Historical Artifacts

1433 readers

2 users here now

COMM MOVED TO !historyartifacts@piefed.social

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

PugJesus@lemmy.world

PugJesus@lemmy.dbzer0.com

christ child with an apple, ca. 1470–80 (sh.itjust.works)

submitted 2 months ago by merde@sh.itjust.works to c/historyartifacts@lemmy.world

9 comments fedilink hide all child comments

https://www.metmuseum.org/art/collection/search/479673

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] PugJesus@lemmy.world 7 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I've received several complaints about this. Whatever your opinions on non-sexualized nudity, it would be appreciated if you marked it NSFW simply to avoid the issue.

[–] merde@sh.itjust.works 0 points 2 months ago (2 children)

In the late Middle Ages, such images often were the focus of altar decoration at Christmas, and documents reveal that nuns frequently were given such sculptures by their families upon taking monastic vows.

if it's safe for nuns, if it was used as "altar decoration at Christmas" in late middle ages, something must be wrong about people complaining about this in 2025!

[–] TheLeadenSea@sh.itjust.works 5 points 2 months ago

It's not about whether nudity is fine. It is. It's about whether images of naked children should randomly show up at work on people who are browsing Lemmy's computers. Not safe for work doesn't mean it's morally bad or anything, it just means it's not safe to be seen at work.

[–] PugJesus@lemmy.world 0 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

In the Middle Ages, Christ's foreskin was also considered an appropriate holy relic.

Standards change with the times.