Las Vegas Orders Cover Up of Topless Mural Figures (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Alternative Lifestyles in the News



Message


whisperedsighs -> Las Vegas Orders Cover Up of Topless Mural Figures (1/5/2010 5:16:42 PM)

The New York Times Arts Page has done an article (http://artsbeat.blogs.nytimes.com/tag/erotic-heritage-museum/) about the Erotic Heritage Museum, located in Las Vegas, regarding their fight for our first amendment rights.  The photo included with the article is from houseofgord (http://www.houseofgord.com) exhibit at the Erotic Heritage Museum (http://www.eroticheritage.org/)
Thank you Erotic Heritage Museum for putting up the good fight!




TheHungryTiger -> RE: Las Vegas Orders Cover Up of Topless Mural Figures (1/5/2010 5:40:16 PM)

Well, according to http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2009/dec/30/it-still-art-pasties/ the bigger concern is that the nipples in question are on the OUTSIDE of the building.

Certainly once you get inside the building it becomes a whole different issue. But am I alone on thinking that 'What I do behind closed doors shouldn't be anyone elses business' is an argument that only works when its actualy behind closed doors and not shoved out there in public for any passer by to see?




whisperedsighs -> RE: Las Vegas Orders Cover Up of Topless Mural Figures (1/6/2010 2:37:17 PM)

I suppose that outdoor statues should have fig leaves covering the groin area? 




tazzygirl -> RE: Las Vegas Orders Cover Up of Topless Mural Figures (1/6/2010 3:12:04 PM)

Its not the naked body that is the objection... its the sexual connotation.

Why this is always an issue i dont understand. Just because i may enjoy a kink doesnt mean i have the right to force others to look upon that kink in public.




AquaticSub -> RE: Las Vegas Orders Cover Up of Topless Mural Figures (1/6/2010 3:36:09 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: whisperedsighs

I suppose that outdoor statues should have fig leaves covering the groin area? 


There is a difference between a nude statue and an erotic statue. While I'm sure someone has, I don't see a lot of guys hanging around the art musuems to buy books of classical art to wank over (except, of course, for the classical porn which is another matter entirely!). Considering this is an erotic hertiage musuem, I'd put my money that the mural was of an erotic nature and therefore the figures outside the musuem where anyone can see them should be covered.

The Holocaust musuem doesn't put the picture of all the shoes from the victims of the furnaces outside for much the same reason. Let people decide if they want to come in and see.




LafayetteLady -> RE: Las Vegas Orders Cover Up of Topless Mural Figures (1/6/2010 4:48:47 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: whisperedsighs

The New York Times Arts Page has done an article (http://artsbeat.blogs.nytimes.com/tag/erotic-heritage-museum/) about the Erotic Heritage Museum, located in Las Vegas, regarding their fight for our first amendment rights.  The photo included with the article is from houseofgord (http://www.houseofgord.com) exhibit at the Erotic Heritage Museum (http://www.eroticheritage.org/)
Thank you Erotic Heritage Museum for putting up the good fight!


"OUR" first amendment rights? Are you talking about all of us involved in the kink lifestyle or do you personally have some involvement with the artist and/or the museum?

The first amendment does not extend to the right to have sexual artwork on a public street. While I did not see any photo of the artwork in question, to compare it to the sculptures of the artists of past centuries is a bit of a stretch.

Someone can claim that a picture of a woman sitting on a port a john amidst a pile of excrement is "art." It doesn't mean I want to see it on a twenty foot billboard though.




TheHungryTiger -> RE: Las Vegas Orders Cover Up of Topless Mural Figures (1/6/2010 5:33:02 PM)

You can see a copy of the billboard in the link I posted. (Frankly I think its in rather bad form that the original article didn't show it in the first place, but rather tried to sensationalize it by showing a display from houseofgord instead.)

I know that art critics are going to absolutely rip me apart on my misuse of terms, so forgive me for having slept through most of my 'art appreciation' class in college. Calling the billboard art isnt that big a stretch. It strikes me as a kind of blend between Harlem Renaissance and neoimpressionist. Quite typical of the 'urban art' movement. In a way it sorta reminds me of Keith Haring.

That being said, its still a bloody billboard. If you paint a billboard that said 'drink pepsi' but you did it in the style of French Baroque, that wouldn't stop it from being an billboard. Trying to claim that rules about billboard advertising dont apply to them because its ~a~r~t~ just feels like the painters are being total self righteous pricks.

