Paintball Guns and Gear forums banner

1 - 17 of 17 Posts

·
Holy ****ing Asscrackers!
Joined
·
6,721 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I have to write a paper for my human sexuality class about the difference between pron and erotica. what are your guys' ideas on what constitutes pron and what constitutes erotica? i'm writing my paper as you read this so it's not like i'm going to copy down what you guys say, i'm just tryin to get some differing opinions
 
D

·
Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
theres a difference?

i dunno, I guess **** is just for getting the job done.. but erotic would be more artsy like dancing and stuff
 

·
ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTFU
Joined
·
5,450 Posts
If it gives me a woody it's good. If it's gross I don't watch it. In my eyes there is really no difference because it could be defined differently for each person.
 

·
Holy ****ing Asscrackers!
Joined
·
6,721 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
yeah thats the point, it can be defined differently by different people.
"in 1964, justice potter stewart said that he did not know how to define ****ographic material, but 'i know it when i see it'"
 

·
Holy ****ing Asscrackers!
Joined
·
6,721 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
and it's my kind of class :naughty too bad it's taught by a butch lesbo :barf:
 

·
oh snap
Joined
·
4,241 Posts
That class sounds awesome. You need to tell the instructor that in order to do the paper correctly, he/she needs to bring in examples of pron and erotica so the class can compare. Lol.
 

·
Holy ****ing Asscrackers!
Joined
·
6,721 Posts
Discussion Starter #10
fenix_freak said:
That class sounds awesome. You need to tell the instructor that in order to do the paper correctly, he/she needs to bring in examples of pron and erotica so the class can compare. Lol.
actually, thats part of the paper. we have to "provide a copy of your examples - one each of **** and erotica"
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,784 Posts
zpyro said:
yeah thats the point, it can be defined differently by different people.
"in 1964, justice potter stewart said that he did not know how to define ****ographic material, but 'i know it when i see it'"
That was during the COPA case. Justice Stewart was a riot during that case.
 

·
Holy ****ing Asscrackers!
Joined
·
6,721 Posts
Discussion Starter #12 (Edited)
edit: just about finished


The difference between ****ography and erotica differs from person to person. Some people have never heard of erotica, some think that only romance novels are such. Others think anything that is even remotely sexual is ****ography, while still others think that only pictures and movies with hardcore penetration can be considered ****. There isn’t necessarily a right or wrong answer to what is what, but there seems to be a generally accepted idea of the difference between the two. I believe that the difference between erotica and ****ography is that ****ography shows nudity, including genitals, and sexual acts, and its sole purpose is to cause sexual arousal. Erotica shows nudity and can cause sexual arousal, but does not show genitals or sexual acts and can be considered artistic, rather than obscene.
There is no legal definition of ****, rather a definition of “obscenity” which was defined in Miller v. California in 1973. The parameters for something to be considered obscene are as follows:
"The basic guidelines for the trier of fact must be:
(a) whether "the average person, applying contemporary community standards" would find that the work, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest, Kois v. Wisconsin, supra, at 230, quoting Roth v. United States, supra, at 489;
(b) whether the work depicts or describes, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct specifically defined by the applicable state law; and
(c) whether the work, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value."1
As section (a) states, community standards are still considered. Prurient is defined as “Inordinately interested in matters of sex; lascivious,” so if the average citizen considered the showing of a belly button as lascivious, it could be considered by the law to be obscene. All three criteria must be met, however, and section (c) is a national threshold, rather than a community test. ****ography is considered obscene because society has determined that pictures and movies showing sexual acts is amorous and has no artistic value. However, that does not mean that anything showing nudity is inherently obscene and ****ographic.
The Statue of David by Michelangelo is a sculpture of a fully nude male figure. Despite the fact that it shows the figure’s genitals, it is not considered ****ography. That is because it is accepted that the Statue is art, and does not show any obscene sexual acts; rather, it is an accurate portrayal of the human body. I, however, don’t believe this to be an example of erotica. Since erotica is defined as “literary or artistic works having an erotic theme or quality,” and there is nothing sexual about the sculpture, it cannot be considered erotica. The showing of genitals alone is not enough to consider the work to be erotica. If the sculpture involved something sexual, such as the man touching or kissing a nude woman, it could be considered erotica.
Erotica is defined as “literary or artistic works having an erotic theme or quality.” Erotic is defined as “Of or concerning sexual love and desire.” To me, the best example of erotica today is from the website www.suicidegirls.com. It has nude pictures of young women (19-30), most of whom have tattoos and body piercing, but these nude pictures most often don’t show genitals or any kind of sexual acts. They are best defined as modern pin-ups, showing naked women but without obscene sexuality. Suicidegirls is different from Playboy and similar publications in that it features real women, rather than fake-breasted, airbrushed blondes.
****ography is defined as “sexually explicit pictures, writing, or other material whose primary purpose is to cause sexual arousal.” Examples of such are easily available on the internet, as 12% (4.2 million) of websites on the internet are ****ographic.2 One such example is www.bangbros.com. It has pictures and videos of oral, ******l and anal sex, and its sole purpose is to cause sexual arousal. I believe that the portrayal of sexual acts, with the sole purpose of causing sexual arousal, is enough to consider that work to be obscene and thus, considered ****ography.
The difference between Suicidegirls and Bangbros is the way that the sexuality is portrayed. Bangbros’ only function is to cause arousal through the gratuitous photography of sexual acts. Suicidegirls does not show sexual acts, and usually not even genitals, but it does show nudity. However, it does so not in a way that is obscene, but artistic in showing how beautiful and sexy a “normal” woman’s body can be. Playboy, on the other hand, I do not consider being artistic, and thus is ****ography, despite not showing sexual acts.
The difference between erotica and ****ography to me is that ****ography shows nudity, including genitals, and sexual acts, as well as having the sole purpose of causing sexual arousal. Erotica shows nudity and can cause sexual arousal, but does not show genitals or sexual acts and can be considered artistic, rather than obscene.
 

·
Holy ****ing Asscrackers!
Joined
·
6,721 Posts
Discussion Starter #13
it would probably behoove you to not click those links
 

·
Holy ****ing Asscrackers!
Joined
·
6,721 Posts
Discussion Starter #15
hardly. you talk about anatomy/physiology, gender/sex, sexuality, disorders, stds, etc.
 
1 - 17 of 17 Posts
Top