xxx

arenkeman (51) in dporn • 5 years ago (edited)

xxx

5 years ago by arenkeman (51)

Authors get paid when people like you upvote their post.
If you enjoyed what you read here, create your account today and start earning FREE STEEM!

Sort Order:

Trending

[-]

kinkytales (50) · 5 years ago

So where do we draw the line? Doesn't it all depend on what we find arousing? Your first image, for example, of the bare-breasted beauty spanking her plump-assed friend, certainly excites me, even though there is no copulation whatsoever. The same can be said about a well presented clothed body. On the other hand, some of the pics of asses covered in red pimples may not exactly be my thing (though I can see how others might drool all over them). Or what about my posts? They are made up of words, barely images, though the subject matter is sex. And as far as nudity is concerned, in and off itself a naked body has barely anything to do with sex, let alone porn. Once you put it into the proper setting, it doesn't even need to be naked any more, and it can convey the most perverted ideas.

$0.00

1 vote

[-]

sali.porn (40) · 5 years ago

Thanks for sharing with us!

$0.00

1 vote

[-]

kharma.scribbles (57) · 5 years ago

Porn can be defined as:
"the portrayal of sexual subject matter for the purpose of sexual arousal"

So while one might say that an image of a naked woman doesn't arouse them, that could be considered 'art' or 'nude photography' and not be labelled porn.

However, to the 40-year-old virgin types, that same image of the naked woman might be enough to stimulate them sexually, so should that be labelled pornography or just 'nude photography/art'?

Is it solely dependent on the intent of the producer? (If their intent was to arouse, it's pornography regardless of if the audience is aroused?)

Are you saying there has to be more than just a sexy image to be considered porn? Or are you saying that in order for there to be pornography, there has to be nudity?

$0.00

1 vote

[-]

arenkeman (51) · 5 years ago

For there to be pornography, the production must be a crude and open presentation of sex with the "intention" of sexually exciting someone.

I remember that when I was 13 I masturbated myself seeing a catalog of women's lingerie.
Obviously this catalog was not created with the intention of sexually exciting anyone. Therefore it is not a pornographic material.

Are you saying there has to be more than just a sexy image to be considered porn?

Exactly!
A sexy image is not pornography at all, it is simply "sexy."

So, returning to the subject of my publication, we are in a porn site called Dporn which is a new steemit tribe. Here as the name implies, "porn" publications are expected.

Let's think of someone who wants to watch porn: googling "porn" and then receives a sexy image of a fully dressed girl. The poor man is going to be sad.

$0.00

[-]

dporn.talk (43) · 5 years ago

Good history here.

$0.00

1 vote

[-]

arenkeman (51) · 5 years ago

Thank you very much.

$0.00

[-]

steemitqa (64) · 5 years ago

Good little education here thanks for sharing.

$0.00

1 vote

[-]

arenkeman (51) · 5 years ago

You´re welcome.
Thanks to you for reading.

$0.00

[-]

monsterboy (39) · 5 years ago (edited)

I cant argue with this if we go by your selected definition. If for some reason your philosophy became dPorn policy, then us soloists would be out of business. But, it might be just what makes dporn unique and valuable (edit: aside from the current success).

$0.00

[-]

arenkeman (51) · 5 years ago

All exposed in this post are my personal ideas. They in no way represent the policy of Dporn.

$0.00

1 vote

[-]

monsterboy (39) · 5 years ago

It’s definitely worthwhile perspective, never thought of it like that.

Posted using Partiko iOS

$0.00

1 vote