June 27, 2012
-
Penis – NSFW
I hope you are all mature enough to handle this photo of a man’s penis.
It is sort of interesting because I read a post today and a guy posted a photo of a woman topless. The photo was not graphic. It was just a topless woman. If it was a statue, no one would give it a second thought. But the guy described the post as a post about porn and posted the woman topless.
If I posted a painting from 300 years ago of naked women, no one would say anything. But if I turn around and post a modern day photo of a woman naked, it would be labeled by some as porn. It would be unacceptable for TV and for xanga.
The same thing with this post. If I posted a photo of a man totally naked, there would be a holy fit on xanga with 20 people reporting me to the xanga team (or xanga person however people from xanga are left). Others would say I am not a Christian anymore.
Why is one considered porn and one considered art?
Comments (51)
PENIS. Erupting penis.
Art will always be an interpretation of the viewer. Many will always agree and disagree with it. I’m sure that statue of david was considered obscene… but with time it has been more acceptable. Artist take crap for their artwork and takes time for it to be appreciated and accepted.
I chalk it up to perception. If you’re so “prude” that you can’t look at a nude picture of art, then, seriously… Everything in this world wouldn’t have a “sexual innuendo” attached to it if you didn’t give it one. >.< The human body is a beautiful piece of work itself; big, small, skinny, fat. Doesn’t matter.
Nakedness should be on The Constitution. Whenever I see a woman breast-feeding in public, I thank The Lord.
Oh… and… look at it like this. If I sent you a picture of myself topless, would your wife get pissed? Probably. But if she saw you looking at a picture of me topless here on Xanga and it’s in an obviously non-sexual and artistic manner, would she get pissed? Probably not. Unless she’s one of those wives who even at the slightest hint of nipple flies off the handle and puts a “child-lock” on the computer… lol
Any sign of naked is porn….right?
It’s not porn unless it’s sexual.
Looking at the statue of David always makes me feel even more confidant about the size of my “manhood”. So, porn? Art? Who gives a shit; It’s inspirational.
Hmmm. You make a very interesting point.
Dammit, Dan, why did you have to make me THINK this late at night before going to bed?! >:(
Art is not porn. It is the depiction of the human form.
@Benjamin888 - Moi aussie
@MommaFish89 - If you sent moi a topless pic, ma femme would not get as you Americaines say “pissed.” I killed her avec my own hands…She was dou8ble agent sadly…
Porn is art.
Mostly bad art.
But naked is not porn!
I will tell you the difference between porn and art.
Now kindly leave the room while me and this handy box of tissues make our decisions.
The intention.
Obviously the tasteful photo of the topless woman in a pretty setting is art while the photo of the topless woman holding a beer is probably just meant to fap to.
I had to show that statue to my friend (very innocent friend) who had never seen a penis. She is very against porn, so I thought art would be ok. She was concerned about how little it was. We had to have a very long talk that day about how things work.
I think some paintings would still be considered vulgar during that time. It’s really all about interpretation
I have always thought of this myself. I don’t like either because I am a proud prude.
People are dumb.
he’s casually standing there with a small limp penis, so it is wutevaz. comedic even.
if he had an erection and is holding it, then it is porn-y. if the rest of him is hot and he’s cute, then I wouldn’t hold it against him
if he oogly, control, alt, delete!
You’ve gotten more mileage out of that statue than Michelangelo ever did.
People are perverted, but also stiff and uptight. This causes repressed sexuality which urgently needs an outlet for expression. Obscure sexual connotations are heightened by such repression, and labels are given where unnecessary. This is like how when my 4-year old client kissed his female friend he was accused of acting “sexually aggressively” by adults. I consider such behavior acts of projection.
I have my own theory: it would be like comparing real flowers with plastic flowers. Real flowers are beautiful while plastic flowers are unattractive. But a photo of a naked man on your post while not necessarily pornographic would be inappropriate, because at the wrong place, it would not fit right, it would be out of order, malapropos.
It depends on the viewer, you can’t tell people how to interpret something.
Well, to some, porn is an art-form. What you are asking is where is the “fine line”. It is in the eye of the beholder, or for public discretion – no “live” nudity in open public, or sexual references in open/public environments. If it is educational, then it is most likely allowed.
Because when humans create art, it’s beautiful and meaningful, but when God creates art it’s totally disgusting and holy shit that guy’s a pervert ewww
Porn or artsy, that’s one teeny penis.
@amateurprose - Did you know that the reason why David is so small in this sculpture is because Michelangelo sculpted him to be ‘in the moment’ before facing Goliath? His size is not due to him being ‘small’, but rather due to the fact that he is frightened of going out there and facing Goliath. So he may have been a normal sized dude but, like even the best of us, shrank in the face of fear.
I honestly do not remember where I heard this and tried to find some references but couldn’t find anything. Anyway that’s the theory I heard and that’s what I’m passing on to you.
Not one mention of Potter Stewart? If “I know it when I see it” is good enough for SCOTUS, surely it’s good enough for xanga.
every day I take my shower -is that considered porn? I’m showing it all.
I’m a nurse and I have an outline of a woman and kids say,”nasty drawing.”
Porn: You know it when you see it
When it comes to art, not everyone has the capacity to see it. Some art seems to straddle the line with sensuality (see Egon Scheile) or shocks, purposefully with truthful nakedness (see Lucien Frued). When you have posts asking if it is wrong in God’s eyes to kiss someone you’re not married too (I swear, revelife has one of those today!), you’re going to have a least a few call contemporary paintings of nudes porn — even if every can agree Michelangelo’s works are pure art.
There’s a difference between an image designed for artistic reasons and one designed for sexual stimulation.
