I've had this discussion with tons of people, and the answer never ceases to amaze me. Some view total nudity as simply art, while others view it as pornography. A friend of mine earlier was confused when I said a fully nude photo on his page was porn, as he viewed it as simply art and "not trashy".

So I'm curious... how many of you view it as art? What level must it cross for you to consider it as porn?

How many of you view it as porn either way?

porn to me is anything sexual

Vivid Video or in a black plastic wrapper behind the clerk, that is Porn

If it is in a Art Musuem, then it is Art

I've seen some things that make me say, "no, this one's art." Hustler magizine, that's not art, Playboy, can be, but isn't necessarily.

If it's done with oil paint, art. If you are if you are in the process of making it and using fingerpaints, probably porn at the time, sell the canvas, that's art.

The one major difference between art and porn is motion. Once it hits video, or is streaming, it becomes porn. Still shots, the majority of those do have some artistic merit. "Behind the Green Door" might have broken a few Hollywood taboos and started main stream porn, but the artistic value of it, not really there.

I'm not sure that it is so easy to make a distinction. Our culture has encouraged us to view sexuality & the human body in a context of 2 extremes - as either 'art' - innocent and beautiful (leaving us normal people believing our desire is 'dirty' and our bodies are 'ugly'), or as 'porn' - disgusting and used only for hedonistic pleasures - jmho. There doesn't seem to be any context for all that may fall somewhere in between.

To me something becomes 'porn' when it exploits or degrades someone in order to satisfy or tantilize a person's salacious/vulgar appetite. Images, acts or words that simply encourage sexual arousal are not 'porn', imo. That is the inherent problem, though...what is vulgar or exploitive to you may not be so for me.

porn is usually the sex movies or smutty magazines. Total nudity done tastefully can be considered art......the human body is a beautiful thing!

nude pictures male/female are not porn in my eyes. but pictures of intercourse, playing with self are porn in my eyes

<-----would you consider this porn??? I dont think so, but many probably do.....

Boobs!

After a couple of years of marriage, I review recent porn to make sure we've done it all at least once. Seriously, if it is a video of a sexual act, it's porn. If it's a simple picture, it could be art or comedy. Think about it for a minute, a hundred Size D blondes in a marathon run. Imagine all the bruises they'd end up with?

nekid peoples

exactly

Nudity isnt porn

Nuthin wrong with nudity

It is a matter of how the nudity is presented. A spread eagle female with her everything inside and out viewable is pornography. Aristic nudity is presented with the beauty of the body portrayed. I have even seen a drawing of a man with a hard on that appeared very artistic and was not trashy or pornographic. So it comes down to how it is presented.

I agree...Just like many other things, it all rests on the intent of the display. Of course, nothing can prevent art from being used as pornography; beauty can, and has ever been, twisted by depraved minds.

so does that include National Geographic photos?
just curios