I can't view anything with a 'Mature content' warning on it now because it's deemed unsuitable for someone who is fifteen years old. There isn't anything with a mature content warning on it that you wouldn't see in a film rated 15 so to me it's entirely pointless.
Come on, deviantART, what are you protecting us from? A few naughty words and natural body parts? What are we being protected from - are we deemed not mature enough to appreciate art in certain forms?

At the age of fifteen you are well past the stage where a naked man or woman would cause a fit of giggles. At the age of fifteen you have experienced far worse language than that which you would find anywhere on deviantART. At the age of fifteen you are exposed to FAR more horrifying things. So where exactly is this ban coming from?
There is nothing on this site that is unsuitable for a fifteen year old - I would even argue there is nothing too unsuitable for a thirteen year old either. There's nothing dirty about artistic nudes so does this ban not make it seem that way? Doesn't it say to us that we aren't mature enough and aren't emotionally ready to view these images as works of art?

I think young people are often underestimated greatly - both emotionally and intellectually. What is ' protecting' young people from the naked body going to do exactly? We are exposed to drugs, sex, violence and alcohol abuse from early ages - you can't escape from it in society. I, personally, have seen some pretty nasty drug and alcohol related incidents - so have most - and aren't these more extreme than nudity?
To quote a friend, I would rather explain to a child how two people express their love to each other than explain to them the hatred in men that causes them to act violently.

There are images of violence on deviantART but you aren't going to find anything sickening. I COULD understand it if the ban only concerned violent images and was for those under 15 (as I've already said, you won't see anything on dA that you won't see in a movie rated 15).
Is sex more dangerous than violence? Why are we so much more accepting of violence in TV and films than we are of sex and nudity, shouldn't we be worried about the impact graphically depicted violence in films can have rather than sex scenes and nudity? Young people should be more protected from 'making babies' than murder and torture? Perhaps people would disagree with me when I say I think it sounds silly.


So now there's age restrictions on art - what next - age restrictions on books? You know, somehow that wouldn't surprise me...