Quote:
Originally Posted by NightbatŪ
Looking at that Al and Another Blood figure I got thinking.
It's a nice fig but while I have nothing against nudism, somehow I never buy a fig where 'certain' parts are clearly visible
most of the time I consider it a 'turnoff'  from being a 'great' figure
though there may come an exception, so far it exceedss my idea of 'good taste'
Seeing some borderline pr0n figs at times, when it comes to "Erotic" figs, where do you all draw the line? |
I think this is an excellent question. It's something I wrestle with all the time, partly because of my own standards and mostly because of the fact that I'd rather not be called a pervert by people passing through.
I don't buy figures with nudity or with cast-off ability, period. That eliminates over half of the figures I like. A bit harder to judge are figures that are intended to be sexually provocative. Where does one draw the line between tasteful appreciation and artistic depiction of the female form and sheer titillation? I err on the side of caution.
And then there's the underpants question. Many, many figures are designed to show off underpants in an attempt to pander to a panty fetish. At SOME angle, though, underpants will be visible if the character is wearing a skirt, no matter the intentions of the sculptor. I err on the side of caution again.
Add to that my policy of not buying figures of characters from series I'm not familiar with and I'm left with, uh... not much. I guess my wallet is happy about that, though.