Shop Mobile More Submit  Join Login

Look at the pictures in this gallery: mathewlove.deviantart.com/gall… - What's your opinion on them? 

29%
388 deviants said I see naked toddlers in suggestive positions. I don't enjoy these works but they are not against DA policy.
17%
235 deviants said Clearly child porn. It should not be tolerated on DA.
17%
230 deviants said I can't see how this is art. It's distasteful. I would report them and move on.
15%
200 deviants said The creator is a sick pedophile, a child molester. These pictures should be removed and the deviant banned.
8%
102 deviants said These are cherubic cartoons, they are part of classic art. No sane human being would consider them pedophilic.
7%
98 deviants said Other.
4%
53 deviants said Naked kids with wings. So what? Don't be so moral and prude!
3%
36 deviants said What should be wrong with them? I don't see anything erotic here.
1%
10 deviants said I like them.

Devious Comments

:iconperegrijn:
Peregrijn Featured By Owner Jul 15, 2010  Hobbyist Photographer
Yeah, well, that's what I see in it. But I'm wondering what the guys real motivation is off course. In any case, personally I think people everywhere (not only on DA) make a fuzz to soon about anything... My opinion
Reply
:iconlilyas:
Lilyas Featured By Owner Jul 14, 2010  Professional General Artist
Good point! :thumbsup:
Reply
:iconperegrijn:
Peregrijn Featured By Owner Jul 15, 2010  Hobbyist Photographer
Thnx, and I'm actually very disappointed that hardly anyone sees it like that. Did you ask his motivation?
Reply
:iconlilyas:
Lilyas Featured By Owner Jul 15, 2010  Professional General Artist
No. He is not talking very much and he doesn't seem to take interest in the conversations we have over his work.
Reply
:iconperegrijn:
Peregrijn Featured By Owner Jul 15, 2010  Hobbyist Photographer
Ignorance is bliss...
Reply
:iconaldreich:
aldreich Featured By Owner Jul 12, 2010
yuck >_<
Reply
:iconana-happy:
ana-happy Featured By Owner Jul 12, 2010  Student General Artist
I don't know way but I think that pictures are really funny :) !!!
Reply
:iconmadeleineruuth:
MadeleineRuuth Featured By Owner Jul 12, 2010  Hobbyist Photographer
I don't enjoy them, and they seem too "simple" to actually be taken seriously, prude or not... It feels a bit immature and stupid, really... but that's just my opinion...
Reply
:iconbackwardbruises:
BackwardBruises Featured By Owner Jul 13, 2010
I agree completely =/
Reply
:iconsilverdragonrs:
silverdragonrs Featured By Owner Jul 12, 2010  Student General Artist
Many people draw cherubs... they and yes they ARE usually nude... but rarely are the genitals showing in such a way! Cherubs represent love and romance... not sexuality or lust... to associate a child image with these ideas is both gross and to many people offensive. It should be removed from DA!
Reply
:iconraven-maniac:
Raven-Maniac Featured By Owner Jul 12, 2010
I see the workings of a man who is expressing himself albeit some be a bit risque no it is not child porn.Art has Always been controversial ever since the venus de milo,and crucifying someone for expressing him or herself is both wrong and rude.Now some of you may see him as a child molester but did you talk to him about it?Did you ask him why he draws cherubs?Noone looks for a reason to place blame they just look for the place to put it.
Reply
:icondarkgloomynights:
DarkGloomyNights Featured By Owner Jul 14, 2010
Ditto
Reply
:iconraven-maniac:
Raven-Maniac Featured By Owner Jul 14, 2010
Thanks.
Reply
:iconmidnight-dance-angel:
Midnight-Dance-Angel Featured By Owner Jul 11, 2010  Hobbyist Artisan Crafter
They're cherubs. Traditionally depicted as children, naked, with wings. I see nothing wrong with these personally. I mean, if we can submit works of nude adults as drawings, why not cherubs? Seriously. And for that matter, I've seen art of cherubs in such positions before in professional galleries, so I don't see anything wrong with this really.
Reply
:iconsilverdragonrs:
silverdragonrs Featured By Owner Jul 12, 2010  Student General Artist
You have scene cherubs tied up in a professional gallery? Where I gotta see this!
Reply
:iconmidnight-dance-angel:
Midnight-Dance-Angel Featured By Owner Jul 12, 2010  Hobbyist Artisan Crafter
Tied in some form yes. And in provacative poses as well. I don't remember the name of the gallery, but it was pretty interesting to see.
Reply
:iconsaiyanprincesscat:
saiyanprincesscat Featured By Owner Jul 11, 2010  Hobbyist Photographer
:\ I'd report them...it's just gross. I don't care what a collective policy about this is; this is my personality and the way I think. It's incredibly immoral.
Reply
:iconshelldevil:
shelldevil Featured By Owner Jul 11, 2010
I looked, I was somewhere on the fence, disliking but dont totally hating. Then I noticed his 2 fav's.... and that pushed me over the fence and into wtf aint this dude banned?
Reply
:iconaowyn77:
Aowyn77 Featured By Owner Jul 11, 2010  Hobbyist General Artist
I second this person's comments 100% and will add the following:

