I typed a great response but internet is being sucky and it got lost. :( First off, SoFurry = Yiffstar.
Just because porn is instant gratification doesn't mean that it is worthless or disposable. People do use the same porn more than once. I've read some stories multiple times, particularly when they have been gifts. There's no reason why evoking the emotion of lust is less worthy than evoking sadness or joy.
A story does give you a reason to continue with Omaha but after you're done reading it, then what? It's over and is essentially disposable. That's even more true with single pictures. The Mona Lisa is art but once you've looked at it, that's that. It's not even a particularly interesting picture.
You say that art and porn are different but you don't provide any justification for that. Why are they different? And why does art deserve more protection? I don't think there is any worthwhile distinction between them, and indeed I think many porn pieces are worth more than some art. Just because something is called art doesn't make it better than porn, or worthy of some sort of protection. Some art is nothing more than rubbish that's only notable feature is that someone was so taken with the title of art that they gave it more than the sneering dismissal it deserved.
Art does not deserve unquestioning protection or any protection above porn. All forms of expression should be protected so long as they do not harm or violate people's rights. And even then that protection must, like every viewpoint, constantly be questioned. There is a great danger in not questioning. If art deserves protection then questioning that should not be a problem at all. If it doesn't deserve protection but you forbid the mere act of questioning it's protection then you may protect something unworthy. It's always good to question your views, to make sure they are properly founded.
"If all mankind minus one, were of one opinion, and only one person were of the contrary opinion, mankind would be no more justified in silencing that one person, than he, if he had the power, would be justified in silencing mankind."
~John Stuart Mill~
I typed a great response but internet is being sucky and it got lost. :( First off, SoFurry = Yiffstar.
Just because porn is instant gratification doesn't mean that it is worthless or disposable. People do use the same porn more than once. I've read some stories multiple times, particularly when they have been gifts. There's no reason why evoking the emotion of lust is less worthy than evoking sadness or joy.
A story does give you a reason to continue with Omaha but after you're done reading it, then what? It's over and is essentially disposable. That's even more true with single pictures. The Mona Lisa is art but once you've looked at it, that's that. It's not even a particularly interesting picture.
You say that art and porn are different but you don't provide any justification for that. Why are they different? And why does art deserve more protection? I don't think there is any worthwhile distinction between them, and indeed I think many porn pieces are worth more than some art. Just because something is called art doesn't make it better than porn, or worthy of some sort of protection. Some art is nothing more than rubbish that's only notable feature is that someone was so taken with the title of art that they gave it more than the sneering dismissal it deserved.
Art does not deserve unquestioning protection or any protection above porn. All forms of expression should be protected so long as they do not harm or violate people's rights. And even then that protection must, like every viewpoint, constantly be questioned. There is a great danger in not questioning. If art deserves protection then questioning that should not be a problem at all. If it doesn't deserve protection but you forbid the mere act of questioning it's protection then you may protect something unworthy. It's always good to question your views, to make sure they are properly founded.
"If all mankind minus one, were of one opinion, and only one person were of the contrary opinion, mankind would be no more justified in silencing that one person, than he, if he had the power, would be justified in silencing mankind."
~John Stuart Mill~