lord Kügenheim]: I thought I was in Elfpack when I saw that warning XD. I think we should have a special section that you can only get on when you're old enough, Perhaps a passworded wiki page or something. We could use it for all the Artistic Nudity and stuff.

2005-09-29 [peacefrog]: There is nothing inherantly bad about any nudity. Although I think this is not a good place for kids, I also think that children should not be "protected" from nudity.

2005-09-29 [Michael Asher]: are tehy serious? fuck yah mayn this site rocks lol

2005-09-29 [Izzles]: Hey... I'm a girl. I think it's perfectly natural and normal to allow breasts to be on show. I mean, most people breast fed when they were a baby. It's part of the human anatomy, and the human body is an incredibly beautiful thing, no matter what shape. So yeah, boobs are natural. And normal. I mean, you dont point at women in the street and shriek SHE'S GOT BOOBIES do you? If you do, and are over the age of 4, please, seek help immediately..

2005-09-29 [ftw2007]: hey you know what i tell this to all the girls that got good breasts or anything else for that matter "if you got it, flaunt it"

2005-09-29 [Angels Of San-Angelus]: a person after my own heart on that remark!

2005-09-29 [Rondel]: I'm torn as to how to answer this. My views tend to be coloured by the fact that while I consider the human body to be a natural thing, & a very suitable one for artistic display, I'm also aware that exposure of the human body's "taboo parts" (which vary from one civilization to another) causes risk, because of the behaviour of people who view such exposure as innately sexual. As such, exposure of the bodies of the underaged is, IMHO, inappropriate for this site -- but I'm also tired of seeing bodies exposed for non-artistic reasons. For that matter, why does "big breasted" list on "body shape" in personal descriptions -- why is that even PART of the bio information solicited here?

2005-09-29 [psychoflea]: ok, on this subject, if it is art, then i'm cool with it. But i can see how perverts will try to take advantage of it and put porn on here. Hey, if women are willing to show there brest on the internet, let them. We live in a world that should have the right to show them... but for the people that are to younge to see nudity, I would sugject some kind of switch so that they can't see the nudity profiles.

2005-09-29 [zip]: Whats wrong with children seeing nudity? If any child is really going to be shocked by seeing a breast then they need some psychological help.

2005-09-29 [Angels Of San-Angelus]: Quite true!

2005-09-29 [Angels Of San-Angelus]: They might have a giggle but if they need to be "protected" then there's somin' wrong with them!

2005-09-29 [Rondel]: I think THAT is part of the problem - it encourages people to view the site as a way to get connected with others for cybersex purposes, & that in turn promotes the exposure of bodies for non-artistic purposes. I'm starting to think that Elftown needs a way to verify ages, with some parts of the site accessible ONLY to those whose ages have been verified as being above the legal minimum for all relevant laws -- & nude/"revealing" imagery should be confined to that section. Forum-locks are useful, but not up to doing this job. In the meantime, warnings would make it easier for people to decide what they wish to view - but they need to be specific, *&* distinguish between drawings & photos.

2005-09-29 [zip]: And despite what some of the female members may think, The reason I think it should be allowed is not because I'm male and want to see some boobies, if I want that I'll download some DVD rips.

2005-09-29 [XxHelp_lessxX]: nudity is a part of life and many kids see nudity every day i do not find a problem with nudity as long as it is used maturely. 

2005-09-29 [Angels Of San-Angelus]: I yet again agree with Zip....if i wanted porn i'd get it from a porn site!

2005-09-29 [DeleriumJ]: and do, on a regular basis

2005-09-29 [Rondel]: I'd prefer to see them distinguish between nude artwork and random revealing pictures, as well. I'm perfectly happy to see nude art, and don't think children need to be protected from THAT -- but I think that the prevalence of non-art-oriented revealing photos, particularly of adolescents, HAS become a real problem here on Elftown. So, why don't we lose the bio elements that are more suited to a dating site, and focus on how to let this art-related community site be both art-related, AND friendly to community members of all ages and comfort levels? Maybe putting a content rating (better than an age rating, IMHO) on all image tags, specifying whether an image is artwork, nude, photo, etc.?

2005-09-29 [T_Pop]: true... we should do something about underaged users from seeing it... we at least have an obligation to try to limit the amout thay see... the true problem with children seeing nudity is that even if its something small it slowly leads to bigger things. first breasts then thay get curios. soon thay will either be haveing sex or be getting close to it... thats why we should at least try to limit it you know?

2005-09-29 [Angels Of San-Angelus]: That's a load of shite....you havn't a clue what you are on about....just cos kids look at pron dosn't mean next month there makin' babies....and whoever says so is as stupid as you!

2005-09-29 [zip]: T_pop I hardly think the sight of a breast is going to drive a poor innocent child into having sex, there is nothing sexual about breasts except that normally they are covered up, so they have BECOME something sexual. I agree with rondel on the content rating as opposed to age rating, I'd like to know if there are going to be nude photographs/art on a house if I'm at a public library or my parents are around.

2005-09-29 [T_Pop]: tell me then... have you had sex? and how old where you when you first started to see porn???

2005-09-29 [thoughtfox]: hmm... us south africans tend to be hypocrites when it comes to this. Breasts are considered pornographic, but you often find cultural photos of topless women. Does the fact that it's cultural make it not pornographic? As an ordinary Western guy, i'd have to say no. Not as bad as genitals, but bad.

2005-09-29 [Angels Of San-Angelus]: T_pop you prick....you have no idea so shut the fuck up.....i'm 14 and i do watch pron.....i was watching pron sinse i was 12....i'm nealy 15 now and i'm still a virgin!!

2005-09-29 [zip]: I have refrained from sex so far, and I saw the occasional playboy calender at about the age of 5. But I had certainly seen nudity in real life before that and frequently.

2005-09-29 [Vesthrix]: A) Information is not something that it is good to control. B) The only thing making nudity wrong is that it is concidered wrong. If we, as a sociaty stop concidering it wrong then we wont have this problem.

2005-09-29 [Angels Of San-Angelus]: here ye

2005-09-29 [T_Pop]: no we will have other poblems...

2005-09-29 [Angels Of San-Angelus]: Go away T_pop...face it...your wrong cos we have the evidence....it's not wrong at all...children don't start having sex cos they see porn!

2005-09-29 [Tears of the Dead Star]: I think there happens to be the occasional artist who draws their character showing their breasts, in such a way that it is not in a pornagraphic way, but then there are a lot of people who show their own breasts, and they ARE doing it as a sexual "flaunt" in which case, is wrong. We've got children on here as well, and I think that for at least us older people we need to keep that stuff out of here so that they don't think that the only way to be cool, is if you show your boobies. That's just my opinion

2005-09-29 [Angels Of San-Angelus]: What if you havn't got any lol...all the lads would be uncool...another stupid idea!

2005-09-29 [Angels Of San-Angelus]: I know what you mean but it just wouldn't happen!

2005-09-29 [zip]: The issue here isn't porn though, it's nudity and while there is a difference, neither one is going to cause a child to have sex earlier than the would have otherwise. When we use "child" or "underage", exactly what are we referring to anyway?

2005-09-29 [T_Pop]: think... mankind is a curios race... we prefer to learn as much as we can about things that we are either not ready for or things that are not truely good for us... if God wants us to learn about sex when we are young then why didnt he just do that to begin with??... it is called adaltry to look at some one with lustful intentions... to simply say that it is ok to see what you want to see and expect no consiquenses then that is just plain stupidity... tell me do you have the same mind set now tword women that you did back then??

2005-09-29 [Angels Of San-Angelus]: There thinkin' of kids of 4 or 5....it wouldn't bother them....they prolly wouldn't know what it was nor would they care!!!

2005-09-29 [Angels Of San-Angelus]: Not at all...if i see a good lookin' lass then of course i'll comment on her ECT.....but all that is is my age.....a kid wouldn't see someone any differently if he'd seen a pair of jugs!!

2005-09-29 [zip]: T_pop, most people are aware of sex by the time they are 6 years old, most of us just don't get around to doing it until our bodies are mature enough(about 13 years+). And it's not adultery to look at someone with lustfull intentions, adultery is having sex with a person other than your significant other.

2005-09-29 [Angels Of San-Angelus]: Zip is the only other sane guy here...i'm with zip!

2005-09-29 [T_Pop]: ok... if you want i can give you a bible verse that will prove that looking at a women with lustful intentions is adoltry, but the maner is that 13 years olds haveing sex is not a good thing... i know that a 4 or 5 year old probiboly wouldnt know what thay are looking at but an 8+ year old would know... these are the people we should try to keep from seeing pornagraghic images... now when thay get to 18 then we have no obligation to them but those that are under we do... see? im not saying we should try to compleatly ban it for i know thats imposible but we should at least try to limit it right? with out a limitation then other things tend to push there way in...

2005-09-29 [windae]: nude art fine.... but just random pics of girls breast its just not the place for it... there's plenty of that already

2005-09-29 [Angels Of San-Angelus]: NOBODY GIVES A SHIT ABOUT THE BIBLE!!!!

2005-09-29 [T_Pop]: agread

2005-09-29 [rockntori]: what a friggin surprise...the bible got dragged into this....cant anything somewhat controversial be brought up without someone reading from the bible!?! everyone is sick of it.....i believe in god very much so...but im not gonna tell people how to live because of it!

2005-09-29 [Vesthrix]: T_Pop, ET is not a theocracy (sorry about the spelling). Arguments based on god can not be used to determine policy.

2005-09-29 [T_Pop]: *sigh* look if no one gives a shit about the bible then why are there cristions???

2005-09-29 [Angels Of San-Angelus]: SO UP YOURS!!