I didnt really see a choice in your poll that totally expressed my feelings with this. Based on my own personal taste, I look at what I like and favourite those pieces. THOSE I consider "art". I do not feel I am the person to say this is art and that isnt. HOWEVER, these particular drawings do push my comfort levels quite a bit. Add to that the person's favourites and I start to scratch my head and get uneasy. Drawing cherubs is one thing. Anatomically correct and specific cherubs is anoter. Putting them in intimate positions is, in my opinion, going outer limits.

I think DA should review this person's gallery and those that he/she linked to and decide what their stance will be. Up to this point I have seen all kinds of things on this site that have opened my eyes and mind to different perceptions and media to express oneself. This particular display and those like it take away from DA, again in my opinion, and what I understood the purpose of this site to be. It makes this site smutty (is that a word? We'll allow it here) and soils the integrity of those using the site.

Artistic freedom is one thing but hiding behind that to post borderline porno-cherubs and "photography" as seen in the links in the favourite as examples is sick and abusive.
Reply
:iconlilyas:
Lilyas Featured By Owner Jul 14, 2010  Professional General Artist
All of those pictures have been reported multiple times and I think DA admins reviewed the gallery more than once. The decision on their side was clear.
Reply
:iconaowyn77:
Aowyn77 Featured By Owner Jul 14, 2010  Hobbyist General Artist
That is too bad.
Reply
:iconmrswave:
MrsWave Featured By Owner Jul 11, 2010
i think that is sick! they should be ashamed of themselves!
Reply
:iconforbiddenrace1:
forbiddenrace1 Featured By Owner Jul 11, 2010  Hobbyist General Artist
Naked cherubs is one thing (since most are depicted as such) but these are in some suggestive positions which makes it closer to drawn pornography
Reply
:iconlilith-illageatte:
Lilith-Illageatte Featured By Owner Jul 11, 2010  Hobbyist General Artist
They look a little too much like toddlers for my taste but they don't exactly violate anything. I certainly wont be looking at them.
Reply
:iconkisskisscutie:
kisskisscutie Featured By Owner Jul 11, 2010
Well, I take it as how the artist sees it.

If he sees it as a metaphoric thing like the cherubs are innocence or whatever... or if he sees them as CHERUBS... OR if he sees them as little boys.

