Finland about to get stamps with homoerotic motifs, small amount of protests arise - Polidicks - Facepunch Forum

Finland about to get stamps with homoerotic motifs, small amount of protests arise

218 replies, posted
In This Thread

[QUOTE=catbarf;44625770]Only in SH would someone look at classical art depicting the female form, then compare it to a mustachioed, cigarette-smoking leather-clad man straddling a restrained nude man with his head buried in leather-man's crotch and say 'yup, that's equivalent'. I guess by that logic Michelangelo's David is indistinguishable from Smell The Glove, right?[/QUOTE] what makes those defacto, objectively better or less offensive? Oh that's right, fucking nothing. [editline]23rd April 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=lazyguy;44625921]Why should I have to put up with your self-proclaimed liberation? Why must I be bombarded with indecency on every letter I send or receive, simply because you have declared yourself above us? If you want smut, you can find it online. I don't see why I should have to put up with what ought to be private, thank you very much.[/QUOTE] So what determines what's acceptable and what's not? Give me a non arbitrary line and maybe we can start doing things your way.

[QUOTE=Awesomecaek;44626076]People like to pretend that nudity back then served a different purpose than nudity today but it's just hilarious snobby bullshit. People drew tits because they or other people wanted to see tits. It's just that some people stopped pretending since then because it's acceptable now to admit that you adhere to normal natural reactions and aren't afraid of being smitten by angry antitit god or something.[/QUOTE] there's like twenty billion ancient Roman or Greek pots with just a chain of dudes boning each other painted all around them. and that's a double whammy cos it's art [I]and[/I] ancient history but it's still totally porn [editline]23rd April[/editline] people have literally been drawing dongs since we had fingers and sand to write in

I'm all for gay rights and everything but I really despise the arguments involving crude stuff like in the article. It pretty much boils down to this: "If you don't agree with having pic related in public you're a bigot:" [t]http://315enf2uzxh930c91y23mattfz7.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/4836576561_be2b57874a_b.jpg[/t] That is [B]not[/B] the case at all, I completely support people pushing for their own rights, but I sure as hell do not want such blatant lewdness in front of me, and yes that goes for straight couples too.

[QUOTE=orcywoo6;44626268]I'm all for gay rights and everything but I really despise the arguments involving crude stuff like in the article. It pretty much boils down to this: "If you don't agree with having pic related in public you're a bigot:" [t]http://315enf2uzxh930c91y23mattfz7.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/4836576561_be2b57874a_b.jpg[/t] That is [B]not[/B] the case at all, I completely support people pushing for their own rights, but I sure as hell do not want such blatant lewdness in front of me, and yes that goes for straight couples too.[/QUOTE] But the stamps aren't really anything like that

[QUOTE=orcywoo6;44626268]I'm all for gay rights and everything but I really despise the arguments involving crude stuff like in the article. It pretty much boils down to this: "If you don't agree with having pic related in public you're a bigot:" [t]http://315enf2uzxh930c91y23mattfz7.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/4836576561_be2b57874a_b.jpg[/t] That is [B]not[/B] the case at all, I completely support people pushing for their own rights, but I sure as hell do not want such blatant lewdness in front of me, and yes that goes for straight couples too.[/QUOTE] So a stamp of classic art featuring female boobs is fine, but uh oh, something midly gay? How dare they put smut somewhere I have to see it(voluntarily)

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;44626324]So a stamp of classic art featuring female boobs is fine, but uh oh, something midly gay? How dare they put smut somewhere I have to see it(voluntarily)[/QUOTE] Where did I say that? I wouldn't want boobs on a stamp either. [editline]23rd April 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=Awesomecaek;44626316]But the stamps aren't really anything like that[/QUOTE] It's an exaggeration, I'm not just talking about the stamps, just people that use that argument in general.

[QUOTE=orcywoo6;44626337]Where did I say that? I wouldn't want boobs on a stamp either.[/QUOTE] there's plenty of classic stamps with those, are they smut and porn as well? what line is it drawn at? Where does smut exist? [editline]23rd April 2014[/editline] [IMG]http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-xNX5vKE0oC8/UcxXLkQeWkI/AAAAAAAAhBA/lCd0DdlzOvw/s1600/Bathing+beach,+1920s.jpg[/IMG] At one point in time, this was fucking scandalous. What is right and what is smut and what is wrong is literally as arbitrary and meaningless as it gets.

I don't see ass in that picture, or boobs. There is a point where the line starts to get pushed a bit too much even for the modern day. I understand that expectations and society evolves over the years but there is a point where we can't really go much further unless we start plastering cocks and pussies on things. (and before someone mentions the romans did it, I know)

[QUOTE=Battledrobe;44623006]Why is this accepted?[/QUOTE] Stamps are accepted because despite their relative ease of forgery, they're only applicable for letters and other small mail items that do not require large amounts of postage. The post office has decided that the minor risk of lost profits is worth the convenience of using stamps. However, more expensive items such as parcels require a special label with a unique code to indicate that postage has been paid. Hope this helps

yes, so when the romans did it and it clearly didn't cause the fall of society, why does it matter? we'd all be a lot happier if the sight of some fucking skin didn't bother people.

