Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2003/12/11
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]The line between pornography and art is not thin. I can't even imagine what would make you suggest that it is. Pornography is objectionable because it treats human beings like senseless beasts. And because it offers fantasy in place of human warmth, kindness, understanding, and communication. It exults the mechanics of sex detached from its humanness. It's difficult to believe but there are people in relationships that require pornography as an integral part of their sex life. The dummy actions on a screen mean more to them than the person they are with. The detachment of reality from sexual intimacy is a very bad thing. Have you noticed that almost all serial killers engage in some type of perverted sexual ritual with their victims? Pornography is infantile and destructive. Now I wonder who come to its defense? Sam S Phong wrote: what do people object > in pornography ? I assume that the objection it is not just > about unclothed women. What _is_ the fine line between art and > pornography then ? What is the difference between naked and > nude ? What is art ? Are the stone carvings in the temples > at Khajuraho less a work of art than the Gothic cathedrals > in medieval Europe ? > - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html