Taste in Erotica

What makes “tasteful” erotica versus “distasteful” erotica in photography or art?

Post contains nudity:

Helmut Newton is good.

My theory:

Erotica is “distasteful” when it is actually the sexual act (penetration, coitus).

What’s the purpose of erotica?

My thought:

To stimulate sexual desire towards your partner in order to impregnate them.

At what point is a photo or art work “lewd”?

An interesting experiment:

If you select a photo which arouses you then you Gaussian blur it… at what point does it still arouse you or doesn’t?

This is me trying to fool Google AI:

Nude photos I don’t consider erotic

These photos don’t stimulate me:

But this non nude photo I find very erotic and stimulating:

Erotic Helmut

Apparently this is not an “adult” photo, but it is “racy”:

Is it because of the arched back and breasts?

The look … the expectancy of coitus?

Youthfulness, fertileness?

Theory:

Us men desire a sexual partner who we consider fertile for offspring. This is why the attraction to youthful women.

Also an interesting point:

It seems for us men, it ain’t about a woman with massive breasts, but rather having perky, supple breasts in which the nipples point upwards. This is apparently a sign of youthfulness and fertility in women.

I wonder if this notion of a woman with insanely huge breasts (artificial augmentation) is socialization that nature.

Scroll to Top