You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

RE: xxx

in #dporn5 years ago

Porn can be defined as:
"the portrayal of sexual subject matter for the purpose of sexual arousal"

So while one might say that an image of a naked woman doesn't arouse them, that could be considered 'art' or 'nude photography' and not be labelled porn.

However, to the 40-year-old virgin types, that same image of the naked woman might be enough to stimulate them sexually, so should that be labelled pornography or just 'nude photography/art'?

Is it solely dependent on the intent of the producer? (If their intent was to arouse, it's pornography regardless of if the audience is aroused?)

Are you saying there has to be more than just a sexy image to be considered porn? Or are you saying that in order for there to be pornography, there has to be nudity?

Sort:  

For there to be pornography, the production must be a crude and open presentation of sex with the "intention" of sexually exciting someone.

I remember that when I was 13 I masturbated myself seeing a catalog of women's lingerie.
Obviously this catalog was not created with the intention of sexually exciting anyone. Therefore it is not a pornographic material.

Are you saying there has to be more than just a sexy image to be considered porn?

Exactly!
A sexy image is not pornography at all, it is simply "sexy."

So, returning to the subject of my publication, we are in a porn site called Dporn which is a new steemit tribe. Here as the name implies, "porn" publications are expected.

Let's think of someone who wants to watch porn: googling "porn" and then receives a sexy image of a fully dressed girl. The poor man is going to be sad.