The Instigator
Chsdebateteam
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Nivek
Con (against)
Winning
1 Points

Fun debate, you chose (Nothing really serious)

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
Nivek
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/25/2016 Category: Entertainment
Updated: 11 months ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 279 times Debate No: 91804
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (2)
Votes (1)

 

Chsdebateteam

Pro

First rounds just acceptance. But yeah, let's just have a fun, nonserious debate. You get to chose the topic!
Nivek

Con

I accept. Thanks for having me. I'd like to thank Pro for allowing me to choose the topic as I wish.

If Pro permits, I'd like the topic to be....

1) Art should not be permitted as a medium of sexual use/arousal.



Standard Debate TOS applies. I am an asexual, so if pro allows, I'd like to take my original position as Con in this debate. You will begin as Pro.

I await your case.
Debate Round No. 1
Chsdebateteam

Pro

First off, thank you for joining my debate, and thank you for the interesting topic choice. I have a few points to bring up, and a few definitions I would like to bring to the table as well. First of all, for the purpose of this debate, I would like to define art as a still image drawn or created by a human and I would like to define sexual use/arousal as sexually provocative or appealing

My first contention of why art should not be permitted as a form of sexual arousal is that it takes away from the actual beauty and care put into the art itself. Art is a beautiful thing, holding an almost endless amount of value, we can't let sexual pleasure interfere with that. We should make it so that the first thing brought to someones attention is the actual work of art itself, not whats on it. We should care about how much thought and effort was put into the piece and not how sexually appealing it is. This entire debate is based around a concept that is completely up to interpretation. Art simply cannot have a definition due to the fact that art is different to everyone. Some might not even consider drawings art, but rather music. Since this entire debate is based around a definition that doesn't exist, there will be some pointless conflict surrounding it. But since I believe that the quality of art is not so much what it depicts, but the quality of it, I chose to argue that sexual appeal has no place in art, for it distracts the viewer from all the hard work put into it, and directs their attention to the sexually provocative images, so for this reason I believe that the proposition wins this debate
Nivek

Con

I thank pro for his response. Interesting insights. This is a humorous debate, so I'm going to tirade my hatred on perverts. I thank Pro for allowing me to hate on perverts.

I hate perverts, every single one of you should stop talking about sex

Why is it that everywhere, everything has to be about sex? You go to your biology class and somehow somebody is going to mention that xylem vessels resemble their somewhat dubious long shaft or if your goddamn lecturer mentions things that are "long", everybody reacts with "well....that is long". In other times,even a T-Rex in an archaeological class somehow resembles a sexual position????

WHY?

WHY????????

WHY TALK ABOUT SOMETHING THAT'S COMPLETELY IRRELEVANT????


Art is a valid substitute

Pro mentions that the value of art should be pure.......f!ck no. If everybody gets creative about the positions they once took last night, they should consider art as a valid option of venting out their sexual frustrations. That way, I can sympathize and gain useful insights regarding the various advancements of art. Here's a few examples









All the pictures are:

1)Long
2)With a position?
3)In Contact

Why should we talk about the sweat and the movements we made when we can appreciate beauty itself? Why seek stupidity when you can at least pretend that you're insightful?

If somebody mentions this to me, I don't have to suffer the awkwardness of social ineptitude since I can relate and start showing more pictures of art that could *possibly* satisfy these savage monkeys......

:(

I mean, hypothetically, I might show them these....




And these......









People should start being arooused by these so we can always have a smarter earth >.< albeit a bit too perverted.

ART IS A VALID SUBSTITUTE, I STAND BY MY FOOL'S STATEMENT. YOU SEXUAL IDIOTS SHOULD TAKE ART AS A VALID FORM OF AROUSAL.
Debate Round No. 2
Chsdebateteam

Pro

Chsdebateteam forfeited this round.
Nivek

Con

Actually I take it back.

I hate sexual humor.
Debate Round No. 3
Chsdebateteam

Pro

Chsdebateteam forfeited this round.
Nivek

Con

Nivek forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by Nivek 12 months ago
Nivek
I'll only be able to post tomorrow. Sorry for the delay. Thanks for the early 1 day post.
Posted by Nivek 1 year ago
Nivek
As clarification, you would argue that art should NOT be of use (It's not a typo). To how or what extent, that is entirely up to you. There are no definitions, so it's free for all.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Ragnar 11 months ago
Ragnar
ChsdebateteamNivekTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Reasons for voting decision: First of all, pro and con seemed to be fluid positions on this comedic debate... With this confusion I find it difficult to assign who better proved their point (as much as con obviously put more work in with the photos and layout, but it's not nearly enough of a lead to get source points)... However pro forfeited half the rounds (plus the first round had something that should have just been negotiated in the comment section), making it an FF, con of course committed a soft forfeit at the end, but not a Full Forfeit comparable to pro's utter disappearance.