Pornography: Is it Art?
Recently, I overheard a couple in a coffee shop discussing their views on a predominately homosexual club displaying artful nude photos, and having their photos censored by a local neighborhood group. Over the years, there have been countless lawsuits regarding pornography and art. Legally, pornography is defined as imagery that intends to create sexual arousal. The United States Supreme court has determined that the First Amendment has no effect when it regards obscenities. Where does the government draw the line at obscene?
Araki Nubyoshi is a photographer who takes mostly nude portraits of women. His subjects are often, but not always, Asian. They are often portrayed as engaging in a sexual act that involves violence. However, his images depict in such a way that the purpose is obviously not sexual gratification of the viewer. In a series, the meaning changes. It shows views of city life. However, someone who is less liberal may suggest that this is indeed pornography. That it is pornography because it portrays a sexual act.
Today, an adult film producer was found guilty on five charges after producing films depicting bestiality and other fetishes. The Supreme Court ruled in 1973 that obscenity is not anything that holds “literary, artistic, political or scientific value”. He was claiming that his pornography held artistic value, even though federal law outlaws bestiality.
Feminism concludes that pornography and nude art depict a negative image of women and gives the idea that men should be able to overpower them sexually. They argue that child pornography was the cause of men in prison becoming rapists. They say that once the idea is planted, it never leaves. Often, pornography and pornographic art show images of women being sexually assaulted. It is intended to warp the mind of the viewer. Another reason women may naturally find pornography offensive is because men are...