Well, since anything can be art?there?s no real difference other than your own interpretation. I?ve watched what I?d define as some pretty artistic porn in my time. But just like porn, not all art is good. That?s where something called ?subjectivity? comes into play.
For example, three years ago, I remember an instance when I was reading the graphic novel of
Watchmen during our ?reading hour? in my Music class, but my teacher confiscated it and reported me to my tutor because my idiot friend pointed out the sex scene between Nite Owl II and Silk Spectre II in it, and my teacher deemed it as ?inappropriate sexual material?.
If it was anyone else that tried to demean the importance of
Watchmen as ?porn? rather than ?art?, I?d punch them in the face. OK, not really, but you get my drift. It was fucking stupid, and there was, like, one panel where you could see her nipple. I wouldn?t masturbate to
that.
Not to mention that people have masturbated to nudity way
before porn was invented, or more specifically, internet porn, and/or hentai. Not everyone masturbates to just porn. For some people, all they need is a picture of a girl in a tight miniskirt on
deviantART to get them going.
Another example: anyone seen the film named
Lost and Delirious? Well, short summary: it?s about a fifteen-year-old girl who arrives as a new student at an all-girls boarding school, when she discovers that her seventeen-year-old female roommates are in a relationship. There are multiple sex scenes between the two girls. Some people, including the director, would class it as art, because it explores social issues of the lesbian relationship, as well as how the two girls themselves don?t seem to class themselves as lesbian, and one of them pretty much goes insane when the other one decides to end it, but I don?t doubt that a number of people were waxing their pole when they saw Piper Perabo licking Jessica Paré?s nipples.
Ultratwinkie said:
Porn is when a man screws a woman.
Art is a man dressed like Uncle Sam screwing a woman with "American Taxpayer" printed on her forehead.
One is just porn, the other is porn but conveys a message.
I like this answer.
A couple of months ago, my friend sent me a link over
Facebook to what I?d class as ?racist porn?. Some people would consider this art; I, personally, didn?t see the message in it, which is why I go back to the subject of ?subjectivity? and ?multiple interpretations?. Like how some people think that the Qu?ran is a great moral guide for everyone to follow, while others think it?s a violent, disgusting, and discriminative form of fascist propaganda.
Anyway, the video that my friend sent me ? obviously, this was all staged ? included a white man kidnapping a black woman in his car and taking her back to his house. Then he racially belittled her, before forcing her to eat watermelon while he anally raped her.
So, would that be porn or art? Or both? That?s the thing; there?s no one right answer. I bet some people would even say it?s not racist because it?s a sexual fantasy.
lechat said:
a child is like a priceless piece of art
you get in trouble if you touch it
Not if no-one knows about it.
