I like nude art, just as long as the person who composed it didn't have erotica on their mind. I also do nude art so personally I find the human body beautiful no matter what shape or size. I mean hell, check out what my tagline says
ah yes same goes for a woman exposing her neither regions suggestively, it's offensive to me since people will pass that as "art", but the second you toss in an erect penis they get all offended saying that just porn. So a woman exposing herself sexualy is not pornographic/erotic? Sexism is a cruel thing for both parties. And yes why the hell post a picture and call it art when it has no composition or subject matter?
I think it depends how it's done...I don't like it when it's supposed to be funny or when it's poking fun and particular body types or anything.. but done right I think it can be beautiful and powerful....
It mainly depends on the piece. If there is a shot of a crotch as it is, it is not nice to look at, or artistic. And once I stumbled upon a gallery full of pictures of male genitalia, all the pictures were basically the same - not art. Many people seem to mistake artistic nude with a close-up of their private parts, but I think artistic nude is much more than that.
There sure is a difference between "artistic nude" and "plain nude". Also, I hate the fact that some talented artists don't get the appreciation and attention they deserve, but crappy tit-pics get a lot of noting since the web is full of creeps.