any movie where it shows you the reproductive organs of people
2007-11-05 06:54:25
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
2⤋
2
2016-07-25 10:36:21
·
answer #2
·
answered by Rodolfo 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
There is no agreed upon definition. That is why the to levels of all 3 branches of government have struggled to define it in a way that meshes with the first amendment.
That it is allowed under the first amendment means people have the right to produce it, view it, and do whatever else is legal with it. Or to ignore it completely if they want.
What they don't have a right to do is to legislate it, or to make moral claims that arise from an authority such as a church that not everyone is part of.
There are ample documents describing the history of anti-porn legislation available on the web - google is your friend.
2007-11-05 07:49:54
·
answer #3
·
answered by Barry C 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
It's 'whore lit.'
Let's suppose you're a prostitute, and time is money. When the next customer comes in, you want him ready. Throughput and cash flow is the dominant concern. So, being a practical man or woman, you've painted the walls of the waiting room with images that prepare your customers for the thrill of a lifetime, for a reasonable fee. Or, catering to a literate clientele, your magazine rack does not contain a single copy of Better Homes & Gardens, but holds somewhat racier material that is frankly aimed at getting your customers' trousers around their ankles, etc.
So, there's your initial definition: "Pornography is writing that is written to make a whore's job easier."
It's not adequate yet, as 'pornography' has had a lot of meanings appended to it, and its original meaning is frequently dropped. Moreover, use of the term is rarely neutral now.
Today, for instance, writing aimed at increasing the rate of rise, so to speak, is written for users who would never engage with a prostitute. Stroke books, for example; or skin mags; or crossword puzzle fetish material; or fawning biographies of the rich or famous. I'll add private user-written material (e.g., the fictional diary you keep about the life you aren't really having, but would if you could), despite that its existence isn't public, and it can be kept secret. These are 'pornographic' if used properly.
Some of this 'pornography' cannot be prevented, by any means, as its effect need never be revealed. Who thinks twice about a pot-bellied old man taking the sports page into the bathroom with him?
Organized on this one, not, I'm. But let's rule out "nudity is pornography" before I go. The first pornographers so called lived in a culture that was perfectly comfortable with nudity. Pornography was invented to counter the pernicious effect of ubiquitous nudity, that skin alone was insufficiently exciting, by engaging the mind through images and words.
2007-11-05 07:20:32
·
answer #4
·
answered by skumpfsklub 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
What does it matter? Do you want to argue semantics or do you want to argue about whether or not people should have a right to view and produce porn? The questions are: should people have a right to view and produce recordings of any form of affection? Should people have a right to view and produce recordings of nudity? Should people have a right to view and produce recordings that are intended to produce a sexual thrill? Whether or not those things should be included in the definition of the word "pornography" is irrelevant.
FYI, I think people should be able to view and produce any of those three things.
2007-11-05 09:07:41
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
Porn is that which the community as a whole deems to have no artistic value and is morally repulsive. Unfortunately this leads to different definitions of porn in different areas. Some areas define it as the showing of genitalia, some of showing genitalia in a sexual context, some define it as the act of copulation while others refuse to clearly define it to prevent a argument over free artistic expression. Since the standards defining porn is a community standard, the standard changes drastically between communities. An Amish community in rural Pennsylvania will have far more stringent standards than someone from a more sexually liberal area like San Fransisco.
2007-11-05 06:45:34
·
answer #6
·
answered by xtowgrunt 6
·
2⤊
0⤋
Well, clearly it's not "any form of affection that is recorded"...otherwise, we wouldn't ever have love stories on TV or in movies. Really, you wouldn't even be able to see Shrek and Fiona getting married. Additionally, this would impact simple things like a Mom & her kid holding hands while they cross the street, or hugging each other.
It's also not "nudity", or else we'd have to remove a lot of very good art from our museums...The Statue of David by Michaelangelo, for example, or Boticelli's "Birth of Venus", both of which are considered major artistic accomplishments.
Dictionary.com defines it as "Sexually explicit pictures, writing, or other material whose primary purpose is to cause sexual arousal" or "The presentation or production of this material".
Personally, I agree with the above description. I believe that the is a way to display the human body that is artistic or for educational purposes, and another way to display the human body that is intended to create sexual stimulation. I believe that the latter is what we can easily define as pornography...That it is the intent that defines it.
2007-11-05 06:53:08
·
answer #7
·
answered by abfabmom1 7
·
1⤊
1⤋
Porn is any sexual act that involves nudity. Boobs, Groins, Butts, etc.
Any form of affection being recorded is not porn because kissing is a form of affection and I wouldn't consider that porn unless they were kissing certain areas of the body. It doesn't matter the intent of the producers or directors because they can show sexual acts on movies that do not show nudity (besides breasts) and they are not considered porn.
2007-11-05 06:44:20
·
answer #8
·
answered by Tryin to Liv 3
·
0⤊
1⤋
Under a broad definition, pornography is any explicit presentation or description of the uncovered human breasts, genitals or anus. Some definitions narrow it down to only images (that is to say, text and sound descriptions don't count), and others require it to be designed to cause sexual arousal in viewers (placing non-sexual nudity in another category). In common usage, pornography usually refers simply to pictures or videos of human nudity (nudity being defined as having any of the breasts, genitals or anus uncovered and visible). I hope that answers your question.
2007-11-05 06:44:50
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
0⤋
pornography is something that people find interesting, but many do it. It leads people away from the good things and perverts the mind to only want to see sexual, explicit photos of nude people kids included. It takes away one's privacy and leaves nothing for the imagination. It can also change a person's attitude or abilities to perform the act of sex without looking at porn or acting out what they see or to masterbate in front of a tv or playboy.
There are alot of illegal sites in the net you can see or novelty shop and video stores that sell things to distract a person aand cause them to be addicted.
you can go on line to amercias' most wanted or other police sites to get an idea
2007-11-05 06:46:45
·
answer #10
·
answered by poetbjc64 5
·
0⤊
2⤋
Well I can see the confusion. I'd say that porn is when "sluts" (my choice word for the guys and gurls in the vidoe) make a vidoe of sexual activities for anyone to view. Porn makes me sick. That is what is done in privacy for you and your lover but it has become a popular form of entertainment. On the otherhand, I have let my bf record a lil somethin-somethin on my phone (which later was deleted). That was diferent tho b/c that was for our personal viewing ONLY, and we're in love. So vidoe taping is video taping, but for the wrong reason... it becomes porn.
2007-11-05 07:05:48
·
answer #11
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