I don’t necessarily see why it should be illegal- but in regards to the poster’s position, that those who draw it are fucked up- yeah, I think I’d have to agree.
Either they’re fucked up, or I suppose the money (from fucked up people) is good. TBH there’s also a sliding scale, or spectrum of this sort of content wherein at some point- if someone is still into it all- they’re decidedly seriously fucked up and not in a good or particularly acceptable way.
The mental state of those drawing such images is certainly questionable. However, OP clearly believes that it should not be legal:
“Oh, it’s legal if it’s 2D rite?” Like, no!
It is said to be illegal because these drawings may contain necrophilia, among other things. Based on this, he denies that something like this can have any artistic value or that it can be art at all.
Judging what is art and what is not plus whether such drawings should be legal or illegal based on the personal moral judgments of this person is not something I could agree with. This person could refer to any religious scripture exactly, whether it is art or not or whether it should be legal or not, it would be no different.
The posters position is not “It is disgusting, those people are fucked up”, but rather " It is disgusting, those people are fucked up, it should be illegal and it is not art at all. Why? Because it is my moral judgment"
I’m sorry. Porn drawings of necrophilia, pedophilia, and so on have no artistic value. These are not some 17th century large canvas oil paintings depicting a metaphoric analysis of a historic or religious event. It’s fetish art. Made for the purpose of being fetish art. So that people can jerk off to corpses.
There is no such thing as “degenerate art” but there is a limit to art. There is zero artistic value to random digital drawings showing this garbage.
Moral judgements of large groups of people have value. That’s the entire point of societal morality and why it exists.
At what point does art become exploitative or abhorrent? You can’t have an anything goes attitude, absolute free expression is impossible, or then you allow people to take pedophilic pictures of children and attempt pass them off as art. So where’s the line?
This is about anime drawings with a necrophilic context. This isn’t about pedophilia at all, so put your straw man back in its place. As such, I will ignore any reference you make to it because it has nothing to do with the topic.
You haven’t given me any reason why goru can’t be art. Except that you don’t like it and people masturbate to it. Is the latter enough of a reason for it not to be art? Would it be art if people wouldn’t masturbate to it? Is it because it is in the anime art style?
Is the the cover from Cannibal Corpse album Tomb of the Mutilated art or not art or does it depend if someone masturbates to it? I was told that it was not art because it would offend the sense of shame and was morally wrong (long time ago it really happened). Why shouldn’t fetish art be art? The art in fetish art stands for what?
Moral judgments of a large group have to be taken into account. But you do realize that moral judgments on a certain topic vary completely depending on the cultural context? Morality as a basis for what is or is not art is an absolutely wrong point of view. You could just as easily say that it is not art because it is haram. It has the same meaning.
Morality is always changing, is subject to regional and cultural differences and is above all one thing: class morality.
While I cant tell you, where the line should be, what is art or not - For this I need to delve much deeper into this topic to be able to tell you where the line lies. But it definitly shouldnt be decides by morality. Just think what was moral wrong 100 years ago. Or even 600 years ago.
You haven’t mentioned it, but I would like to emphasize once again that it would be wrong to declare something illegal based on it.
I don’t necessarily see why it should be illegal- but in regards to the poster’s position, that those who draw it are fucked up- yeah, I think I’d have to agree.
Either they’re fucked up, or I suppose the money (from fucked up people) is good. TBH there’s also a sliding scale, or spectrum of this sort of content wherein at some point- if someone is still into it all- they’re decidedly seriously fucked up and not in a good or particularly acceptable way.
The mental state of those drawing such images is certainly questionable. However, OP clearly believes that it should not be legal:
It is said to be illegal because these drawings may contain necrophilia, among other things. Based on this, he denies that something like this can have any artistic value or that it can be art at all.
Judging what is art and what is not plus whether such drawings should be legal or illegal based on the personal moral judgments of this person is not something I could agree with. This person could refer to any religious scripture exactly, whether it is art or not or whether it should be legal or not, it would be no different.
The posters position is not “It is disgusting, those people are fucked up”, but rather " It is disgusting, those people are fucked up, it should be illegal and it is not art at all. Why? Because it is my moral judgment"
I’m sorry. Porn drawings of necrophilia, pedophilia, and so on have no artistic value. These are not some 17th century large canvas oil paintings depicting a metaphoric analysis of a historic or religious event. It’s fetish art. Made for the purpose of being fetish art. So that people can jerk off to corpses.
There is no such thing as “degenerate art” but there is a limit to art. There is zero artistic value to random digital drawings showing this garbage.
Moral judgements of large groups of people have value. That’s the entire point of societal morality and why it exists.
At what point does art become exploitative or abhorrent? You can’t have an anything goes attitude, absolute free expression is impossible, or then you allow people to take pedophilic pictures of children and attempt pass them off as art. So where’s the line?
This is about anime drawings with a necrophilic context. This isn’t about pedophilia at all, so put your straw man back in its place. As such, I will ignore any reference you make to it because it has nothing to do with the topic.
You haven’t given me any reason why goru can’t be art. Except that you don’t like it and people masturbate to it. Is the latter enough of a reason for it not to be art? Would it be art if people wouldn’t masturbate to it? Is it because it is in the anime art style?
Is the the cover from Cannibal Corpse album Tomb of the Mutilated art or not art or does it depend if someone masturbates to it? I was told that it was not art because it would offend the sense of shame and was morally wrong (long time ago it really happened). Why shouldn’t fetish art be art? The art in fetish art stands for what?
Moral judgments of a large group have to be taken into account. But you do realize that moral judgments on a certain topic vary completely depending on the cultural context? Morality as a basis for what is or is not art is an absolutely wrong point of view. You could just as easily say that it is not art because it is haram. It has the same meaning.
Morality is always changing, is subject to regional and cultural differences and is above all one thing: class morality.
While I cant tell you, where the line should be, what is art or not - For this I need to delve much deeper into this topic to be able to tell you where the line lies. But it definitly shouldnt be decides by morality. Just think what was moral wrong 100 years ago. Or even 600 years ago.
You haven’t mentioned it, but I would like to emphasize once again that it would be wrong to declare something illegal based on it.