Vyn wrote:
Nothing is perverted about it, but at the same time, one can still appreciate the beauty of the human form without drooling over it for sex. One thing I do from time to time is browse nude art. Not porn, just art. Despite the beauty of the models and the obvious nudity and sexual parts visible, there is no arousal. Merely appreciation for the beauty. Now that I think about it, that's one of the few forms of art I do appreciate. Gaia knows I don't find anything in an art museum interesting.
I wouldn't drool over it for sex either, but there would be an awareness of the sexual angle, of sexual pleasure, that would make me wonder whether I really ought to be looking. And some painters made no bones about the sexual content of their nude artwork - Renoir for example, used prostitutes as models, and frequently slept with them, and I think his nudes are very much appreciations of female sexuality. I once read an article about nude photography and porn, that suggested there was a very fine line between thinking "look at this beautiful photo" and "look at this sexy girl."
Nonetheless, I'm sure there's artistic merit in these works as well as the sexual content, and it's quite possible that an Aspie could have a one-track mind while looking at them, which might be very differently focussed to the one-track mind that so many guys are accused of having when looking at female flesh.