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;44626345]there's plenty of classic stamps with those, are they smut and porn as well? what line is it drawn at? Where does smut exist? [editline]23rd April 2014[/editline] [IMG]http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-xNX5vKE0oC8/UcxXLkQeWkI/AAAAAAAAhBA/lCd0DdlzOvw/s1600/Bathing+beach,+1920s.jpg[/IMG] At one point in time, this was fucking scandalous. What is right and what is smut and what is wrong is literally as arbitrary and meaningless as it gets.[/QUOTE] its still fucking scandalous shes wearing socks on a beach wtf

That's my point, society (including me unfortunately) isn't ready for it at this point in time. We need to come a bit further first. It was okay for the romans because it was a part of everyday life so obviously it didn't bother them. I'm not wanting to cause an argument by the way, just saying my piece.

[QUOTE=orcywoo6;44626454]That's my point, society (including me unfortunately) isn't ready for it at this point in time. We need to come a bit further first. It was okay for the romans because it was a part of everyday life so obviously it didn't bother them. I'm not wanting to cause an argument by the way, just saying my piece.[/QUOTE] so when do we make the move towards that point

I understand that, I'm not "arguing" with you in the sense I'm telling you you're wrong and can't feel that way. I'm just saying it's not really a big deal. They dealt with it because it was part of every day life. It's part of OUR every day lives, we're just ashamed of it. It's a ridiculous idea that public life has to ignore and remove the sexuality of our private lives 'just because'. we're sexual beings able to handle that fact. Past society proves that. I just don't see why today we have to be prudes when we can even look back just a century and find ourselves literally unable to look at a womans knee without a shit ton of sexual context and issues coming up. We should be past that by now.

[QUOTE=orcywoo6;44626268]I'm all for gay rights and everything but I really despise the arguments involving crude stuff like in the article. It pretty much boils down to this: "If you don't agree with having pic related in public you're a bigot:" [t]http://315enf2uzxh930c91y23mattfz7.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/4836576561_be2b57874a_b.jpg[/t] That is [B]not[/B] the case at all, I completely support people pushing for their own rights, but I sure as hell do not want such blatant lewdness in front of me, and yes that goes for straight couples too.[/QUOTE] Seems like that's a whole lot of [I] Your Problem [/I]. I would suggest not attempting to police other people's behavior by your own personal standards, because, as much as it may offend your perception of yourself as a civilized and tolerant person to accept this, that DOES make you a bigot.

thats gay

[QUOTE=.Lain;44626479]so when do we make the move towards that point[/QUOTE] Were on a slow and steady slope of progression in that matter, we'll look back on it and laugh at it like the picture of the girls on the beach in the not so far future. Its just a matter of baby steps, these things take time. [QUOTE=Big Dumb American;44626504]Seems like that's a whole lot of [I] Your Problem [/I]. I would suggest not attempting to police other people's behavior by your own personal standards, because, as much as it may offend your perception of yourself as a civilized and tolerant person to accept this, that DOES make you a bigot.[/QUOTE] I didn't know that not really thinking that people shagging in the streets is a good idea made me a bigot, but hey, the more you know.

[QUOTE=Awesomecaek;44625950]I sure hope Shadman's genius will be revered in galleries all over the world few centuries from here. [editline]23rd April 2014[/editline] You know they sell more kinds of stamps at once, right? You can usually choose from several of the same value. [editline]23rd April 2014[/editline] So I will go ahead and call you a prudent whiner because you obviously don't actually send letters.[/QUOTE] I do send letters, and when I buy stamps they're given to me over the counter. I don't get to pick and choose. You get what you're given. [editline]23rd April 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=HumanAbyss;44626221]what makes those defacto, objectively better or less offensive? Oh that's right, fucking nothing. [editline]23rd April 2014[/editline] So what determines what's acceptable and what's not? Give me a non arbitrary line and maybe we can start doing things your way.[/QUOTE] So your line isn't arbitrary? Unless you are advocating for no barriers whatsoever then you're being just as arbitrary. However, it is clear that you are one of those people who pretends they are not able to see the difference between an anatomical diagram and the weirdest crap you can find on deviantArt.

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;44626221]what makes those defacto, objectively better or less offensive? Oh that's right, fucking nothing.[/QUOTE] yeah you should get public schools to show hardcore pornography, they already have medical diagrams of genitalia so it's objectively exactly the same What is acceptable in public and in society in general is not something you can boil down to a binary yes/no or a checklist. For what it's worth I too think that Western society is excessively repressive regarding sexuality, but telling grandma to just deal with it when she doesn't like getting letters with a restrained nude man straddled by leather-daddy on them and insisting that it's no different from classical art is pretty autistic.

