Re: Are fine artworks in European museums deemed NSFW by forum rules?
For reasons that you have succinctly described from your own viewpoint, I really do not understand the “NSFW” rule. Rules are supposed to be understandable to the ordinary intelligent person. I believe that I meet or exceed that description; and yet, I seem unable to use my usual mind-reading powers to guess what a moderator will declare “Not Safe For Work”, vague as the term is.
I don't suppose it ever occurred to you to simply ask what is and isn't appropriate, as I did when attempting to determine whether my contest entry was acceptable.You are unfair to “Western society”. It is a Christian issue, and most of all an issue of the persistent influences of certain denominations of Christianity—not a Western cultural issue.
When I said "Western society", you know perfectly well that I meant current Western society, which I'm well aware has been negatively influenced by religious conservatives. You can spare me the art history lesson.You probably disagree with me about many things; for example, I infer that you would hate this post of mine and its followup. (← ⚠ WARNING: Links contain artistic nudity—i.e., a nude statue of Napoleon’s sister as Venus Victrix—and are likely offensive to Foxpup!)
I'm only offended by your apparent confusion about how drag performance works: Conchita Wurst is not a man in a dress; she is a fictional bearded lady, who is played by a man in a dress (Thomas Neuwirth) - and the dress itself is merely a stage costume. It just makes it really hard to take you seriously when you start conflating actors with the roles they play. 