Shop Mobile More Submit  Join Login
×

More from DeviantArt



Details

Submitted on
November 20, 2011
Link
Thumb

Stats

Views
4,843 (3 today)
Favourites
0
Comments
52
×
So, some people brought this up on my painting of Ariel with no bra. One just pointed that it's "underage nudity", and other said that when she posted a painting of Ariel without bras with her boobs showing, DeviantArt deleted it for "underage nudity" and it's not fair that mine got a DD.
This is just plain stupid for me. I mean, c'mon, it's just a piece of art. And it's not like it's portraiting a naked 12 year old. Sexually. And anwyay, couldn't one just assume my painting of Ariel is of an older Ariel, if that's the issue?
The whole "mature content" policy is bullshit already for me, and now this? I HOPE my painting doesn't get deleted for that stupidity as the one from the person who commented was.
Add a Comment:
 
:icondbananza:
dbananza Featured By Owner Jan 7, 2012  Hobbyist General Artist
hmm... I didn't really get that vibe when I looked at it (and normally I have an eagle eye for that sort of thing)... I just thought: fae, they don't wear pants, it's all good
Reply
:iconfuzi666:
fuzi666 Featured By Owner Dec 14, 2011  Hobbyist General Artist
And we have this problem on our society. "Breasts are the fountain of sexual pleasure. There is not mama's milk for children, just damned baby bottles".
Reply
:iconclauds-c:
Clauds-C Featured By Owner Nov 24, 2011
O.o
Reply
:iconpandadragonkefc:
pandadragonkefc Featured By Owner Nov 24, 2011  Student General Artist
i thought it was awesome....and i really have learned to stop caring for nudity.
Reply
:iconwickedsatyr:
wickedsatyr Featured By Owner Nov 24, 2011  Professional Digital Artist
Did it get removed? I really can't believe that, what an asinine situation.
Reply
:iconaeryael:
aeryael Featured By Owner Nov 24, 2011   Digital Artist
No!! Mine didn't. I just got worried because some people said that "underage nudity" was against the TOS and some deviations were deleted for being fanart of known "underage" characters, like Ariel. And I also heard of a deviation that got a DD and was deleted afterwards anyway. Soo...
Reply
:iconbaiexa-btrfly:
baiexa-btrfly Featured By Owner Nov 23, 2011  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
Honestly I don't approve of underage nudity in any context (except maybe for babies), but in your case Ariel doesn't look underage at all! She only has small boobs :P I don't think you should be worried, you even got a DD with it. And btw congratz! :)
Reply
:iconrockitrocket-rir:
RockitRocket-RIR Featured By Owner Nov 22, 2011  Student Digital Artist
How the hell, Ariel gets freaken married in the first movie, hows that under aged? Plus 16 is the legal age for sex in my country.
Reply
:iconkrukof2:
krukof2 Featured By Owner Nov 22, 2011  Professional
That sucks .
In the same time DA allow Art Theft...

take care
be strong
and submit it again :D
Reply
:iconnekoninja7:
nekoninja7 Featured By Owner Nov 21, 2011
exactly how old is Ariel supposed to be anyway? She gets married in the movie so I assume she's old enough. This is simply stupid and I wouldn't worry about it! Like some of the others have already said they were probably just jealous!
Reply
:iconchissweetart:
ChisSweetArt Featured By Owner Nov 21, 2011  Professional Digital Artist
If anyone can complain they will. It's usually people, as some said, that are jealous. They don't care about details just that you got the DD and they didn't. I wouldn't worry about and celebrate. You accomplished something incredible and your art is beautiful. Ignore the whiners and congrats!!
Reply
:iconknight-of-ishtar:
Knight-of-Ishtar Featured By Owner Nov 21, 2011
First of all nudity is not a reason for DA to delete a piece of art, the only thing I know of that DA will delete is overtly sexually themes like visible intercourse and graphic masturbation, and second her anatomy looks as if she is an adult,and third I don't remember if Ariel was under age in the movie I mean wasn't she trying to marry the guy she saved? and I just would like to say, like I did before, she is very beautiful . :)
Reply
:iconyapi:
yapi Featured By Owner Nov 21, 2011   Digital Artist
People are getting mad because they're not completely familiar with the rules. They don't ban underage nudity -- they ban underage EROTICA. Meaning, sexualized minors. Your painting isn't sexualizing Ariel. It's a nude picture, yes, but it's not done in a way that it's obviously a piece that's meant to arouse or tease. Certainly, there are some viewers who may feel that way upon looking at it, but at this point it's still ambiguous.

