Art or porn?

I personally think it's the best cover Playboy has done in nearly a decade.

Playboy usually does tasteful pornography, and this looks to be no exception.

"Art or porn?"

it cant be both?

Considering what Congress did to the American people today, I think porn has as much artistic merit as any other subject matter.

Porn. Always has been.

But what difference does it make in a free society?

Guys seem to like it.

Girls seem to think it is bordering on pedophile.

I don't think "art or porn" is the right question.

I think the question should be, "does she look too young?".

im thinking more art, i think porns more sexual acts and obvious teasing, then lily just modeling the female figure.

Monet's Olympia and a snapshot of some 20 year old caressing a teddy bear are incomparable. Good try though.

The difference? Monet's Olympia was not created for a porn magazine.

Well, I haven't sean the pics so I cant really say. But it seams like more woman are saying that I can be sexy and still be a respectable person. Becids Playboy is the most cleanest porn magazines out there. And let he do what ever she whonts to do.

It is what you make of it. Lets just not turn this into something for the supreme court to decide.

well, she looks quite tasty to me.

I think its borderline pedophile. She conjures up thoughts of little girls and knowing that the point of the magazine is porn, I wouldnt want to see little girls in it. Does that make sense? I think some of their covers are fine but stay away from provoking thoughts of kids...

two of both please.

I'll take one Art please!

By the by it's based on an old album cover.

Being naked can be art. Playboy is not art. You would never find a cover of playboy in an art exhibition. Horny guys read playboy. So Id call is tasteful porn

art or not, great cover picture, sexy.

I never knew the distinction between 'nude' and 'naked' before. But I don't think the distinction between art and porn is so clear cut. Surely something slightly provocative can still be art?

I would call it art....at least the cover shot. It is much more tasteful than yet another crotch shot of Paris or Lohan getting into and out of their cars!

"The main point is that there are no "artistic" nude works of art of the past that do not have a sexually suggestive and arousing element to them."

"The fact is that if nude images are not arousing, whatever the prudishness surrounding them, then they are not very good works of art."

Enough said!

Creepy

I think it's just a picture.

It's a picture of a young naked woman, but somehow it does not make me think of sex, no matter how sexy it seems.

Maybe it's because Lily Cole is attractively strange looking.

error error cannot compute must be art not porn.