I just gonna rant for a minute here: I'm so sick and tired of people who see any type of nude modeling as porn. "That woman/man is naked! This is porn!" No, it's NOT you close minded moron. Nude modeling has been around since the beginning of Art. Just because people use cameras now, doesn't change the fact that it is Art. Porn is something created to purposely sexually arouse you.
Yeah I agree with you, there are guys and gals who do life modelling for art classes and that's not porn either.
Yeah. There was a naked baby for New Year's on the newspaper, and someone jokes "put that porn away!", and I'm thinking "great, get them to censor that too."
it's true, but the naked form now can be arousing, and porn IS art no matter what people think. but nude modelling doesn't mean it's porn, appreciating the naked form is different than masturbaiting to it
I had a "life drawing" class my senior year in high school with a hot chick model.... a 2 hour hard-on every Thursday evening.
just to play devil's advocate a moment, didn't picasso say that all art was erotic by its very nature? if that was true, does it make the distinction between art and pornography kinda blurry?
I think a better title for this thread would be "Nude Modeling IS NOT NECESSARILY porn". Because it might be. Or even if it wasn't intended that way, the images that were created might be used as pornography later. I guess that means I don't agree with this part of the original posting: "Porn is something created to purposely sexually arouse you." Again, it might be, but people are really ingenious about finding things to get aroused by. If we succeed in finding something, then for us it's porn, but maybe it didn't start that way. For people of a certain age--does the name "Sears Catalog" bring back happy memories?