Please take this question seriousely

Status
Not open for further replies.
"As for the other nude pictures, these were only in Rome's decadence or fertility gods."

This is again incorrect. Lets look at the Kama Sutra for example, written more the 2000 years ago, but records and recorded art indicate it had been handed down in oral tradition and in graphical form for more than a thousand years prior. Kama Sutra is neither roman, as it pre-dates the roman hey day, nor homage to fertility gods. Manuals for erotic sex are found in a variety of forms in every culture.
http://www.dimensional.com/~randl/cg/fuckcup.jpg <- This Greek water vessel was only a roman hey day or fertility god? riiiight. Considering this is the Hellenic period in greek history, and considering that Greece was not under Roman control that's a little far fetched.

Your generalizations of the Roman empire is flawed and incorrect.

"this kind of art was expensive and difficult to produce."
Another folly of a statement. As most art, especially the stuff that has survived is both artistic and utilitarian. Fresco's on pots that carried water, jewellry, adornment on animal harness are all part of rich cultural traditions. Nor was/is it difficult to produce. Especially in the middle east area a great amount of the land if clay based, and clay put into a fire (even at low temperatures harden's). Inks are made from local plants and minerals, and as we see in cave paintings, last a long time.

Erotic art as I stated is found in every culture in many forms, it appears in temples it appears in homes.

Also to be perfectly frank, Roman art history is for the most part rather tame, yes there are nude statues but they are not eroticized. Roman culture had developed to the stage of nudity as tasteful art. Roman art and nude's are most recognized for their drapery and cloth. Yes there are the olympiad nudes, but they were nude because its difficult to run a marathon in a toga.

http://www.hermitagemuseum.org/imgs_En/03/artwork/e3_1_2c_ancient_rome_statue.jpg <- Take for example this Statue of the Emperor Octavian Augustus.

Erotic art actually does not usually appear in the high level's of society, it is most commonly found among the lower classes. High society had to keep up appearances. (despite their orgies and harem's)
 
Last edited:
Cyberia, you're going on a tangent that's really quite far from what I said or the purposes of this thread. None of the art produced could possibly be as realistic as a photograph, and that's what I meant by "graphical." Now where did I make any mention that any of your pictures were Roman--there's no way to really tell from a glance because the Romans copied so much of Greek stuff--or that sex manuals did not exist in ancient times?
 
By the term Graphical I assumed you meant graphic depictions meant to depict or cause arousion. I would like to contest the point that art in non-photographic form could not be as realistic looking as a photograph. For rather art can be more realistic, take for example Madame Tussaud's wax museum. True not all medium's relate to photorealism, I'd like to see a photorealistic staind glass. But painting, sculpture, fresco all can be frighteningly realistic. If you are going to mention that you mean films. Well films have replaced live theatre in terms of mass-entertainment appeal. The live theatre version of porn would be a harem or orgy or something of the like. And if we're going for "realistic" are porn stars really realistic? Triple D jugs, and 12" shlongs. Real sex isn't like how it is in porn anyways. Erotica is about stirring images in the imagination, not exactly line for photorealistic line.

The romans did not "borrow" or "copy" greek (or any culture they came to conquer) but were rather influenced by those cultures. (One cannot assimilate others without others becoming part of you). Cultures time periods and ethnic groups have very distinct artistic styles. But artists do not develop en vacuum. Art is influenced by, and influences others.

And yes it is a tangent. But its a related and relevent tangent, in that it is related to Masturbation, and that erotic art and the need to deal with arousion, whether by onesself or by intercourse. It is something that has been around since the birth of mankind. And as this is a forum of discussion and I am contributing, relevent and informative material to conversation to back the points of my argument and to prove points made by others wrong.
 
The romans did not "borrow" or "copy" greek (or any culture they came to conquer) but were rather influenced by those cultures. (One cannot assimilate others without others becoming part of you). Cultures time periods and ethnic groups have very distinct artistic styles. But artists do not develop en vacuum. Art is influenced by, and influences others.
Click to expand...
Roman art is often times a mirror image of the Greek art. For instance, it can be rightly said that Roman's borrowed the Greek gods notwithstanding that they changed the names. The words influence, borrow, and steal dictate scales of influence.

And yes it is a tangent. But its a related and relevent tangent, in that it is related to Masturbation, and that erotic art and the need to deal with arousion, whether by onesself or by intercourse. It is something that has been around since the birth of mankind.
Click to expand...
Even if the ancient Greek had photorealistic porography, those before them didn't. My comments were directed at the evolution of the human mind. If one believes in evolution, then it would seem that those before us, even before civilization, did not have pornography. This alone does not anything except pornography being an accident of evolution.

