Visitors
Is this Porn?
This poll brought to you by Blogster Polls
Believe it or not everything you see in this photo is in fact covered(I can prove it) but implies almost complete nudity. Do you consider this porn? My answer upfront is it is art. A first attempt at art using the digital camera as a tool, but amateur art for sure.
- No, how can the nude form be automatically considered pornography?
- Maybe and explanation in comments
- YES! How can you ask such a stupid question!
Email
Print Article
Favorites
Report Abuse
User Comments
 |
|
 |
thank you thank you |
 |
Not porn. |
|
Wee agree! (as usual) |
|
Is this pornographic (literary...) |
|
<< Ezekiel 23:20 >> |
|
YUM! |
 |
Nah...I don't think so. Erotic yes. Porn, not really! |
 |
I'm clearly seeing her cheeks that suggests an entrance...that suggests intercourse? hmmm nah not porn |
|
lol, :) |
 |
I don't see anything. Where'd it go? |
|
LOL exactly :) |
 |
You see more on mainstream television these days, so no, not porn. Maybe not art, but not porn. JMO. |
|
I agree 100% |
 |
It's just erotic art, not pornography. Pornography is the depiction of sexual acts, not nude poses or semi-clad poses. As for any moral implications of that, as SimplyTrace says anyone calling you to account is probably going to have a whole lot of explaining to do when it comes to their choice of softcore popular TV programs, which are rampant these days. Ultimately, softcore is further over the line than erotic art. |
|
Well said! |
 |
Not on my side of the pond... with the stupid exception of UK of course |
|
I thought the uk was pretty racey? |
|
Exactly my point... All over Europe this is just a nude, maybe art. In UK (just as in US) it's considered porn |
 |
Not only is a naked female the most beautiful thing to look at (leer, ogle, stare), (drool and slobber) but also to taste and smell..... |
|
MMM, I do like that! |
 |
Hello holly, this is really funny ...in a way ... i don't think this is "covered" in anyway ..... cover is not what on ... it is what covers .... , and no it does not look like a porn at all. It is pretty and erotic but not porn. |
|
These panties are in picture in question, you can see the strap! The angle just implies nudity. |
|
very cute holly,... still not covered as far as "covering" is concerned ... and yes, the strap is clearly shown in the pic .. just from the side angle ... |
 |
You are a babe. |
|
mmmmmmm, thank you |
 |
Don't see it as porn. More like modelin', an' in that case it falls more into th' art category. Jus' my .02 cents, for whatever it's worth. |
|
& you would be correct! Thanks for visiting! |
|
Well...th' feelin' of bein' right feels pretty damn good. An' that's commin' from a man! LOL! Keep postin' things....I enjoy readin' yer blog! |
|
Everyone likes to be right! Women the most! |
|
Thanks fer statin' th' obvious! |
|
anytime honey pie |
|
Now I know who to go to when I want someone tuh point out the most obvious, mundane things in every day life that I normally would miss. LOL |
 |
Porn is in the mind of the beholder. In other words the definition of porn is extremely variable - just like some other words...racist, homophobe, pervert and many more. |
|
I agree fully. |
 |
Yes that's porn. I smell a rat. |
|
How, there is no nudity. |
|
BTW, where is that rat hiding? |
 |
I would say softcore porn image. |
|
Even if there is no nudity, nothing showing? (the hiney is not bare) |
|
Yep, look it up http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Softcore_pornography I didn't make up the definitions.:) "Softcore pornography is a form of filmic or photographic pornography or erotica that is less sexually explicit than hardcore pornography. Softcore pornography depicts nude and semi-nude performers engaging in casual social nudity or non-graphic representations of sexual intercourse or masturbation." |
|
"engaging in casual social nudity or non-graphic representations of sexual intercourse or masturbation" then this clearly fits neither defintion. It is not social per your bold font. The legal definition ison my previous article.
|
|
Sure it is, someone had to take the photo... that is social and besides she is looking out the window and there is a whole crowd of people down there having a big social gathering... it is probably her wedding. Yeah that is it, that why she is wearing the white stocking, that is what she is getting married in. Also see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pornography about a quarter of the way down the page, there is a photo with this caption She is wearing panties and pretending to have been something that looks book with her rear end up in the air, she even has a shirt on... perhaps the defining part is the "rear end" pose. :) |
|
Whoops I meant She is wearing panties and pretending to have been READING something that looks book with her rear end up in the air, she even has a shirt on... perhaps the defining part is the "rear end" pose. :) Like I told you I don't make up these definitions, just share them. |
|
FYI Margar3t, Wikiedia is not a reliable site because anybody can post, add and (even worse) modify about anything. This means that what you read there may be the truth but it is always subject to personal views, therefore not scientific. I don't know about U.S. of A but in Europe students are not allowed to include Wikipedia to their sources for this reason. Does this ring a bell? |
|
Actually I am just giving Holly a hard time, so I don't really care if it is a "reliable" source. It was all in fun, sorry you took it so seriously. |
|
OK... no problem. Unfortunately I see lots of people quoting Wikipedia... There was an article in UK Metro day before yesterday about "history been rewritten in Wikipedia" just two days ago |
 |
Nop, not porn!!! |
|
Why thank-ye |
 |
no this is clearly not porn. you should re-upload and try again |
|
LOL, hehehehe I got some places you can go! |
|
well if they got you in them please do tell |
 |
I see beauty and from the photographer's point of view, art, but I guess it depends on the definition. As we have noticed on Blogster, there are many different viewpoints. |
|
Considering the beautiful, almost naked body in the picture, leads one to posit forth many questions. Is sexuality, sensuality, erotic thought, somewhat lustful desire and wanting pornographic, bad, or wrong, or just the way we as humans are genetically programmed to respond in order to continue our species? |
 |
It isn't porn and the picture probably could be on most tv networks, especially the cable networks. |
 |
Ha...I tried to click and get a bigger shot. But naaaa...this isnt' porn. |
 |
well now, very nice! That photo is NOT porn, but if yo have few that are, go ahead and send them to me, lol, I like what I see!!! |
|
I have lots :) |
|
|
 |
Porn, no ... not even rude ;-) Could be art, could be teasing, could be advertising, whatever label you wish but not porn. ReikiRebel |
|
Why thank you! |
 |
No, it isn't porn, but it IS quite hot. |
|
lol, thank you :) |
 |
You're a dangerous lady, but I like! |
|
mmmm, thank ye |
I don't consider it porn, but others may see it that way. The human body is art, and I believe that if this form of art makes you feel confident in yourself, go for it. People will think what the will.