An artist posts a work for comment in a critique venue.  She/he is advised, gently, that one of the works is too suggestive, especially considering reactions pedophiles could have from viewing it.  And what happens?  The artist comes back all snippy, lecturing the reviewers about “it’s art, and I’m not here to debate sick minds.”

Really!?  So what is the point of putting a four-year-old’s head on the body of a child undergoing puberty and its associated changes, namely the growth and development of “baby boobs?”

“It’s a fairy,” replies s/he.

“I’m aware of that, but it’s still too suggestive. You need to change that.”

[INSERT PETULANT REACTION BY ARTIST]

And who is this snide and snippy creative type? Well, the name is stricken from my list of possible candidates for review on NakedGenius.com, and s/he will never be permitted to show on the Art Showcase.  Why?  Well, first off, because this isn’t the ONLY embossed leather work s/he has created that is suggestive in such a manner to be too attractive to pedophiles, the nipples on all of these sexually suggestive baby angels and baby fairies sculpted in fully enhanced, erect prominence such as a woman gets when she’s “turned on.”  Secondly, because I am completely tired of snippy attitudes from writers as well as artists who request critique, then, when they get them — gentle and fair ones, not “chew you a new one” reviews — they get their underwear all gathered in a knot because they got some suggestions for improvement, and didn’t just get all lauds and applause, never mind what they REALLY crave, which is rectal licking.

Pfffft! on them.