True not all medium's relate to photorealism, I'd like to see a photorealistic staind glass. But painting, sculpture, fresco all can be frighteningly realistic.
Click to expand...
To my knowledge pornography always means photographs. For instance, someone who models nude to be drawn by art students does not become a porno star. Pornographic art or erotic art is used instead of pornography.
 
What's it been? About 5 seconds or so, evolutionarily speaking since we were all running around with our goods on full display. If anything, evolutionarily speaking, clothing is an aberration that is warping our minds.
 
sam said:
I have accepted to the fact that I have no control over him masturbating. But Okinrus is right about the difference in values. My values say that porn is not right. The magazines really bother me. My boyfriend says that he will throw them away but does he really want to. I don't want him to resent me for that but at the same time I don't want the magazines in the house. It is funny that you say that he is addicted to sex though because he says that I have a higher sex drive then him. Do I tell him to throw out the magazines or not???????
Click to expand...

Sam,

You're boyfriend is going to be spanking that monkey until the day he dies.
It is 110% natural for a guy to do this. Rather than trying to stop it (which
will ONLY lead to resistance), simply encourage it (let him have any mags he
wants for that matter).

There is a problem that you guys are facing (and it's not masturbation). You
simply want to have sex more often; however, there are alot of time
constraints on one or both of you (work work work). Pick one or more
evenings on any weekday where you two will agree to do nothing but
spend time with each other. Sex may happen and it may not... but there
is a very much improved chance that it will.

Now, about masturbation. It is not a replacement for having sex with you.
It is simply easier. He can do it on his time, its quick, and he doesn't have to
engage in any complexities and work of interacting with another person.
Think about it. He's working all the time. He's tired. He doesn't always have
the strength to engage in foreplay, sexual intercourse, post-intercourse
*cuddles*. Additionally, he may want to spend what little spare time he has
do other things. Asking for sex on his spare time may be interpreted as not
respecting his time; however, agreeing on giving each other dedicated time
is a whole new ballgame (but it will never... I repeat NEVER stop
masturbation).
 
okinrus said:
My comments were directed at the evolution of the human mind. If one believes in evolution, then it would seem that those before us, even before civilization, did not have pornography.

...

To my knowledge pornography always means photographs.
Click to expand...

Oh dear holy men crack me up. What in gods name are you trying to say about evolution and pornography? I can’t make out any coherent point. Is it because that in your mind the two merely exist in a bin you call "sin" so you can attempt to relate them at will?

as to your assertion that pornography always means photographs, I suppose that means you will pleasure yourself to this www.literotica.com (Might not want to click that at work! No actual pictures there, but they do have pornographic add banners) without any guilt? I find many of these stories much more erotic than any photograph.
 
That's a very good point Mystech. If its not porn why do they call them "erotic fantasies" not "erotic photorealistic images, taken from photos..." Riddle me this Batman... err...Okiman...

(Points to post above that was posted in postdom)
Then what's with the Dogma?
I Happen to beleive that animals live MUCH better lives than we on the whole. We(as a species) have this weird self-obsession with killing ourselves off. I have never met a suicidal species other than ourselves. (and don'ts say lemmings cus that was a hoax, disney admitted it. Of course animals are gonna run of a cliff if you spook them that way)

(Points to post below, as I don't want to waste another post)
Isn't that a bit nit-picky ridiculous? (Sorry Its very early right now and it struck me as funny) Best bang since the big one *snort*
 
Last edited:
sam said:
I have accepted to the fact that I have no control over him masturbating. But Okinrus is right about the difference in values. My values say that porn is not right. The magazines really bother me. My boyfriend says that he will throw them away but does he really want to. I don't want him to resent me for that but at the same time I don't want the magazines in the house. It is funny that you say that he is addicted to sex though because he says that I have a higher sex drive then him. Do I tell him to throw out the magazines or not???????
Click to expand...


yes, if he doesnt have those to get off with then he will give you more
 
Thought you all might want to check out some caveman porn.

<img src="http://www.sciforums.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=3040&stc=1">

<img src="http://www.sciforums.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=3041&stc=1">

<img src="http://www.sciforums.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=3042&stc=1">

So, How recent is the porn revolution again? Hmm?
 
Sam said:
I have never been happier in my life except for this situation. It has been difficult to deal with but the communication in this thread has helped wonders. This weekdend I am going to show him this thread to help our communication. I think that things are on their way to getting better rather then letting this become something that ruins a great thing.
Click to expand...

Heh. I wonder what happened? Did she show her boyfriend this thread where she was discusing his masturbation habits with the world of sciforums (and google of course. Wonder if sam's boyfriend masturbation gets any hits. :p) What happened? Did they break up? Did he stop he stop yanking on it? Or at least slow down? Or maybe just pretend to quit and continue in secret? Maybe he got her into porn? Maybe they masturbate together now?

The world may never know. ;)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top