Now if you posed her like she was cupping her breasts in a way that she's trying to entice the viewer in a lustful way, then THAT is not allowed.
Reply
:icondraggah-n:
Draggah-N Featured By Owner Nov 20, 2011
I would suggest simply changing the title. Perhaps to "Deep Sea Mermaid" or some-such. It's perfectly fine to have a "generic" mermaid showing herself.
Reply
:icontime-raining:
Time-Raining Featured By Owner Nov 20, 2011
That is INSANE -_-" Seriously?? I didn't see any child porn on your picture, it was art and the age could be interpreted for anyone. If people were that sensitive about your work, there's a newsflash for them about th rest of the internet. Besides yours already has a mature warning D:
Reply
:iconpahjeunpure:
PahjeUnpure Featured By Owner Nov 20, 2011  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
This was your depiction of Ariel and it was no child. Yes, an older Ariel. She's beautiful.
Reply
:iconzimtard21:
zimtard21 Featured By Owner Nov 20, 2011  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
What the hell is wrong with that?! Jesus, you're not posting child porn, you're posting ART. -_-
Reply
:iconchyme12:
Chyme12 Featured By Owner Nov 20, 2011
All ya gotta do is change her name to AERIS or some other name. Then who can tell who or how old she is?

But it's true, you shouldn't have to do that. But if it stops them deleting it, at least you keep the DD !
Reply
:iconaeryael:
aeryael Featured By Owner Nov 24, 2011   Digital Artist
Yeah, but I don't want to change the name. The whole point of the painting was to portrait Ariel alternatively. =<
Reply
:icontfantoni:
tfantoni Featured By Owner Nov 20, 2011  Hobbyist Digital Artist
Olha Carol, ao meu ver, alguns caras do staff do DA são uns escrotos.
Já aconteceu de eu ver desenho da Sailor Moon de amiga em que a nudez tava bastante implícita sem o mature content apagada. E mesmo depois de ser reupado com o mature ativado, foi apagado de novo. Até um tempo atrás, eu ouvi de mais alguém que também teve esse problema.

aí você pensa nesse tipo de situação injusta e descobre que coisas nojentas como essa está no ar: [link]

em suma, existe uma chance considerável de censurarem a sua pintura. eu só torço pra isso não acontecer :( (ainda mais pelos 'nus artísticos' erotizados ao extremo do extremo, que particularmente me incomoda)
Reply
:iconaeryael:
aeryael Featured By Owner Nov 24, 2011   Digital Artist
Pois é - eu até fui procurar nas regras do site etc, sobre esse negócio de fazer personagens fictícios q são menores de idade representados nus, mesmo q seja uma "versão mais velha" etc eles dizem q não pode. Juro q nao entendi! E eu vi essa pintura nojenta com os vermes - acho q com certeza AQUILO é contra as regras. MAS... ao mesmo tempo não sei. Parece q está no limiar. Eu confesso q achei aquilo mto interessante, artisticamente muitíssimo bem executado, repugnante e ao mesmo tempo fascinante sei la haha. Acho q isso pode ser considerado arte, né? Mas é com certeza mtissimo mais explicito q, sei la, a sailor moon nua. E tá lá.
Eu acho q esse tipo de regra é mto relativa e não deveria ser levada a ferro e fogo. Acho q cada obra deveria ser analisada individualmente. Quer dizer, não entendo oq pode haver de prejudicial em fazer uma personagem da disney com peitos de fora, sem ser numa situação sexual. AH SEI LÁ.
Reply
:icontfantoni:
tfantoni Featured By Owner Nov 25, 2011  Hobbyist Digital Artist
bem, eu concordo que o cara que fez a ilustração tem uma técnica invejável e uma noção de cores/profundidade/whatever surreal. mas não consigo me simpatizar com uma imagem que mistura sexo com vermes. se me lembro bem, há uma regra em que você não pode usar nada que seja (ou lembre) objetos fálicos e brinquedos eróticos e afins, e bem, é praticamente isso que eu entendo com essa imagem.

pode até ser mais justo analisar uma imagem individualmente para entender melhor a mensagem passada, e posso até me dispor a acreditar que imagens repugnantes podem transmitir algo que não seja como num pornô, com putaria gratuita e sem qualquer contexto pra apoiar. é relativo, de fato, vai depender do que cada um entende/sabe.

só continuo achando uma escrotice injusta sem tamanho a sua pintura dar tanto forfé sabendo que existe coisa muito pior permitida no DA.

