IRC Porn Discussions Options

[Ottava]

Okay, I'm posting this here because of rampant really nasty sex talk. I am just posting a little, and not some of the really graphic stuff that was discussed for a long time. I and some others complained to ops about it and they refused to do anything.

The room is for all ages and Freenode is very strict about what can be deemed sexual harassment, which in the UK can include uncomfortable discussions like this. Here are some pictures to show what was said (I removed names so they can't say I violated anyone's privacy, but I am sure they will be upset for me publishing logs when they refused to uphold their standards):

(IMG:http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6018/5903124202_0d21ddb55e.jpg)

(IMG:http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5317/5902564457_33c1c12df6.jpg)

(IMG:http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6029/5902564471_76e175bf1a.jpg)


When there is enough complaining, one Op asks people to stop but they ignore them (because they are friends and it is fine if friends talk about graphic sex in front of children):

(IMG:http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6026/5903126050_b9dbcb0516.jpg)


I really don't understand how such Ops can be completely okay with such behavior yet use their Ops to bully and abuse others who aren't their friends. Freenode's ToS is rather clear that such behavior isn't appropriate yet it continues. Just more of the Wiki culture of not caring or being reckless I guess.

[The Joy]

I never understand why the Catholic Church and its clergy would be patrons to Renaissance artists who loved the naked figures of men and women (and even children). Why invest so much into art that was not holy and fully-clothed? Renaissance art we see today would not have been possible without the Catholic Church.

[Alison]

I never understand why the Catholic Church and its clergy would be patrons to Renaissance artists who loved the naked figures of men and women (and even children). Why invest so much into art that was not holy and fully-clothed? Renaissance art we see today would not have been possible without the Catholic Church.

http://articles.latimes.com/1994-04-09/new..._sistine-chapel

[The Joy]

I never understand why the Catholic Church and its clergy would be patrons to Renaissance artists who loved the naked figures of men and women (and even children). Why invest so much into art that was not holy and fully-clothed? Renaissance art we see today would not have been possible without the Catholic Church.

http://articles.latimes.com/1994-04-09/new..._sistine-chapel

Interesting. I watched The Agony and the Ecstasy (film) (T-H-L-K-D) and I remember the scene where Michelangelo is arguing with a certain priest about "modesty" and whether painting the human form was backed by the Bible or not. I guess that was Cesena? What I find so strange is how the Catholic Church (save for those like Cesena and Girolamo Savonarola) would embrace the humanism of the Renaissance and invest heavily in it despite some of the more "immodest" and radical ideas coming out of it. Normally, the Catholic Church is very resistant to change and contemporary culture. I do recommend watching Simon Schama's Power of Art (T-H-L-K-D) and its analysis of Caravaggio and Bernini. Strange people, those Renaissance artists and patrons!

I doubt that Wikipedia's IRC will be painted on a church ceiling anytime soon, though.

I do wonder what Ottava thinks of art like the Ecstasy of Saint Teresa (T-H-L-K-D)?