Has anyone actually LOOKED at Baroness covert art before? This

>not noticing that the girl on the right is probably about to do something lewd with that catfish

File: IMG_143292.png (2MB, 1280x651px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1280x651px

>>71062446
their covers are pretty good

>>71062446
anyone else disappointing with purple?

>>71062723
geeze, disappointed

>tfw a band has godtier cover art but their music sucks

>>71062446
>>71062518
>DUDE FEMALE BODIES LMAO

>>71062446
Also that one egg in front of the left girls chest that's breaking in the shape of a penis

>>71062819
This.

When can we stop having covers about female bodies that doesn't represent anything other than being used as sexual objects? and no making it 'artistic' doesn't count.

>>71062723
thought it was great

File: venus.png (1MB, 770x494px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 770x494px

>>71063437
What the fuck
>and no making it 'artistic' doesn't count.
Following this logic, this image and much other paintings with nudity in them are porn.

>>71063998
It isn't necessary porn and porn isn't the problem, it is the needlessly sexualized art in society that is the problem. By the way the example you have given does not count.

>>71063998
It's not that, it's just that naked women is somehow used as a shortcut for being 'artistic'. You still have to actually do something more than just having a naked woman in your art.

>>71064036
>>71064030
Go to bed, Abdul.

>>71062723
Are you talking about the art for purple or the album itself?

>>71062819
Female bodies are more aesthetical pleasing than male bodies, that's it

They cover women in nature and have them a bit fat. This is beauty.

>>71063437
Honestly I was gonna ask you how this particular art piece has anything sexual about it beyond them being nude, but I then realized I'm going to bed and really don't give a fuck about your answer.

These pieces have very obvious references to the feminine nature being earth and water (elementally). I wouldn't consider these to be sexual in nature at all, there is nothing that suggests anything about sexual intercourse or objectification of their physical forms.

I honestly believe you're projecting your own belief that women are too often objectified in art and failing to see that you can use a female body as an art statement without it relating to anything "sexy". Please consider taking a second look at these covers.

>>71066747
I stress the nonsexuality of the women as well. Their nudity represents a return to the earth, which is where the human body originated.