não vejo lógica alguma pegar algo que não tem absolutamente nada de erótico e se ofender porque não aguenta nudez de menores. fico até triste por saber que existe um limite de idade para mostrar nudez no DA (acho que eram bebês em que não podia ter os genitais expostos, algo assim).

ah, sei lá, até eu estou ficando confusa com essa porra toda :P
Reply
:icon0snow-white0:
0Snow-White0 Featured By Owner Nov 20, 2011  Hobbyist Digital Artist
Eu concordo com vc.
Reply
:icontfantoni:
tfantoni Featured By Owner Nov 21, 2011  Hobbyist Digital Artist
né :V
Reply
:iconprincevi:
PrinceVi Featured By Owner Nov 20, 2011
If you don't mind, can I see the drawing in question? I'm curious.
Reply
:iconaeryael:
aeryael Featured By Owner Nov 20, 2011   Digital Artist
Why yes, it's on my gallery haha [link]
Reply
:iconkeeperofdreams:
keeperofdreams Featured By Owner Nov 20, 2011
I think some people just need something to complain about.
Reply
:iconneil-macleod:
Neil-Macleod Featured By Owner Nov 20, 2011  Hobbyist General Artist
I never even thought of it or her as being young. I person ruins it for the rest.
Reply
:icongingerkellystudio:
GingerKellyStudio Featured By Owner Nov 20, 2011  Professional Digital Artist
Personally, I don't think the issue of underage nudity applies to mythical creatures ;) :thumbsup:
Reply
:iconjimnamman:
jimnamman Featured By Owner Nov 20, 2011
your ats amazing man, and thats what it is its art man. dont listen to these people you get them in all walks of life , haha they just dont get enough attention in the house thats it. they got to take out there frustraton by moaning at people. good luck and i very much look forward to seeing more art work from you
Reply
:iconmalcolmd:
Malcolmd Featured By Owner Nov 20, 2011
I hope that your deviation isn't censored too, and the fact that it's already received a DD suggests that it won't.

dA's current policies can be silly, and they look even sillier when they're applied unevenly. I know of a lot of artists who drew characters that were underage during part of the source fiction, and whose drawings were removed for being sexually suggestive despite the figure in the deviation clearly being a mature version of the character. Each of those artists has been able to point to other, accepted deviations that committed similar or worse infractions and are dA-approved.

My condolences to the person who had their deviation deleted, but I don't think that you need to worry about yours.
Reply
:iconaeryael:
aeryael Featured By Owner Nov 20, 2011   Digital Artist
I worry about it anyway because I've heard of a deviation that got a DD and after that still was deleted because there was genitalia on it. And I doubt it was the only case like that. Yeah, rather confusing. u_u
Reply
:iconharusame:
harusame Featured By Owner Nov 20, 2011  Professional Traditional Artist
lols, really!? she was 16 in the first movie and had a CHILD in the second or third! XD my thought is, the disney girls are going after guys at 16 to 19 and getting married, they were drawn by a bunch of lecherous old men * the 9 old men* and i love them all to death :) anyone whos ever seen an animators rejections board or , "the board of shame" would have a good giggle at the deletion *hope not , but you never know :) *

Anyways, I liked it and ariel is about 27 years old by now , *lols* just remember that one! :D
Reply
:iconarchaeobibliologist:
archaeobibliologist Featured By Owner Nov 20, 2011  Professional Photographer
I highly doubt that your work will be deleted for being underage.
I've seen some of these other Ariel pictures that were deleted, and they were essentially screencaps from the movie photoshopped to remove her clothing.
There's a big difference between painting a scene the way you did, and editing the clothes off an underage looking cartoon in a movie.
Reply
:iconmia-sehana:
Mia-Sehana Featured By Owner Nov 20, 2011  Student Writer
that and didn't ariel get married? i doubt disney would support child marriages....T_T
Reply
:iconpigsaint:
PigSaint Featured By Owner Nov 20, 2011
It's true!! Hahahahaha. She got married!! Is not Ariel 16 years old? I think she said "I'm 16 years old! I'm not a child anymore!". ^O^
Reply
:iconmia-sehana:
Mia-Sehana Featured By Owner Nov 20, 2011  Student Writer
i think she said that as well.
Reply
:iconshinedust:
shinedust Featured By Owner Nov 20, 2011
Technically a lot of Sailor Moon pieces get removed for "underage nudity" even when the artist states that it is an 'aged' photo, because it does state in the dA rules (somewhere) that aging the character doesn't matter...something about well known characters are just 'known' as their younger age and therefore it doesn't matter, or something. However, at the end of The Little Mermaid Ariel gets married, shes at least 17 years old, not 12, so people need to calm the hell down and stfu. Your painting is beautiful, obviously deserved the DD it received and obviously has been looked at over mods of the site to have been given a DD to begin with. Besides, in the second movie she has a daughter, I'm pretty sure Disney made Ariel at least 17 or 18 to get married and have a damn family...people and their craziness need to quit.

