File talk:20120303 zoophilia Lakshmana Temple Khajuraho India (panoramic version).jpg

"Sex-themed", not "erotic"

The title of this image is misleading and should be changed. The scupltures at the Khajuraho Group of Monuments are not intended as "erotic art" – defined as works "intended to evoke erotic arousal" – but rather the complete opposite. Has the caption-maker not noticed the figure in the background burying his face in his hands in shame? SteveStrummer (talk) 19:25, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

I did your rename request. Ggia (talk) 22:03, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

(A very late comment, but....) Note that the Wikipedia article that the original poster pointed to repeatedly describes the temple artwork as both "sexual" and "erotic". Also, to be fair about the figure in the background, it's not at all clear whether their uncovered eye is open or closed, so it would seem not unreasonable to interpret that as someone who finds the scene shocking, yes, but perhaps "compelling" nonetheless. In other words, it's not necessarily evidence that the artwork is intended to be "the complete opposite" of erotic. But whatever... - dcljr (talk) 06:09, 30 January 2013 (UTC)