Quote from: tuypo1;810366As for what it could convey to lift an example from my campaign nudity can be used for tragedy one of the lichs in the setting has a sever sex addiction although i was originally going to run it comically i have decided to show it as tragic instead and it would be hard to portray sex addiction without nudity. And oh god yes i hate the double standards of male and female nudity it is one of the biggest problems with the previously mentioned devientart definition of pornography. And i dont know if it really falls under tasteful but nudity also works well for creatures such as the succubus crack open the book of vile darkness theres breasts everywhere but it all works well. I would not find having to hide my books a problem as i dont think i would be friends with somebody that thought it a good idea to hide there children from genitals. even none tasteful nudity can be alright sometimes the 3.5 monster manual nymph was pure fapbait but thats ok nymphs are meant to be attractive.

I believe by "tasteful nudity", the implication was that it wasn't going to have anything to do with sex.

The inability of modern audiences to distinguish between nudity and sex is why this is such a problematic subject for some people.

Hell, I think the whole idea that sex is something terribly shameful that sullies and lessens all it comes in contact is problematic. But that's probably beyond the scope of this discussion.

Quote from: Nexus;810381Hell, I think the whole idea that sex is something terribly shameful that sullies and lessens all it comes in contact is problematic. But that's probably beyond the scope of this discussion.

I think Tristram won the thread.

Quote from: CRKrueger;809403I wouldn't want an RPG book full of cock, but one full of vaginas probably wouldn't be that great either.  A Succubus/Incubus full frontal though isn't gonna make me rub one out or scream in homophobic panic either way.  

It's art.  You wanna make Faeries/Dryads/Nymphs/Nereids wearing diaphanous clothes or nothing at all, whatever.  You want to show a group of Satyrs with erections dancing with naked women, whatever.  If the art is good, it works, if it sucks, it doesn't.  If it's obviously pornographic and designed to masturbate too, that generally doesn't work in a RPG book.  If it gets across the look and feel of the world despite being sexually charged or erotic, then it generally does. (See Artesia)

A lot of the cheesecake art in RPG books doesn't belong because it's not well done, not because it is a taboo subject.

Yep, my opinion exactly. If it fits, it fits, and I do not care if it's male, female, frontal or not, with or without sex. As long as the ilustrations are well done and have a reason to be there, I'm OK.

Cock: The Vaginining.

Quote from: TristramEvans;810382

I never noticed how much the Zardoz head looked like a giant glans until now.

Quote from: TristramEvans;810382

That image makes me wonder what the world would be like if the Abrahamic Faiths were based on a fertility goddess instead of a desert war god.

Quote from: CRKrueger;810440That image makes me wonder what the world would be like if the Abrahamic Faiths were based on a fertility goddess instead of a desert war god.

Maybe like this

or this

Quote from: TristramEvans;810374I believe by "tasteful nudity", the implication was that it wasn't going to have anything to do with sex.

The inability of modern audiences to distinguish between nudity and sex is why this is such a problematic subject for some people.

Oh i agree completely but it is for precisely that reason its worth bringing tasteful sex into the discussion. The aforementioned sex addiction does not even need nudity in it to portray its purpose but in the same vein it would be foolish to avoid nudity in it as well if the piece of art makes sense to have a nipple in it have a nipple otherwise dont have a nipple you should neither seek or avoid genitals.

Getting people to understand that sex is not bad is also important the book of exalted deeds was a step in the right direction in getting that across even if the vow of abstinence did send mixed messages although that gets a pass if you read the book carefully because its explicitly stated to be about giving up a good thing. The abstinince components on spells though were completely stupid and does muddle the message.

I am sure there is a Busen Memo joke in there somewhere...

Spoiler

Or The Backbone...

Quote from: Bren;810473Maybe like this

or this

Mehhh....I was going to right a very long winded argument with a jaded sarcastic view that our world would eventually be exactly the same even if our cultures had been founded on a "fertility Goddess" as presented in these pictures.

But never mind....

But I maintain it would end up probably exactly the same since no religion has ever been able to permanently reform the core nature of humanity.

Quote from: MonsterSlayer;810701But I maintain it would end up probably exactly the same since no religion has ever been able to permanently reform the core nature of humanity.

Nope, but they sure as hell have been able to fuck things up.

A society based on a fertility/pro-life goddess would have its own inherint problems and could go in all sorts of VERY bad directions.

Rampant Overpopulation is potentially the big one. If there arent any checks on population growth then they will spread like locusts. This could lead to starvation, canniballism, incessant wars, lethal bloodsports, or other problems to alleviate the pressure if resources become limited.

One one Post Apoc setting I played in we ran into a pro-life extremist faction that became major threat for the campaign as they were literally forcing more and more births without any thought to the environment.

Speaking of post apoc. One of the illustrators for the original Omega World book did a piece showing an otherworldly characters first arrival naked. Nothing sexual to it and was a herm so no discrimination... But that one went in the "adult" print. ahem...

Quote from: MonsterSlayer;810701Mehhh....I was going to right a very long winded argument with a jaded sarcastic view that our world would eventually be exactly the same even if our cultures had been founded on a "fertility Goddess" as presented in these pictures.

But never mind....

But I maintain it would end up probably exactly the same since no religion has ever been able to permanently reform the core nature of humanity.

Which is why people behave exactly the same regardless of time period, culture, or upbringing...oh wait a minute. :rolleyes:

No the other thing where culture and nurture do change the way people behave.

Are you seriously trying to claim that culture has no effect on how people behave? So culture doesn't matter at all? Not one bit?

You are going to need a really long and convincing post to support that.

Quote from: Bren;810752Which is why people behave exactly the same regardless of time period, culture, or upbringing...oh wait a minute. :rolleyes:

No the other thing where culture and nurture do change the way people behave.

Are you seriously trying to claim that culture has no effect on how people behave? So culture doesn't matter at all? Not one bit?

You are going to need a really long and convincing post to support that.

Nahh...it doesn't need to be that long. Jealousy, greed, desire for power, even the most basic desire to see your offspring do just a bit better and "give them every advantage" are universal principles across all cultures from the most leftist Asian and Latin American nations to the most capitalist U.S.

It doesn't matter if you are an Arab Sheik or the leader of an Israeli Kibutz. It doesn't in the most matriarchal Nepal.

It didn't matter to the ancient Germanic or American Indian tribes where the family in power enjoyed the best food and best work. They all had to fight to stay in power, they all wanted to stay in power for the sake of their progeny.

Since the advent of the first human family our wolf pack nature has flourished and evolved into what we call culture and society. I'm not saying that is bad, I'm just saying I doubt it would be any different.

Look at the picture with the women sitting around with their breaststroke exposed. Why? Why would they do that and the rest of their bodies covered and the males' genitals covered?

The only reason for that in that picture is to show that you are capable of feeding your children better. It's a "stylized penile display" for a fictitious matriarchal culture. And if you have displays of superiority you have all that other stuff I said earlier and you end up just like the rest of us.

The poster asked for an interpretation of that culture based on those pictures. My analysis on both the pictures and topic. YMMV in all