[quote=inhinyero]The man in the picture became the object of happiness or lust for people who do not have a broad perception or have narrow views on the art of photography. The picture loses its purpose. Nowadays, people do not acknowledge anymore the sense of art. What they look only is the body which gives them the pleasure, the privates which makes them horny, the face, etc.[/quote] actually most nude arts barely even show the full body. because sometimes lighting also helps "cover" them up. however, why the concern with pleasure and horniness when the said "FS pics" are all about being horny and lust - and they've got clothes on. that's just my point! [quote=inhinyero]But let's have a reality check, generally people look at it now as a sex fantasy material rather than as an art. For example, those FHMs, playboy, and other magazines featuring the same as those mentioned a while ago. Those celebs, some if not all, who have been in the cover shoot do it for the sake of their career, hence, for the sake of money.[/quote] i don't even count those magazines as 'art' or tasteful. those are specifically targeted towards men and sexuality and 'horniness' LOL! do i need to post an example of nude art im referring to that's tasteful? [quote=inhinyero]Btw, why not argue on some other topics, right? It would be more challenging. And hopefully an enjoying one.[/quote] i "debate" or "argue" whenever and wherever it arises. however, im just peeved by the responses here for some reason. well i guess the reasons would be the ones i've been stating. im sure they mean well, but it just seems to fake and hypocritical in general because of what see a lot in friendster.