But in all, I would say that THIS is a way better alternative for him if he crave pictures of naked little boys.
Reply
:iconaumen:
Aumen Featured By Owner Jul 11, 2010
Meh, I kind of like them.
They remind me of those cool old-style gigantic painting you see in museums or churches. :3
I can't really say that they're gross cause then I would probably have to say that those cool ones with angels and such are gross too. :/
Reply
:iconjessicablood:
JessicaBlood Featured By Owner Jul 16, 2010
You don't think a baby spreading his legs and showing you his little cock while winking is gross at all?
Reply
:iconaumen:
Aumen Featured By Owner Jul 16, 2010
If you say it like that, it makes it even worse than it is. S:
But I guess you're right.
That is pretty friggin' repulsive...
Reply
:iconappaloosapinto:
AppaloosaPinto Featured By Owner Jul 11, 2010  Hobbyist Photographer
What makes me want to report him is the fact that the poor 'commissioner' was dragged into this.
[link]
Reply
:iconlilyas:
Lilyas Featured By Owner Jul 14, 2010  Professional General Artist
I know. But as long as Iceriel doesn't take action on that matter the man can say what he wants.
Reply
:iconcincyfrog:
Cincyfrog Featured By Owner Jul 11, 2010   Photographer
First off, the word cherub is misleading. The Artist is drawing Putti (plural of Putto), which is the term for the winged babies or toddlers. More often than not, Putti are male, and almost always nude and winged. I was an Art History buff in college and can tell you that most drawings and paintings of Putti show genitalia. That said, the fact that the artist has drawn the genitalia on his 'cherubs' does not offend me.

The kissing in the first picture reminds me of one of Bouguereau's more famous paintings L'Amour et Psyché, enfants. [link] . Even the fact that the Artist has drawn his 'Cherubs' kissing on the mouth instead of the cheek does not bother me; because just last week, my little cousin (who is 4), who was the flower girl in her sister's wedding, was kissed by a little boy (who was maybe 3 or 4). He walked up to her, placed his hands on her cheeks and kissed her on her lips. Everyone there was laughing, taking pictures and saying 'How Cute'. If I did not take offense to that, I can't take offense to a drawing of the same thing.

The bondage pictures are the only ones I may have a slight problem with and that all depends on the Artist intention. He may have been drawing a representation of tortured innocence or he may have been drawing a child tied up in bondage. I don't know if his intentions were sexual in nature or not. Either way, the only thing I have control over is how I take it. Which is tortured innocence.

Though whether I am offended or not (and personally, I'm not), I will defend the Artist's right to draw.
Reply
:iconlilyas:
Lilyas Featured By Owner Jul 14, 2010  Professional General Artist
I agree with your comment in full.
Reply
:iconphydeau:
phydeau Featured By Owner Jul 11, 2010  Hobbyist Photographer
It's not photography, so theoretically no actual children were involved.
However, dA has dealt with the depictions of characters known to be minors (Harry Potter, Calvin and Hobbes, etc.) in adult situations. It's not allowed. So while I don't think the artwork is bad, dA doesn't want to be a haven for pedophilia. So while it's technically not pedo-porn, they should probably remove it.
Reply
:iconnignag:
NigNag Featured By Owner Jul 11, 2010
Very poor taste. I suspect the artist more than likely has some mental issues. Very few would care to view or consider infant genitals, be they photos or drawings, art. My humble opinion
Reply
:iconstruck3xbylightning:
struck3Xbylightning Featured By Owner Jul 18, 2010  Student Digital Artist
Condeming someone to mental instability over their unexplained drawings is hardly a fitting way to judge someone.

Would you consider the parents who take photos of their kids in the bathtub when they are little unstable? Every day thousands of people post imagery of questionable nature on the internet.

Cherubic characters are child-like in appearance, but are representations of youth and fertility, love and mischief. Some consider Cupid, who appears as a young boy to be just that; a young boy, but he is in fact a millenia old iconic figure.

Edward Cullen is supposedly a very old vampire, incidentally dating a seventeen year old girl still in high school. But somehow that is considered to be ok?

It is funny what people regard as right or wrong, but perception is different for every being alive.

Don't be so harsh to judge someone's mental stability, when you are not qualified to make that assumption; specifically without knowing anything about them before saying it.
Reply
:iconanorakblue:
AnorakBlue Featured By Owner Aug 1, 2010  Hobbyist General Artist
On the Edward Cullen bit - no , that isn't ok, but then I hate Twilight.. you do have a point with the rest, he isn't unstable but.. some of the pictures are a tad too suggestive for it to not be controversial.

