Food for thought: is a facial cumshot actually porn?

[bbthorne]

art.jpg


I'm serious. I'm not talking about the ACT of delivering a facial, or anything that leads up to it. I'm talking about a picture of a woman's face with sperm all over it. Look at the above pic and think about it: there's no sex being shown, no genitals being shown, not even any nudity being shown. Just a face with some white stuff on it. I actually consider the facial cumshot to be the preeminent form of abstract art in our society today. Art because there's no logical reason for it to exist other than to elicit a visceral response to the viewing of it, preeminent because it's practiced by millions, rich and poor alike, and abstract because... well just look at it. It's not a painting representing another object, or a sculpture of something; it's just a mess that millions love looking at, and even those who don't love looking at it are guaranteed to have an emotional response to seeing it, good or bad. What is that if not art? Separated from the act leading up to it, I don't see how a facial can even be technically considered pornographic. If I'm nude while painting a bowl of fruit, that doesn't make the painting a depiction of nudity. If you're having sex that leads to a facial, that doesn't make the facial itself a depiction of sex. It is ART, pure and simple, and I'm not being the least bit sarcastic when I say that. Thoughts?

[hhorner50]

Semen is inherently a sexual thing and depictions of it in or on people is a sexual display. I don't know how 'porn' is really defined, but it's definitely something 'NSFW' and also not for kids.

[littlejoe]

First, I love the picture you posted!

Yes, a facial is porn because it's intended to turn the viewer on. Porn, i think, falls into the broad definition of art anyway. At least, they are not mutually excludable.