[shahar2k]

I was looking over the following thread http://www.sijun.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=5&t=004221
and people kept asking whether or not the image in question was pornographic.

I wonder what everyone on the board would consider as pornography, and where would they draw the line... is it in the saucy "bits", the actions preformed? and what would make pornography appropriate? if you put black boxes over the eyes and parts, is it no longer unsuitable for the viewing of unprepared eyes?

any takers?

[Ko]

I wouldn't consider the things posted recently (and always) as pornography.
There are no women in "spread-eagle" positions... no throbbin' cocks and whatnot.
Just the nude female form... that can hardly offend anyone but the most purist american.
I just got home from a week in Paris where I went to all the great museums I could fit in to my tight schedule. And a warning to those easily offendable. Do not go there! There are evil sculptures... and every other painting displayes female bits and bops.
It's all classic roman- and renaissance porn.

Cheers
Ko

[calzgal]

Personally I think our political system in this country is pornographic.

Naked women/men doing the nasty? That's just life at it's best. So what?

[mk]

Whats the problem with pornography anyway ?
I really cant understand that.
Whats the problem with naked bodies? Whats the problem with lust?
Everyone has sex but noone wanna see or speak about it... sick ppls.

mk

the image is neat... the face is a bit... well... not so good. And i personally dont like milktanks... maybe some smaller breast would look better... the rest is okay.

[shahar2k]

ok, but what If I said that I think that images used purely for commercial purposes, such as selling a product are actually pornography and not art? that IS my oppinion, anything "art" that has no use in expressing the artist's self somehow is not art at all, and anything which tries to sell a "product" is pornography, in the case of something along the lines of hustler magazine, they are selling sex, nothing more or less, and for that purpose there is no art in it, therefore it's pornography.

[Dan]

what about the new milk tv commercial campaign with the naked lady getting milk poured all over her? Didn't work quite as well when they used a guy though.. unless you like that kinda thing.

[Dan]

whoops replied to the wrong post

[ July 31, 2001: Message edited by: Dan ]

[tayete]

Well, maybe it is just a cultural handicap.
It has always seemed funny to me how everybody says at the forum "Future biker girl - WARNING, NUDITY", and such.
At least in my country (Spain), nudity is not a so extraordinary thing (you can see it in many TV advertisments, and at the beaches in summer many women go top-less). And better not talk about Germany, Denmark, Norway, etc... where it is even more common.

So, I do not see anything strange in that pic (well, she's not too beautiful, and yes, too big breasts, and I *HATE* high heels), but maybe it is just because I am culturally biased to accept nudity.
Maybe an artist from a muslim country doesn't think the same...

[Dan]

I'd imagine that high heels might cause some painful damage in bed if her foot slipped

[Lapjos]

No porn IMO..hihi..talking about cultural handicaps, some American Exchange students visited our school, they participated in art education where we drew some building outside. It was VERY hot and some guy took off his t-shirt (nothing else!!!) and the gals were screaming like crazy "Oh!!! I can't look there! He is naked!! NAKED!!"

Funny

ciao

[ July 31, 2001: Message edited by: Lapjos ]

[shahar2k]

lapjos, you got the broken americans heh happens at my school all the time, and no one complains, but there is a point there,

In america in general the censorship, and fear of anything that MIGHT be wrong, or bad for "the children" is immidiately kicked out of society, and this is NOT a good direction, it will be as if everyone learned how to deal better with disease by living in a bubble... dosn't happen...

by being sheltered from nudity, Sexuality, and "vulgarity" people learn to understand it for what it is, and not as something which is out of the ordinary.

I think that over the long course there is NOTHING which is bad in itself, everything which people consider bad has become like that because the meaning is put into it.

[pixualize]

I kind like the way comedian Bill Mahr put it:
When he was growing up there were "things for kids" and there were "things for adults" and that was that.

I think there is a problem when we become a little too protective of kids.

[shahar2k]

yah most likely, still, a little correction, I'm IN california, I'm FROM israel

[circuitrider]

I don't consider it to be pornographic however it does border on the edge with its overt sensationalism of distorted female sexuality in a position of vulnerability....

[Lapjos]

shahar: These xchange students were from Wisconsin, you are from California and I think this makes a big difference. I reckon people from CA are less prude then people from Wisconsin.

ciao

[ August 01, 2001: Message edited by: Lapjos ]

[EviLToYLeT]

some say sex is an art...

[DarkBlade]

That particularly pic... Hm. Not sure.

In general, if it strikes me as trashy then I don't really consider it art. Or rather, I don't consider it good art. But then, part of it depends on context.

Err.. maybe I'll come back when I"m a bit more coherent.

[shahar2k]

hm, well, a topic like this is always much more fun if the conservative people get into the mix
this is like arguing that Craig is a good artist on this board... I won't get much conflict (I know, there are people who think he isn't the end all be all, and there are those that do, personally I think I can't wait to see where he takes his style and talent next, because if it's pretty I like looking at it but that's completely off topic)