• @taiyang
    link
    English
    275 hours ago

    I’ve literally seen historical tentacle porn prints in an Asian art museum. It is wild.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    336 hours ago

    In the Art History courses I’ve taken, they usually talk about nudity in the realm of “it represents fertility” or something like that. Yeah sure… Venus of Urbino is totally about “fertility” and she’s definitely not touching herself for any other reason.

    • @MonkeyDatabase
      link
      English
      156 minutes ago

      The pose was copied from Dresden Venus. Where it’s much more obvious that she’s touching herself. Likely whoever commissioned it requested her to be like that.

      Art History courses I’ve taken seem to gloss over the fact that most famous artwork is commissioned. The patrons of 1000 years ago are the same as the patrons of today. They’re down bad and want titties & ass.

      Maybe in 1000 years ahegao catgirls will “represent fertility”

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      144 hours ago

      and she’s definitely not touching herself for any other reason.

      How dare you, the ancients weren’t tainted with the same levels of sexual proclivities found in modern society. They weren’t just grooming those boys because they just wanted to fuck them, they were engaging in pedagogy, not pedophilia! It’s why all my twink TA’s are underclassmen, someone must teach the youth. - every male art history teacher

  • @RadicalEagle
    link
    English
    54 hours ago

    There’s no way cavemen weren’t the first people having bukakke gangbangs.

  • @shalafi
    link
    English
    44 hours ago

    See also: Wonder Woman and bondage starting in 1941.

  • Björn Tantau
    link
    fedilink
    English
    197 hours ago

    Or naked baby angels. That’s just pedo art. No wonder you see that shit in churches.

    • Dharma Curious (he/him)
      link
      fedilink
      English
      92 hours ago

      This one is a stretch for me, honestly. I’m willing to have my mind changed, but prepubescent nudity was pretty common place before relatively recently. Like even super conservative sexually repressed Victorians didn’t really consider baby nudity to be… Nudity. Like, there’s just no there there, y’know? Kinda like how today you’ve got album covers like that nekkid baby in the pool, or they show female babies without a shirt on in movies/on TV. Because before a certain age it’s just a nonissue.

      Again, maybe I feel that way because I’m not into cherubim penis? Are there people super into nekkid baby angels and I’m just too sheltered to know about it?

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      31 hour ago

      Fuck the church and everything it stands for, but you need to stop whiffing your own farts and calling it roses.