“According to a group of psychologists in Rome, museums are fast becoming a favorite for erotic adventures. Of the two million Italians who visited museums last year, 20% had some kind of ‘romantic interlude’ while taking in the masterpieces. Scholars at the Institute of Psychoanalytic Studies are calling the state of arousal inspired by art Rubens Syndrome. ‘Cultural seduction has always existed,’ noted sex expert Willy Pasini. ‘Clearly, from ancient times on, sculptures and statues have acted as catalysts to bring out eroticism.’ A bit more surprising, perhaps, is that the hallowed halls of art are so high up the list of pick-up places — second only to the beach.” — Zoomata (Italy)

It is ironic that so many art historians should continue to “deconstruct” the Western tradition with derivative concepts filched from French philosophy when such a tremendous area of study still lies fallow. Admitting that there is a continuum between aesthetic response to an artwork and sexual response to a person — aka the Rubens Syndrome — why not study the erotic charge of different kinds of art?

You could easily formulate testable hypotheses to study the question. Are there higher attendance rates for museums whose collections are dominated by nudes? Around what kinds of art are people most receptive to kissing or to meeting a stranger? Is Rubens quantifiably sexier than Rembrandt? Do certain colors (such as red) excite more than others (such as blue)? And if so, would Yves Klein with his famous blues therefore dampen sexual desire? In general, what effect does abstraction have on the libido? Do people respond more to form or to content? Is there a correlation between the type of content depicted and the sexual response elicited? In other words, do paintings of children appeal to pedophiles? Do depictions of death bring out necrophilious urges? Do Crucifixion scenes turn on devotees of bondage and discipline?

VideoBox

It's like the iTunes Music Store for Porn. Download unlimited high-quality video for only $9.95/month.