I think the two overlap but pornography can be enjoyed by people just for sexual pleasure and not aesthetic pleasure. That means, it can be just plain crude and animalistic, wheras art can be enjoyed at another level. Does that make sense?
2006-10-17 23:39:47
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
Pornography is a controversial type of art and not the only one.
Simply put, there is some art you like and some you don't. That's what art is all about.
Even if you doodle naked people, that's still art.
It's a creative expression.
2006-10-17 23:48:59
·
answer #2
·
answered by xenobyte72 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
Depends on the individual. Taking a broad view, pornography can be considered an art, as is all music, even hip-hop.
2006-10-17 23:38:29
·
answer #3
·
answered by robinallsup 3
·
1⤊
1⤋
I personally think all pornography is art. It's just specialised art. It has the same purpose as art: to instill emotions in the viewer.
2006-10-17 23:43:09
·
answer #4
·
answered by genghis41f 6
·
0⤊
1⤋
Art becomes pornography when the knees seperate...
2006-10-17 23:44:27
·
answer #5
·
answered by babyeddieuk 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Both depend on each individual person's perception. But I think that what someone else said is right: it can be Art as long as a significant number of people can get aesthetic pleasure from it.
2006-10-17 23:43:00
·
answer #6
·
answered by Steve-Bob 4
·
0⤊
1⤋
depends on one's own perception of what art is.
personally i would say a 7 way all girl gang bang is better to look at than the mona lisa
2006-10-17 23:43:25
·
answer #7
·
answered by BigBoy 3
·
0⤊
1⤋
In the courts generally.
2006-10-17 23:49:41
·
answer #8
·
answered by Chariotmender 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
most "family friendly" art websites draw the line at penetration.
2006-10-17 23:46:15
·
answer #9
·
answered by Ivy 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
"Art" does not (or should not) include porn.
Artists usually confuse the two to get attention.
2006-10-17 23:49:34
·
answer #10
·
answered by Nothing to say? 3
·
0⤊
1⤋