Not sure of the specifics but you can’t deny that some images of naked people are clearly porn…while others are arty.
Even arty porn is clearly still porn…where as there can be sexy nude photos, that are still not porn.
It’s a fine line but I know it when i see it.
(also that guy has a tiny dick anyway
hehe)
The issue is much more nuanced than that. It’s as different as Michelangelo and Larry Flynt. The one is an artist obeying a timeless urge and magnificent obsession. The other is a profiteer with all the sensitivity of a dope dealer. The erotic content might be present. It might even be implicit. but it’s been (there’s a common word, used in a metaphorical sense) “baptised”. It’s the same with written media. I would place the ardent poetry of ee cummings in the same class as the Song of Solomon and Shakespeare’s sonnets.
@Iobot - Can you go into more detail about this Iobot ? I’m curious about your sentence now.
@heart_leigh - David was a thinker. Let that be a lesson to you women. The bigger the winkie the smaller the brain and vice-versa.
As the Pope i approve some of this message!
@wtf_turmoill - I don’t think men see a difference.
Because people like to get their panties all twisted.
Part of me hates the thought of people taking this post seriously but since so many do….
Eroticism, Exoticism, Art, Porn are products of the moral standings of society in which it was created. We think nothing of seeing topless women in pictures of Aboriginal societies where in some societies showing a little clevage is not acceptable. My grandfather (born 1901) thought showing women’s undergarments in the Sears-Roebuck catalog not suitable even though they weren’t even on manaquins and now one of the candy commercials and even a coffee comercial show a woman wrapped only in a towel, and it is in color too! The pendulum swings from flappers to waltz length skirts of the 50′s, mini skirts in the 60′s, and now approximately 4 inches above the knee. All was acceptable in their time, and risque in others. “If the skirts get any shorter and the flags begin to wave, there will be two more cheeks to powder and one more place to &*%#e” but most on here are too young to remember the truth to that statement.
I think because we don’t see paintings and sculptures as actually human, but view photographs as capturing and transmitting personal information. I agree it seems rather arbitrary. Society has for “ages” agreed that the primary sexual characteristics are only to be viewed in an intimate or medical context. A little more freedom with exposing the secondary sexual characteristics (bare chest and thighs, breasts).
Depending what the person is doing while naked, could depend if it’s porn. I think porn is the action of, not just a photo of somebody in the nude.
I did a big speech on this in class. I think most of it could be considered porn. If it has taste like the statue of david, there is nothing wrong, if its people having sex its porn.
@dw817 - So you’re saying David’s got a “big” brain? lol!
@my0615 – love your comment
A naked woman is beautiful. War is porn!
@heart_leigh - Well, my name is also David. And so I must say. Yes, I am. (to both questions)
@dw817 - Uh, that’s more than I needed to know, but thanks! lol!
@heart_leigh – Sorry ’bout that. Actually I thought that statement went against me, since one is positive and the other could be considered negative …
Author’s intent means something. Obviously that picture wasn’t intended to be pornographic. Unfortunately porn can mean quite a few things to quite a lot of people. I guess there may be some who really get off on that picture too. Each person needs to govern themselves accordingly because lust is still lust regardless of what a person is looking at for it. Some things are obviously more of a stumbling block to more people though, so even if a person didn’t personally find a particular picture offensive, knowing it would be generally perceived as porn is a good reason for a Christian to not post it in most circumstances.
its wierd but true
Some Santas
Coach Outlet Online
are born great, some achieve greatness, and some have greatness
Gucci Belt
thrust upon them. And then there are those happy fellows who take a week-long class in all things
Coach Factory Outlet
Father Christmas, and come out the other side with a coveted B.S.C. degree
Coach Outlet Store Online
(Bachelor of Santa Claus).Such was the fate of those
Coach Factory Outlet
who, for years, chose to take instruction at Charles Howard’s
Coach Outlet Online
Santa Claus School in the upstate New York town of Albion, not far from
Coach Online Outlet
Rochester. In fact, the school still exists today, 75 years after it
Coach Outlet Online
was founded by Howard in 1937; since the mid-1960s, it has operated
Coach Outlet Online
out of Midland, Michigan, and remains the world’s oldest Santa
Hermes Belts
school.In 1961, LIFE’s Alfred Eisenstaedt visited Howard’s school for would-be Santas,
Coach Factory Online
and made a series of photos chronicling the evidently quite fun process
Coach Outlet Store Online
of learning to be all the Santa Claus one can be. (Many of the pictures
Coach Outlet Store Online
here were not originally published in the article that
Coach Factory Online
ran in LIFE.) In its November 17, 1961, issue, LIFE shared the lighthearted
Coach Outlet
goings-on at the school with its readers
He teaches
Coach Outlet Store
the history of Santa Claus, make-up and costumes (“Don’t use false
Coach Outlet
eyebrows — let your own grow”), Christmas stories and how to be jolly. He tells how to cope
Coach Outlet Online
with young hazards Santa may find in his lap. There is the tear-spiller
Coach Factory Outlet Online
(“All you can do is get his mind off what’s bothering
Louis Vuitton Belts
him”) and the shin-kicker (“Santa is no reformer so don’t spend much
Coach Handbags Outlet
time with him”). Most dangerous of all is the beard-yanker. “When
Coach Outlet Online
you see a devilish gleam in the eye,” he says, “you know you’ve
Coach Factory Online
got one. So you grab your beard underneath, hold tight and when he
Coach Factory Online
yanks, holler Ouch.Finally, we’ll end with one of Howard’s more
Coach Outlet Online
memorable quotes about St.
@heart_leigh - Ahhhhha, I feel like I should say something in defense of small men in art… but I’m drawing a total blank.