am i the only person who associates boobs with porn anymore?

since beautiful days there has been an increase in the amount of boobs on the forums...do boobs not count as porn anymore?

i'm not being a prude...i don't mind seeing lots of naked boobs...i'm just jealous and bitter thats all...

but yeah...porn isn't allowed...but naked jiggling boobies are ok? is that how things are?

 

so if i put glassses on my cock can i put pictures up of that?

 

lolYES!!!!!!

 

would it make a difference if there was a baby attached at the nipple? i suppse that would be more hippy. i suppose i consider overt sexual acts to be porn, but not nudity. if the statue of David porn? bare-breasted sabines are porn? i don't really think so.

 

it wouldn't make any difference at all...naked is naked...

sorry...am i being completely un-hip wanting people to wear clothes? sorry...i do apologise...

also...i have no idea what a bare breasted sabine is...

 

Hey man, they still turn me on, even if they are art....

 

i wasn't trying to be critical of you, really. i suppose that i'm just so accustomed to seeing nudity, and seeing no harm in it, that i don't see it as porn at all.

as for bare breasted sabines, i'm referring to that masterpiece, the rape of the sabine women. nudity is nothing. now if some woman is getting cum dumped in her mouth, or taking it up the ass, i would consider that porn.

 

Just to help you guys clarify things... I think you're getting confused between two issues. Whether bare breast = porn, and whether bare breasts are appropriate. Porn they clearly ain't, since porn is commonly understood to be material designed to sexually stimulate the observer.

Having clarified that point, you might want to confuse yourselves further by considering whether they're erotica

I'm leaving now, coz the nudity debate is just way, way, way too complicated!

 

...if a guy can post topless pics.... cant a girl?

 

you can post whatever you like as long as its in good taste and everyone agrees with that
i think most of us will agree that our bodies are beautiful

 

Ahh shit, I was so trying to keep clear of this debate!

Obviously you're entirely correct that it's unreasonable that women should be subjected to a different set of rules to men. But to reduce the argument to such a simplistic level is misleading. Like it or not, most men will find naked breasts to be sexually stimulating. Maybe not yours in particular , but as a general rule, breasts are erotic.

I'd entirely defend your right to expose your tits in public and to post pictures of them on the internet, but you should be aware that the issue is slightly more complicated than that. Rightly or wrongly, a woman exposing her breasts is a sexual act.

Now I'm torn a number of ways on this issue. Firstly, I can see that we should be comfortable enough with our natural bodies to be able to relate to naked people without there being a sexual subtext. Clearly we're not yet at this point in our society, simply because of our learned reactions since childhood.

However, I can also see an argument for generally keeping the breasts covered, because this maintains their status as an erotic symbol. If we became accustomed to seeing naked breasts every day, they'd no longer be erotic - and I think we'd have lost something if that happened.

That's obviously no reason to say that women shouldn't be free to go topless, but maybe it's a reason to maintain this as the exception rather than the rule? I'm on the fence.

The other point is whether it's appropriate to post semi-naked pictures on a public forum. Again, I'm on the fence here, so these are just some thoughts rather than opinions, but a couple of issues spring to mind..... firstly, I think it's established that breasts are erotic, so whether you like it or not, posting pictures of breasts has an inherent level of sexuality/sensuality in a way that a man posting a topless picture of himself does not.

Secondly, given that minors view these boards, is it appropriate to post semi-naked pictures where they might be seen by children? I don't see any harm in it, but others might, and society at large probably would.

Just some thoughts.

 

Nudity is natural! We were born that way! We're not supposed to wear clothes!

Natx

 

A thoughtful and well-considered response, I see.

Would you care to define 'natural'? Wearing clothes is 'natural'. 'Natural' = 'that which arises from nature'. Humans 'arise from nature'. Everything we do 'arises from nature'. Therefore clothes are 'natural'. 'Natural' is always a great way to avoid a discussion.

Of course, eating raw flesh is natural. Dragging off women by the hair and fucking them is natural. Are you advocating these things?

There's a strong case for us being more comfortable with nudity, but trying to pretend it's not a complicated issue does nothing to advance the debate.

 

Hmm, I think if there was an image trying to portray anything sexual there might be a problem but the pics aren't sexual at all (no offence girls!), they're just pictures of a few people having some fun

 

I'm not saying this particular image is a problem, but there's a wider issue surrounding social nudity which I think it's valuable to discuss.It alarms me to see the people who frequent these forums dismissing important social issues with glib, throwaway remarks, when surely we should be discussing things in an attempt to reach a deeper understanding?

 

Is just breasts!!....Porn is construed as "something intentionally designed to cause sexual thought". Breasts are just part of people's anatomy, I guess it is what the person looking at the picture construes from it that makes it just breasts or pornography.....

Bill Hicks did a great bit on this subject..I'll go watch it and get back to you...

 

And yet another attempt to provoke intelligent debate falls by the wayside.

 

I don't think so, unless you mean by intelligent debate us all agreeing with you, my points are valid I feel about the viewer deciding what is and is not erotic...I agree with your natural debate, that society decides what is normal and acceptable and exposure or underexposure to an object decides whether or not it is offensive or acceptable....Much with swearing and violence which has become a much more accepted medium now than say 20 years ago...

Many unnatural things are also accepted though, are baby heart monitors natural, do they benefit our society...yes...

As to minors seeing the pics, they probably see them everyday when they pick up their dads Sun newspaper anyway...Personally if I had children I would rather they saw breasts each day than a lot of the violence on tv....

Breasts are breasts there are much worse things to expose people and minors to...I mean have you guys ever watched these boy bands out now....When did banality become a good thing....

 

Well, I was moving towards the 'intent' debate. I think pornography can be defined by the intent of the person producing and the intent of the person viewing. If the producer has no intent to publish porn then they have done pretty much all they can to ensure that they have done the right thing and the responsibility then lies with the viewer to decide i they think it's porn or not.

So, to sum up, if someone publishes something that's not meant to be porn and the viewer sees it as porn then that's the viewers problem to deal with IMHO...

 

Hardly. If you read my posts, you'll notice that I say I'm on the fence regarding most of these issues. The majority of the thoughts that I've expressed have been just that.... Thoughts, not opinions. My point is that the debate is the issues should be discussed in order to reach a better understanding.

I think you're partly correct. The intent of the viewer goes a long way toward defining what is and isn't pornographic. However the intent of the provider of the image can not be excluded. I think we'd agree that pictures of a woman gettign fisted while taking it up the arse could reasonably be described as pornographic? I've already said earlier in the thread though that I don't believe the pictures in question can be described as porn.

Absolutely. I agree with you in this regard. Others who are more prudish might have a different perspective though.

Like I say, I'm just attempting to provoke debate. I think nudity is a complicated subject, and our attitudes towards it as a society are well worth discussing.