How problematic is the Sistine Chapel? - Do we need to cancel it?

[NerdShamer]

Username checks out.

C ya in spergatory.

 

[LargeChoonger]

"No you don't understand, low-quality obscure nudity in a giant piece of art is exactly the same as blatant sexualized borderline cp"

 

[Ira the Weatherman]

We can't just police some art and then pretend not to notice other art.

Only a retard or a pedo would look at the massive murals of the Sistine fucking Chapel and 'notice' the naked babbies in the way you do.

I'm hoping for your sake you're only the former and not both.

 

[ShortBusDriver]

This is the kind of response I've anticipated: "lol bait" and you don't address anything from my OP.
Typical Kiwi Farms.

Because they're not children, or even humans, they're Cherubs which makes the entire post dumb.

 

[Idiotron]

Only a retard or a pedo would look at the massive murals of the Sistine fucking Chapel and 'notice' the naked babbies in the way you do.

I'm hoping for your sake you're only the former and not both.

Can you address my points, please?
Calling me names means nothing to me.

Because they're not children, or even humans, they're Cherubs which makes the entire post dumb.

I've addressed this in the OP, you're using the loli defense.
Please, read a post before responding to it.

 

[Ilikeoreos]

Beat me to it. I just knew that was going to pop up in this thread

 

[i am cancer]

Cuties is sexually exploiting children.
There is nothing sexual about the images you posted and if you find them sexual then you're probably a pedophile.

 

[Idiotron]

Cuties is sexually exploiting children.
There is nothing sexual about the images you posted and if you find them sexual then you're probably a pedophile.

Can you address my points, please?

 

[Andrew Neiman]

Nobody tell OP about Balthus.

 

[NerdShamer]

Can you address my points, please?

It's easier to call you an cretin, honestly.

 

[i am cancer]

Can you address my points, please?

I literally did, pedo.

 

[One Man Bland]

"No you don't understand, low-quality obscure nudity in a giant piece of art is exactly the same as blatant sexualized borderline cp"

"And painting of fictional nude figures using what anyone with eyes and two brain cells to rub together can figure out were obviously adults models as a reference (seriously look at the proportions on those "babies," they’re just shrunken down adults) is DEFINITELY the same thing as taking crotch shots and close ups of real living 11 year olds and broadcasting it to millions of people for profit!"

 

[Idiotron]

It's easier to call you an cretin, honestly.

Of course it is.
That way, you don't have to show that you're unable to do so.

I literally did, pedo.

Why am I exactly a pedo?
Because I'm asking questions about depictions of naked kids?
Can you give a quote that makes you think I'm a pedo and then tell my why it makes me a pedo?
Notice that I never lean one way or another in my OP, I'm just asking questions.

It seems like nobody, other than 1 guy, is willing to actually have a conversation and instead, you just call me names.
I hoped that KF would be at least a bit more willing to talk but I guess people here are as easily triggered as everybody else online.

 

[i am cancer]

Why am I exactly a pedo?
Because I'm asking questions about depictions of naked kids?

if you're unable to tell the difference between a movie that uses children sexually and a painting of toddlers doing nothing sexual then I hate to break it to ya'...

Can you give a quote that makes you think I'm a pedo and then tell my why it makes me a pedo?

"I'm asking questions about depictions of naked kids.

Notice that I never lean one way or another in my OP, I'm just asking questions.

Just to humour you:

If I were to paint something like that and then post it on social media, it would be immediately deleted and I would be put on a list, I would probably have to pay a fine, maybe even face jail time.

If the children were depicted sexually then yea you probably would.

Why should we make exceptions for art like this? Because it's old? Because it's beloved? I don't think any of that matters, Birth of a Nation was a beloved critically acclaimed hit movie when it came out but now not so much.

The children in the paintings wern't depicted sexually.

Should the Sistine Chapel be left alone or should it be censored?

I don't give a shit.

Should this be considered high art or well made CP commissioned by the Catholic Church?

It's certainly not CP because it's not sexual in nature.

Nice bait though OP.

 

[The Pink Panther]

OP wrote this as his 12-year-old fleshlight jumped up and down as he typed looking from the side of her shoulder from the computer screen.

 

[Doctor Placebo]

I agree with OP. We should have all the naked children on the Sistine Chappel covered up with Happy Merchant and Little Black Sambo caricatures. It's the based and redpilled solution.

 

[Scarlett Johansson]

Michelangelo was gay
There's your answer

 

[Idiotron]

if you're unable to tell the difference between a movie that uses children sexually and a painting of toddlers doing nothing sexual then I hate to break it to ya'...

Hat to break it to ya but if the police found drawings of naked toddlers playing together on your hard drive, they wouldn't just let you off the hook because it's not sexualized.

"I'm asking questions about depictions of naked kids.

OK, let me get this straight:
Noticing depictions of naked kids and then asking questions about them makes me a pedo.
Going by that logic, noticing a fire and then asking questions about it makes me an arsonist.
Solid logic, bruh.

Michelangelo was gay
There's your answer

But Michaelangelo was told what to paint by the pope.
He didn't just paint whatever he felt like, he was given specific instructions.
Do you think there's a chance that the head of an organization notorious for their predatory behavior towards little boys might have been a pedo?
I think so.

Also, Michaelangelo being gay would actually strengthen the hypothesis that he painted naked boys (not girls because he was gay) for morally reprehensible reasons.

 

[Ira the Weatherman]

Can you address my points, please?

He just did. They're not sexual. It's as simple as that. It's the same reason why Classical statues featuring naked adults aren't considered porn either.

If you continue to be obtuse about this fact then of course people are going to call you a pedo apologist, because you just seem to want us to admit that this art is totally the same as something like Cuties or loli and, logically following, therefore there should be no social stigma against it.

You're not really 'merely asking questions' when you ignore the answers given because they apparantly weren't the ones you were hoping for. It suggests you do have an opinion on the matter, and are too chickenshit to express it.

 

[Idiotron]

OP wrote this as his 12-year-old fleshlight jumped up and down as he typed looking from the side of her shoulder from the computer screen.

What exactly makes you think that I'm a pedophile?
I'm genuinely curious. Please, explain.
Call me all the names you want, ridicule me, I don't give a shit, but give me a solid reason.
It really seems like this topic is so taboo to the people here that nobody can take even 5 minutes to actually think about my OP, their brains just close and they respond 100% emotionally.
Just like you did - stupid joke and nothing else.
I bet you responded before even finishing reading the OP, if you've read it at all.
Am I wrong? I don't think so.