Crusade? Run amok?
Are you serious? Really? frank Paul Stenquist <[email protected]> wrote: >As a footnote to this, female artists who portray the human body choose >to celebrate the female form by a wide margin. A woman friend who works >in oils once told me that she finds the curves of a woman's body much >more inspiring. She much prefers males for other purposes. Your crusade >is political correctness >run amok. Try to get free of the liberal leash. > >Paul via phone > >> On Nov 24, 2013, at 9:35 PM, knarf <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> What makes you think I haven't protested museums and galleries? >> >> Besides, just because another venue objectifies females doesn't mean >it should be done here. >> >> And there are surely many reasons other than beauty to portray the >male form. Power, athleticism, eroticism, are they not valid reasons? >> >> Not that I accept your statement that female forms are more beautiful >than male. That strikes as pure opinion not backed by any facts >whatsoever. How could it be anything other than opinion? >> >> Keep in mind that the art world, from artists to curators to gallery >owners to purchasers is male-dominated. >> >> Cheers, >> frank >> >> Paul Stenquist <[email protected]> wrote: >>> Mature male bodies simply aren't as attractive as female bodies. Art >>> history weighs heavily in favor of the female form. Perhaps you >should >>> mount a protest at the Met. >>> >>> Paul via phone >>> >>>> On Nov 24, 2013, at 9:14 PM, knarf <[email protected]> >wrote: >>>> >>>> The catalyst for this little missive, I must admit, is Bruce's >recent >>> series of NSFW semi-nudes. That being said, it's not directed >>> specifically to or at Bruce. It's more a comment on the whole female >>> nude thing. Others have posted similar photos in the past and likely >>> will do so again. >>>> >>>> My problem, of course, is the objectification of women. And it's >not >>> because they're sexualized by showing "dirty parts". It's because >>> there's such a huge disparity between male nudes and female nudes. >>>> >>>> As in: there has never been a male nude shown here (that I've seen >in >>> some thirteen years). I don't believe I've ever seen a penis here. >>>> >>>> A couple of years ago someone posted a few photos that appeared to >>> have been semi-erotic (but not nude) gay pin-ups. The only comment I >>> recall was something to the effect that, "all I see here is gay >>> soft-core porn". >>>> >>>> No comments about the technical aspects of the shots, the nice >light, >>> nothing. I stand accused and guilty myself. >>>> >>>> I only mention that because there seems to be a double standard >here: >>> it's okay to show female sexuality but not male. And I wonder why? >>>> >>>> I understand that an individual photographer will say, "But I don't >>> want to photograph male nudes. As a straight male I just don't >>> appreciate male nudity, erotic or otherwise. It's my right to choose >to >>> photograph only female nudes." >>>> >>>> Fair enough. >>>> >>>> And yes, the female nudes shown here have been tasteful and >>> relatively discreet. Nothing gratuitous. >>>> >>>> But here's the rub: showing genitalia and breasts is sexual. It >>> sexualizes the women. Even if they consent to it they are being >>> portrayed in such a way that shows them as primarily sexual persons >>> which takes away from other aspects of their being. >>>> >>>> I know that sexuality is a part of our adult lives. >>>> >>>> However until there is some balance between portrayal of the >genders >>> I can't support female nudes. Because until that happens females >will >>> be sexualized and males won't be. And I just don't think that's >right. >>>> >>>> I'm not trying to stop anyone from posting female nudes. But I >won't >>> encourage it by commenting (except in the rarest of circumstances). >>>> >>>> In closing, I'm no prude. And I'm sure I'll be accused of spouting >>> the politically correct lefty party line. So be it. >>>> >>>> What I'm really doing is expressing my personal opinion. Thanks for >>> you indulgence. >>>> >>>> Cheers, >>>> frank >>>> >>>> >>>> “Analysis kills spontaneity.” -- Henri-Frederic Amiel >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >>>> [email protected] >>>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >>>> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above >>> and follow the directions. >>> >>> -- >>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >>> [email protected] >>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >>> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above >and >>> follow the directions. >> >> “Analysis kills spontaneity.” -- Henri-Frederic Amiel >> >> >> >> -- >> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> [email protected] >> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above >and follow the directions. > >-- >PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >[email protected] >http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and >follow the directions. “Analysis kills spontaneity.” -- Henri-Frederic Amiel -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