I agree though, the person who said it's not fair her image was deleted and yours got a DD, but that has absolutely nothing to do with you or your artwork. They need to take that up with the site, not you.
Reply
:iconazupantsu:
AzuPantsu Featured By Owner Nov 20, 2011
I know how you feel, i had a drawing of miku deleted for the same reason :\
Reply
:icontimconroyart:
TimConroyArt Featured By Owner Nov 20, 2011
I guess all the underage nudity around the world will have to go: paintings and sculptors and, well...you get the idea!!!!
Reply
:icontimconroyart:
TimConroyArt Featured By Owner Nov 20, 2011
Wrong! So, wrong. It's Art. I could say a lot to defend the artist! However, this will be short. In my opinion, the overarching idea is that; today, ever so more in our society there are, and have been, and will continue to be diverse opinions and interpretations of all sorts related to art forms of "underage nudity" in our current society and institutions. When I looked at the Artwork in question, the idea of "underage nudity" did not even display in my brain synapses. The meaning of Art is contingent on the eye of the beholder. I must then ask; to those viewers - do you have a personnel issue you are dealing with as opposed to a artistic creation of beauty and nature? I think it might be because of the fear of litigation from that "one person or group", sadly to say. What would the great Artists say? This is a step backwards for our Art community. But it is also a step forward. I guess you could find a better venue to display your beautiful Art: choice.
Reply
:iconvegetagirl2k2:
VegetaGirl2k2 Featured By Owner Nov 20, 2011  Hobbyist Interface Designer
And not to mention that if mermaids existed, then they wouldn't have any clothing (at least that's what I assume)
Reply
:iconemerald12321:
emerald12321 Featured By Owner Nov 20, 2011
I agree DA goes way overboard especially with the underage nudity thing, personaly i think that as long as it's not sexual and especially if it's a fictional character than it shouldn't be that big of a deal.
Reply
:iconairieferisto:
AirieFeristo Featured By Owner Nov 20, 2011  Hobbyist General Artist
The problem is that most sensible people won't have any problem with it BUT some oversensitive special snowflakes will get "offended" and dA wants to protect their "innocence".
Reply
:iconaeryael:
aeryael Featured By Owner Nov 20, 2011   Digital Artist
I mean, c'mon. So art should be censored because of some immature people who can't stand their own specie's bodies? u_u
Reply
:iconairieferisto:
AirieFeristo Featured By Owner Nov 21, 2011  Hobbyist General Artist
If they're the majority and voice their butthurt loud enough, then sadly yes.
Reply
:iconpigsaint:
PigSaint Featured By Owner Nov 20, 2011
I totally agree. I think underage nudity should not be a taboo. I understand to forbid submitions with children in explicit sexual postures and scenes, of course, but Art has used children nudity since the begining of time. Can not we draw young angels, mermaids or fairies either? I wish this nonsense return to normality soon. ¬_¬;;
Reply
:iconaeryael:
aeryael Featured By Owner Nov 20, 2011   Digital Artist
Yesss that's my point. If it's a young cherubim, as many classical artists have portraited before, or a young fairy in the wild without clothes, is it such a great taboo? I wish children nudity were as natural as adult nudity - I mean, I wish that adult nudity was as natural as it should, also! It's our bodies, dammit. And we make art out of it since always. It should be a better world...
Reply
:iconpigsaint:
PigSaint Featured By Owner Nov 21, 2011
World has changed. Because of a few, we all pay, as always. Probably there are people who reads the comments in this journal and thinks we are all fucking pederasts. Media manipulation is too strong in that way nowadays. Today is relatively dangerous (socially speaking) to talk about child nudity. A taboo. Probably in the future will be strictly forbidden.

As ~VegetaGirl2k2 said, if mermaids would exist, they don't wear shells covering their privates. This is human-only fabrication. Fairies, mermaids or angels are almost always represented unclothed as a clear symbol of freedom and purity. They are all created by humans with dreams.

However, as ~Mia-Sehana said some lines below, Ariel is 16 years old in Disney's 1989 movie and she got married. Is that not more reprehensible?
Reply
:iconlise-e:
Lise-E Featured By Owner Nov 20, 2011  Student Digital Artist
Perhaps she is 18. :shrug: you never know. this could be an older Ariel.
Reply
Add a Comment: