[–] ▶ №117955[Quote]>>118034>>118049
i think art can be inherently sexual or at least prompt us to think/talk about sexuality, but porn is not art.
porn as a medium is meant specifically to sexually excite the viewer, and it very rarely even tries to do anything other than that. in fact, it's literally become a meme to make fun of porn for being extremely one-dimensional, derivative, and often times lazily-done. (how many times have you seen people joke about porn storylines or porn acting before?)
of course, what people consider what is & isnt art is entirely subjective, but even if porn WAS art by your standards, it'd be pretty hard to argue that any of it is good art.
▶ №117958[Quote]>>117959
>>117952 (OP)Are youtube videos art?
▶ №117959[Quote]>>117969
>>117958lowkey some of them are, Conner O'Malleys skits come to mind as pieces of satire/absurdist humor
▶ №117962[Quote]
only some
▶ №117977[Quote]>>117996
hitler was also was a artist
▶ №118020[Quote]>>118095
>>117952 (OP)To call something "art" implies that it has a deeper meaning than it seems when you first look at it. Porn is the opposite of this. The meaning is clear and concise, like an advertisement. So from that perspective it's not art.
Most "artists" nowadays draw shitty doodles from troonsky or xitter, so it's also not art complexity-wise
▶ №118034[Quote]
yes, however like
>>117955 mentioned i wouldnt consider porn to be anything more than just an easy way to goon and i would certainly never consider it on the same level as something like a historical sculpture
▶ №118064[Quote]
Protip: Art can be, and often is, evil.
▶ №118069[Quote]>>118106
>>118036i dont think this was made to jerk off to or arouse people though, i think this was made just to show the beautiful simplicity of the human body, its rather humble in a way.
▶ №118076[Quote]>>118095>>118106
>>118036Tasteful nudity, such as Greek or Roman stuff, was not meant to arouse any body. I’d consider that to be art.
> I think it is pornThat’s just you, dude.
▶ №118095[Quote]>>118106
>>118036this is art and not pornography or whatever the hypocrisy biases towards.
>>118020>>118076agreed
▶ №118097[Quote]
>Porneia is a Greek word that translates to "sexual immorality" or "fornication" in English, encompassing a broad range of unlawful sexual behaviors, including adultery, premarital sex, and homosexuality. [source: AI]
pornography is more comparable to adultery than to art. it causes you to do something thats unproductive while actual art can be a range of things that provide different intentional emotions.
▶ №118100[Quote]
Yes but only hentai and such
▶ №118106[Quote]>>118107
>>118069>>118076>>118095thanks for the insight guys, i was going to post pic related as something more 'tastefully' done and with a clearer vision as to what its trying to depict earlier but just decided not to for whatever reason, gonna post anyway because i found it interesting
▶ №118586[Quote]>>118647>>118650>>118655>>118729
Pornography is less like art and more like a legal drug. The artists are the drug dealers, and their profession inherently preys on the vulnerable and unable to resist. I would only call pornography art the same way I would call a soyjak art, with very few exceptions. It has no greater meaning or worth than the intention to arouse the viewer (in the case of a soyjak, to mock a type of person or self-insert). The comparison to a drug dealer becomes even more obvious when you just take a look at how much people are willing to spend for a single image, (granted art tends to be expensive anyway) it is frankly absurd how bad their spending habits are, but when you look at porn as a drug it makes a lot more sense. Porn artists can still be skilled but even then *they don't need to be*, you could go to rule34 for like 30 seconds and skim past a few pages and see it's mostly low effort dogshit, if it isn't just straight up ai generated- and people still drool over it. Every fetish is like another avenue of drugs, like crack or meth or heroin. Every artist has a specialty; some particular fetish or group of fetishes that they focus on or are willing to draw, because it appeals to an exclusive audience who has to rely on said artists for their "fix" (also note that by artists I'm also referring to publishers like Blacked.com or whateverburger). It's not impossible by any means to make an actual lust provoking image or media and still have some sort of greater meaning or message, but it just doesn't happen because there's no market for it, and gooners don't care. Also I don't think you can argue that porn's message is always political no matter what- obviously gay furries having sex will give you a good idea of the artists' political views, and it may inadvertently serve as propaganda, solely for the fact that it corrupts people's minds; but it was still only created with one intention, and that intention is not to sway people but rather just to give people something to jerk off to. A neonazi can still secretly jerk off to femboys- in fact it happens more often than I think it ought to. One's sexual preferences can function independently from one's political views, they just tend not to. This market only exists because of the internet, before then there were never people just going around selling highly stylized pornography of women with proportions that would make Leonardo da Vinci roll in his grave, maybe some written erotica but nothing else.
tl;dr, modern pornography is specifically designed for profit, so including some greater meaning is pointless
▶ №118603[Quote]
You can be like 4chan/reddit/discord moderation and just lie about it nonstop to make anything sound like it isn't porn. Just don't take everything into account and weave an answer that makes you feel good. Or however the tranny lives its pitiful life.
Another protip: We wear clothes and don't expose certain body parts for a reason. We avoid certain body language for a reason. We avoid certain language for a reason. And organs that are for reproduction (which does include female breasts because children would die without them) are inherently sexual by literal design, thus causing sexual thoughts. It's not just about what turns (You) on, it's about the intrinsic nature of some things. Pedo opinions don't apply here: Would you willingly apply these allegedly "non-pornographic" concepts to a 10 year old for a video?
Some things are not appropriate, no matter what custom definitions you come up with. Pornography is a huge issue. There is so much evil in the world. Stop tolerating it.
▶ №118613[Quote]
Absolutely not
▶ №118622[Quote]
No but most of you consider pop music and anime to be art forms so why its not probably wouldn't impart on you.
▶ №118637[Quote]>>118638
>>117952 (OP)I wouldn't consider it art. Not to denigrate sport, but porn fulfills a similar niche in which the viewer watches physical function for pleasure. An 'actor' in pornography is no more an artist than a football player. Both revolve around the physical performance and physical pinnacle. Now, you might say dance is a physical performance, and while it is both art and a physical performance, the moves have motivation and meaning behind them. Each move in a ballet for example are choreographed to convey a greater meaning beyond the physical action. Pornography and sport revolve around the physical purely. Beyond the physical action, it has no meaning.
Again, I am not trying to denigrate sport, but I am trying to use it as a point of comparison.
I was considering the possibility for pornography to be used as a medium for art, in a self reflexive way, similar to how Andy Warhol appropriated advertising as a satirical medium.
Even then, as a medium, porn is designed to only provoke sexual arousal. That limits the potential for expression. Sex scenes in movies aren't pornographic because they are linked to character and the overall tone of the movie. Nude paintings and statues are not pornographic because they are a tasteful expression of the human form. It would be almost impossible to create something considered artistic through pornography, because the need to place the erotic above all else jeopardizes all other forms of expression. When someone watches porn, they don't care about the relation between the two actors beyond the physical. Even with weird kinks such as BDSM and cuckoldry, which one could argue are based off relationships, these 'relationships' are not developed beyond the act of physical humiliation or physical domination. Any other expression of emotion in the form is inherently repressed. If one was to use pornography in an artistic and satirical way to critique the industry, could it even be considered pornography?
So in that sense, I don't think it could even be used as an artistic medium.
I think intention and meaning plays a lot into what is considered art. If the intention of the 'artists' does not go beyond the expression of a physical performance for the sake of physical performance, and the 'medium' suppresses any form of complexity beyond the physical, it would be hard to consider pornography art.
I think in the end this becomes a discussion between love and lust. Art comes from a place of love. An appreciation of humanity and complexity. While love has aesthetic qualities, it is not limited to the physical. It needs to embody something beyond. Pornography is lust. Purely aesthetic. Superficial and kitsch. Materialistic.
A painter will try to capture the essence of their subject. A pornographer only captures the exterior.
Pornography is a total inversion of beauty. The state of nakedness should be beautiful, because it should be an affirmation of humanity through accepting the physical reality of fragility and vulnerability. In extension, sex should be beautiful, because the physical union mirrors an emotional union. In pornography, the body becomes nothing more a commodity, valued only through the physical aesthetic. Sex becomes an act of dominance rather than union. It is beyond base. It is fucking evil.
▶ №118638[Quote]
>>118637to clarify, I dont think sport is evil, because it appreciates the humanity of the athlete. Pornography does not.
▶ №118654[Quote]>>118695
anything being created like that is 'art', morality or intention does not come into play.
▶ №118655[Quote]
>>118586just saved this TRVKE to my copypasta folder
▶ №118695[Quote]
>>118654The definition of art is pretty subjective, and you could define any human creation as art with that mindset. It's not wrong per se, but I think you kind of have to draw the line (pun intended) somewhere, or else the word "art" becomes effectively meaningless. I wasn't even arguing against porn being art- it is art by a technicality, but not good art, regardless of the actual skill/effort put into it. Arguing over subjectivities is pretty pointless, I just wanted to give my two cents that nobaldi wants to hear.
▶ №118766[Quote]>>118788
>>118650This is why I fucking despise gooners, they just cannot keep it to themselves, they have to force it literally everywhere like the
s they are. And kids being groomed into their fetish is an added bonus.
>>118729>you can't oppose fascism without fetish 'art'Holy shit what a bunch of fucking retards. Literal real life soyjaks
▶ №118788[Quote]
>>118766Soyjak has always imitated and mocked real life people. It still hurts them badly and they can't refute it because they really do behave like insufferable, spastic manchildren with no self-awareness, which is why the meme continues as strong as ever.
▶ №118809[Quote]>>119057>>119102>>119172
Porn will never be art, however it hurts to say but i think rule 34 stuff is art (even doe its bad)
▶ №118810[Quote]
pornography generally tends to be devoid of semantic value/artistic merit.
▶ №119057[Quote]>>119175>>119320
>>118809stupid question, but has rule 34 stuff ever warped your view on any pieces of media? i was dumb enough to goon to some of that coal in the past.
i wonder how i could think about it in a way that annoys me less.
▶ №119172[Quote]>>119323
>>118809dr.doe is troonslop dough
▶ №119174[Quote]
>>>118586
>And they all must stand on a fucking soapbox expecting to be taken seriously by their tylenol induced cattle
Soapbox cacas like Jimmy Kimmel and other stoopid coal creators are so fucking retarded, niggas just want to be free n shit, although i do oppose soe right-wing shit like the 51st state (for obvius reasons)
▶ №119175[Quote]>>119178
>>119057Nah I get it, Just slwly upgrade your media consuming to ruby and forget about that coal raisin, a thing that really helps is to just restart your vydia consuming habits, take a break from online bs for a week
▶ №119178[Quote]
>>119175good reply
i'm gonna start doing that, thanks
▶ №119320[Quote]>>119336
>>119057i mean not really, when i used to be a gooner id goon to shows/games i was interested in the time. Usually i would change my views on a characther but most of the time it didnt really bother me
▶ №119323[Quote]
>>119172dr doe is genuiene brimstone furry porn, while it is art its terrifying
▶ №119336[Quote]
>>119320i guess that's a good reminder i shouldn't take it so seriously
for me, i think i thought of it too much so it got to me. geg
