This is SOOO true. I am always amazed at how often the "open-minded" don't have an open mind when it comes to "closed or narrow-minded" people's point of view. Oh sure, they have an open-mind when it comes to what other people should tolerate or accept, but shouldn't they, by virtue of their own beliefs, tolerate or accept other's so-called limited views?
As for the porn versus art topic, I'm generally among the more narrow-minded of view points. To me, most nudity that involves genitalia is more pornographic than art (with the exception of things like nude baby pictures). My thinking is that it is, by definition, sexual in nature. I know MANY people disagree and that's cool. We all have out own beliefs.
Hmm...so how is it that a picture of a nude baby is considered art, but a picture of a nude adult is porn?
Better watch out..or the prudes above will crucify you for mentioning the word baby and nude in the same post
... LMFAO at some of the views here of these midwesterners who want to label anything they do not like as "porn". Totally fricking hilariously narrow-minded.
A big question I have after reading all of these.........is if it is everyone's interpretation is there really a difference? Does it have to be labeled porn or art? Who cares? You don't HAVE to look at it if you don't want to and if you look at an "artsy" picture with the intent to get aroused go for it........if you look at a porno and view it artisticly cool!