I think one of the problems with the constipation over art vs. porn is the linkage made between pornography and obscenity. A ready-made overgeneralization goes on something like:
Art vs. porn. Porn <---> Obscenity. Therefore, Art vs. obscenity?
This linkage is what enables moral guardians to censor pornography. Even though ... there is no necessary connection between inducing sexual arousal and obscenity. Groping someone would definitely be an obscene act, but pornographic literature and images? Come on ...
When does the image attempt to achieve an artistic goal, and when does it exploit sexuality? There's no single answer, but this is sort of how I "judge"
It's all personal opinion, and it is very rare that two people share the same thoughts.
When it is deliberately taken to be porn, it is always seen as porn, and some porn directors feel they are artistic as well. So really pornography can be artistic, and some people think anything with a nipple showing is pornographic. There is no way to realisticly put down a line and say this is pornographic, and this is not, and have everyone agree.
i don't want people to agree, i wanted a kind of debate as i know there is many sides to this topic. Which i think makes a great topic of discusion in a forum.
Depends on the socity you are in, for example, in any American highschool, you can walk down the halls and see couples trying to lick each other's tonsils clean, in Dubai it is illegal for a couple to kiss in public.
What is considered indecent in one area of the world, is considered perfectly accetable in another.
You can even get this variation in the same family. My mother thinks the statue of David is indecent, because you can see his penis. I disagree, and think it is a beautiful work, penis and all.
There is no definable line. It is all personal opinion.
yes i agree, you could bring religion, culture, genders, age and so on in to any topic of art, well any topic at all. And every opinion would be different.