Cherubs have been painted like little, naked boys for years, as said the only issue I have with it is the poses etc which doesn't fit in too well with classical representations from what I've seen.
Reply
:iconsilverdragonrs:
silverdragonrs Featured By Owner Jul 12, 2010  Student General Artist
I agree with you! Very poor taste indeed!
Reply
:iconthetine:
TheTine Featured By Owner Jul 11, 2010  Student Traditional Artist
it is Very Suggestive and that is NOT art! they should be taken down Immediately and if the person continues to submit this "type of art" then the person needs to be removed. that is NOT how classic cherubs are portrade!
Reply
:iconrejectall-american:
RejectAll-American Featured By Owner Jul 11, 2010  Hobbyist General Artist
Reported.
Normally I don't mind nude art. It's the human body. But when it's children in suggestive positions, then it's not okay. And someone said "it's not photography so it's okay?" :| I busted a child porn artist less than a month ago, and it wasn't photography. And, as someone else pointed out, here you go:
[link]
They aren't allowed on DA, and whether it's a photograph or not, rules are rules.
Reply
:iconaeires:
Aeires Featured By Owner Jul 11, 2010
The simple point is this, if they were photographs they would be removed because they would fail on the underage model consent forms. Because they are drawings, they stay. That is a double standard on all fronts.

DA needs to pull it's head out of it's rear and get over the "artistic freedom" crutch that allows double standards to exist.
Reply
:iconlilyas:
Lilyas Featured By Owner Jul 14, 2010  Professional General Artist
What's your personal opinion on these drawings? Should they be removed or not?
Reply
:iconaeires:
Aeires Featured By Owner Jul 16, 2010
Removed. There's no need for work like this in DA (or anywhere, actually).
Reply
:iconfrodominatrix:
FROdominatrix Featured By Owner Jul 11, 2010  Hobbyist Artisan Crafter
Cherubs are fine, but the positions make it really awkward to look at. It seems to be intentionally erotic, which is weird. I have mixed feelings; they could be very nice pieces if the artist had chosen more appropriate postions and angles.
Reply
:iconf1nland:
F1nland Featured By Owner Jul 11, 2010
Really disgusting art :angered:
Reply
:icontiffli:
Tiffli Featured By Owner Jul 11, 2010
I just watched one art - it was called "Kiss" ....but why the score shows that this is NOT AGAINST DA POLICY ?Some watchers didnt watch these works ore are too BLIND ??? Ore maybe they play TOLERANTS ? Thi is sick for me...i dont see art in pedophilies. I need some brain therapy now -.-.
Reply
:icondreamersleepwalker:
dreamersleepwalker Featured By Owner Jul 11, 2010
not only this one should be reported, but also the girl supporting him should be reported! one might think they're the same person!
[link]
Reply
:iconlilyas:
Lilyas Featured By Owner Jul 14, 2010  Professional General Artist
I don't get that. :confused:
Reply
:icondreamersleepwalker:
dreamersleepwalker Featured By Owner Jul 15, 2010
idk, I didn't like his work, the most annoying part is the girl who backs him up! she's a bit ... abnormal! DA thinks there's nothing wrong with his pictures.
Reply
:icondragonrayne-kun:
DragonRayne-kun Featured By Owner Jul 11, 2010  Hobbyist General Artist
I typically try not to get into this sort of thing, but I will post a quick and calm opinion on it.
While it may not be against DA's rules or any sort of moral standards that people who appreciate his work have, be honest with yourselves everyone; what does his work say about what goes on in his mind? To be honest, it wouldn't bother me if they were adults or it was for the appreciation on the human body - an amazing creation, mind you - but when it's small children it does bother me a bit. They say that artwork is an expression on the soul and it's creator, thus this is an expression of this man's. Is that a good thing? Yes, it's art. I won't deny it one bit. But is it morally correct to draw it? That's something he will have to ask himself and something only he can account for some day.

And someone did bring to attention that this --> [link] says what is and is not accepted within these boundaries of which these pictures are on.
Reply
:iconlilyas:
Lilyas Featured By Owner Jul 14, 2010  Professional General Artist
What exactly is the moral standard?
Reply
Add a Comment:
 

Poll History