> So, your image isn't "sexualization" because Dali and "fine art" ? Yes, there is such a thing as tasteful nudity, and pornography is generally not. This is w

> So, your image isn't "sexualization" because Dali and "fine art" ? Yes, there is such a thing as tasteful nudity, and pornography is generally not. This is why our society allows children into art museums but not strip clubs. What is so hard to understand about this? Context is subjective, but there are agreed-upon standards for professionalism. Just because the standard was different fifty years ago does not make it a good idea today. If you can't think of any "traditions" from fifty years ago that professional scientists unanimously agree are wrong today, then you're quite ignorant. > Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah... Clearly I am the one failing to articulate things.