In the end, I just cant buy into the hysterical 'Dear god! The Constitution is being shredded!' panic attacks. This is anything but a battle of the lone brave freedom fighter standing up against the puritanical police state. But reporting 'city council debates technical difference between a billboard and a mural' just isnt as good a headline I guess.




AquaticSub -> RE: Las Vegas Orders Cover Up of Topless Mural Figures (1/6/2010 6:18:46 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHungryTiger

I know that art critics are going to absolutely rip me apart on my misuse of terms, so forgive me for having slept through most of my 'art appreciation' class in college. Calling the billboard art isnt that big a stretch. It strikes me as a kind of blend between Harlem Renaissance and neoimpressionist. Quite typical of the 'urban art' movement. In a way it sorta reminds me of Keith Haring.

That being said, its still a bloody billboard. If you paint a billboard that said 'drink pepsi' but you did it in the style of French Baroque, that wouldn't stop it from being an billboard. Trying to claim that rules about billboard advertising dont apply to them because its ~a~r~t~ just feels like the painters are being total self righteous pricks.


This artist agrees with you. The mural/billboard/whatever is positively gorgous and the pasties do take away from it. That's a pity. HOWEVER just cause it's art doesn't mean it should be displayed any ol' place. The musuem should have had the common sense to check the law (ya know that thing we are supposed to comply with in exchange for having our rights protected?) before having it done or simply had it done inside.

For goodness sake, I wouldn't display the infamous piss cross (yes it's real http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piss_Christ out on the street either).




TheHungryTiger -> RE: Las Vegas Orders Cover Up of Topless Mural Figures (1/6/2010 8:19:52 PM)

quote:

This artist agrees with you.


Well, since your the artist I guess you are stuck fielding the question then. Was neoimpressionist the correct term for that style of painting?




AquaticSub -> RE: Las Vegas Orders Cover Up of Topless Mural Figures (1/6/2010 8:26:51 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHungryTiger

quote:

This artist agrees with you.


Well, since your the artist I guess you are stuck fielding the question then. Was neoimpressionist the correct term for that style of painting?



Great... make me run off to google and admit I forget all the crap from the art history classes.

*ten seconds later* No, it doesn't look like. Neo-impressionist refers to painters like Seurat. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neo-impressionism


While I'm utterly failing at finding the artist the mural actually reminds me of, I think it has more in common with Henri Matisse than Seurat.




TheHungryTiger -> RE: Las Vegas Orders Cover Up of Topless Mural Figures (1/7/2010 4:44:12 AM)

After a small bit of googling, I think the term I was looking for was Neo-expressionism

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neo-expressionism




AquaticSub -> RE: Las Vegas Orders Cover Up of Topless Mural Figures (1/7/2010 5:53:38 AM)

That does look right. I was never very good at remembering the names for various periods and styles though I did get a few of them drummed in there. [:)]




AQuietSimpleMan -> RE: Las Vegas Orders Cover Up of Topless Mural Figures (1/7/2010 7:46:22 AM)

Having been to Vegas a few times I can say how utterly silly this whole thing is.
 
I remember walking down the strip many times and having non-english speaking people slap magazines (like newspaper inserts) and then hand them to every person walking by. When you looked at what they were it was filled with naked women (fully naked) and adverts for escorts.
 
So apparently Vegas is okay with pornography being handed out on the strip but against anything that could be considered erotic off the strip being presented as art.
 
Art is a funny thing however I once watched a performance art piece where a woman spent an hour making baloon animals and then inserting them in her vagina and anus. She ended the show by making a baloon animal dolphin and then putting half in her anus and half in her vagina then sitting on it till it popped and screamed into the audience "Save the Pourpi" The audience then erupted into applause and I was asked to leave for laughing so hard I almost couldn't breathe.
 
So the question remiains.... what exactly is art and who gets to decide legally?
 
As for this situation I think a big issue is being made of what was actually done. The Museam was actually helped greatly by the press. I bet you they will show record numbers of attendance for at least the next 4 or 5 months.
 
Controversy breeds interest.
 
QSM




xssve -> RE: Las Vegas Orders Cover Up of Topless Mural Figures (1/7/2010 8:57:38 AM)

On the other hand, Las Vegas has legalized male prostitution - I think the public vs private debate is a valid, if complicated one.




AQuietSimpleMan -> RE: Las Vegas Orders Cover Up of Topless Mural Figures (1/7/2010 9:08:56 AM)

No not Las Vegas. Prostitution is not legal of any kind in Las Vegas. It is however legal in Nevada Brothels such as Ely and Pharump. Lincon county also has a few legal cat houses but nothing in clark county is legal.
 
That is not so say that it doesn't happen.
 
QSM




Mercnbeth -> RE: Las Vegas Orders Cover Up of Topless Mural Figures (1/7/2010 9:13:41 AM)

Vegas is one of those quirky places that have no problem with nudity as long as it's PAID for, behind the doors of a club or entertainment venue.
Free expressions of female breast nudity in a club or "gasp" in public...hey, that might just have an affect on the almighty $$$$, so they'll be having none of that.
Men, feel free to walk around the streets with your tops off, though, because by virtue of being male nipples, YOUR nipples aren't something to be ashamed about...or something for someone else to make $$$ over.




LafayetteLady -> RE: Las Vegas Orders Cover Up of Topless Mural Figures (1/7/2010 11:19:46 AM)

FR-


I don't think that anyone (here anyway) is going to dispute whether it is art or not. The dispute is where it is appropriate to display. When someone hands out pamphlets showing nudity or advertising escorts, they can pick and choose who they hand it to. I'm sure if a nun walked by, they weren't going to press it into her hands. When it is on a public display, however, there is no way for anyone who might not want to see it to avoid it (sure they can avoid it in the future once they know it is there, but before?).

I'm sure the performance art piece wasn't on a public street, and I will admit that the whole "performance" sounds a bit ridiculous to me and I would have been asked to leave right along side you QSM.

beth,

Honestly, I don't care to see men walking down the street without their shirts on either. Yes it is all the human body and natural, and maybe people look a lot better in your area, but around here, the men who tend to walk around without shirts, or wear speedos to the beach are just not pleasant viewing. Hair shirts are not nice to look at.




Mercnbeth -> RE: Las Vegas Orders Cover Up of Topless Mural Figures (1/7/2010 12:03:50 PM)

quote:

beth,

Honestly, I don't care to see men walking down the street without their shirts on either. Yes it is all the human body and natural, and maybe people look a lot better in your area, but around here, the men who tend to walk around without shirts, or wear speedos to the beach are just not pleasant viewing. Hair shirts are not nice to look at.


and on that, Dear Lady, we will have to disagree.  this slave finds hairy chests and abs on a man absolutely HOT and incredibly sexy.  as a matter of fact, this slave finds them much more appealling and would rather look at hairy men's chests (hair shirts) than a naked woman's hairless chest, all day any day.
 
seeing David Beckham's hairless tatooe'd chest displayed as large as a movie poster on the wall as He was wearing nothing else than a pair of tightie whities while strolling through the airport wasn't attractive to this slave either...but it isn't about what we personally find attractive...it's what we as a group find socially acceptable.
 
it's the blatant gender-bent nipple discrimination that gets to this slave, that's all.[:)]




LafayetteLady -> RE: Las Vegas Orders Cover Up of Topless Mural Figures (1/7/2010 4:39:08 PM)

beth,

I, too like a man with some hair on his chest. However, I'm talking about bigfoot amounts that can be cornrowed with beads. Oh yea, and the abs they have.....well, let's just say that gravity has struck and those "abs" are covering the whole front of that evil speedo. I just don't think you would enjoy the site I'm thinking of.

While I do love a well built man, I'm a "butt girl" myself and just love watching a guy's nice tight ass in a good pair of pants. Other than that, I honestly will check out his smile first. I have this thing about a nice smile.

I think that perhaps Disney World has the right idea. No one, male or female is permitted to be topless there. I assume it is the same for Disney Land in California, but I've never been there.

I can't disagree that it is gender discrimination that only men's nipples can be seen, but after visiting the people of Walmart web page, I'm convinced that instead of allowing women to show theirs, we should ask men to cover theirs.




MissAnimus -> RE: Las Vegas Orders Cover Up of Topless Mural Figures (1/7/2010 7:37:11 PM)

Oddly enough I think the pasties make the whole thing look 20 times more vulgar (not that I had a problem with it to begin with).




Page: [1] 2   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2024
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.0234375