I don't see the point in either side, really. The art that the guy drew on the postage stamp didn't even have to be sexual. There's really no reason for him to have drawn something that implied ANYTHING erotic, whether it be male or female. He should have been trying to show his skill as an artist, not how homosexual he is. Beyond all that, though, it's a fucking postage stamp. Who actually cares about postage stamps besides stamp collectors and people who have to send a letter, who can just choose to use a different series stamp anyways? edit: You just say you don't like the subject matter of the stamp and ask for a different one. It's really not difficult. And if the clerk makes a fuss over it then he's doing something wrong.

[QUOTE=orcywoo6;44626567]Were on a slow and steady slope of progression in that matter, we'll look back on it and laugh at it like the picture of the girls on the beach in the not so far future. Its just a matter of baby steps, these things take time. I didn't know that not really thinking that people shagging in the streets is a good idea made me a bigot, but hey, the more you know.[/QUOTE] Do you not know the meaning of the word bigot, or something? Because this holier-than-thou approach of telling other people the standards by which they should be conducting themselves to meet your satisfaction is, like, textbook bigotry.

[QUOTE=lazyguy;44626637] So your line isn't arbitrary? Unless you are advocating for no barriers whatsoever then you're being just as arbitrary. However, it is clear that you are one of those people who pretends they are not able to see the difference between an anatomical diagram and the weirdest crap you can find on deviantArt.[/QUOTE] oh yay ad hominems! so what's the line then, tell me about it, describe it, where does it begin, where does it end, what's include, what's off limits, what's not? You're the one advocating for it. I'm just saying that acting like our bodies are shameful pieces of shit is wrong and terrible and stupid. The line changes constantly, was it better in the 50's? Where was it "correct"? Care to explain? [editline]23rd April 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=catbarf;44626660]yeah you should get public schools to show hardcore pornography, they already have medical diagrams of genitalia so it's objectively exactly the same What is acceptable in public and in society in general is not something you can boil down to a binary yes/no or a checklist. For what it's worth I too think that Western society is excessively repressive regarding sexuality, but telling grandma to just deal with it when she doesn't like getting letters with a restrained nude man straddled by leather-daddy on them and insisting that it's no different from classical art is pretty autistic.[/QUOTE] Oh, so what you're saying is if this "gay" art was a thousand years old, it'd be fine? thanks

[img]http://i.imgur.com/6hPNyjZ.jpg[/img] [I]HumanAbyss converses with a local army recruitment officer.[/I]

[QUOTE=orcywoo6;44626567] I didn't know that not really thinking that people shagging in the streets is a good idea made me a bigot, but hey, the more you know.[/QUOTE] It's a good thing that like, zero, progressive movements advocate that then isn't it? Like, do you even know what you're criticising here or what? Being more open about sexuality (something we seem to meander in and out of every so often throughout history) is not going to lead to "shagging on the streets" or whatever, it at most will lead to people being able to openly show affection in public for their partners, sexuality irrelevant. Being able to talk about shit going on in our more private personal lives without being shunned, that sort of shit. Not mass public orgies with leather and whips or whatever the fuck you've managed to twist it in to.

[QUOTE=Big Dumb American;44626684]Do you not know the meaning of the word bigot, or something? Because this holier-than-thou approach of telling other people the standards by which they should be conducting themselves to meet your satisfaction is, like, textbook bigotry.[/QUOTE] "Yeah! So stop doing it and meet the standards by which you should be conducting yourself to meet my satisfaction!"

[img]http://dengedenge.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/Coins_of_ancient_Rome_3.jpg[/img] This was completely acceptable and extremely commonplace thousands of years ago. We need to drop this prudish, Victorian taboo that still resonates through most of our society.

yeah why can't we just make pictures of dicks and the act of sex on stamps? there's literally nothing wrong with sex or nudity or being gay or being straight or whatever (as long as its consensual)

[QUOTE=lazyguy;44626710][img]http://i.imgur.com/6hPNyjZ.jpg[/img] [I]HumanAbyss converses with a local army recruitment officer.[/I][/QUOTE] You're really bad at this posting thing, you know that right? This is in no way a relevant response unless you're just being a fucking ass on purpose or something.

[QUOTE=Big Dumb American;44626684]Do you not know the meaning of the word bigot, or something? Because this holier-than-thou approach of telling other people the standards by which they should be conducting themselves to meet your satisfaction is, like, textbook bigotry.[/QUOTE] You're pretty much doing it to me right now.

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;44626685]oh yay ad hominems! so what's the line then, tell me about it, describe it, where does it begin, where does it end, what's include, what's off limits, what's not? You're the one advocating for it. I'm just saying that acting like our bodies are shameful pieces of shit is wrong and terrible and stupid. The line changes constantly, was it better in the 50's? Where was it "correct"? Care to explain?[/QUOTE] Personally? I think that the line between the naked body as depicted in art, and titillation - which does not necessarily even require nudity - is obvious to just about everyone, including you. Luckily, however, we live in the West, and thus can have an argument about this, and even do wonderful things like compromise. I know that means you won't get everything you want, but that's part of living in a civilised society. Along with not plastering pornography everywhere just to prove a point.

Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.