Recently, I proclaimed the following:
"It occurs to me that anyone who faps [Wiktionary link] to pictures of other people on the internet is a hypocrite if he has a problem with other people fapping to pictures of him on the internet."
Here's a potential counter-argument, that I will debate momentarily:
Porn stars, erotic models, et cetera are photographed with the expectation that people will fap to their pictures. Just because I might go ahead and fap to them doesn't mean other people are entitled to fap to non-sexually oriented pictures of myself (e.g., nudist pictures, pictures of me at the beach or pool) I might post online.
I will concede that point - yet not without mentioning how convenient it is that others are kind enough to be willing to become masturbation fodder for you, while you are not for them (granted, not everyone is equally attractive, and the burden of demand will therefore vary). However, the fact remains that nobody is harmed in an anonymous act of fapping. You may as well try to control people's sexual fantasies, because I guarantee you there are people fantasizing about people (if not about you) and acts that would offend you. I think what you're really concerned about - or what you should be concerned about since it's pointless to worry over something you can't control, i.e., other people's thoughts - is the sexual attention you may be attracting.
I feel for you, because sexual attention can be rude and offensive. And I'm not gonna say we shouldn't encourage people to be more polite about how they give out sexual attention. That's something I support. But sexual attention is not just gonna go away, and trying to censor people through sex shame is not healthy or humanitarian. We ought to come at it from both sides. While encouraging "perverts" to be more polite, we should also work on our own sexual hang-ups, and learn to deal with the fact that sexuality is out there, some people are going to address it, and we should, at the very least, learn how to accept polite sexual attention. That is to say, not dismiss (or attack) someone purely for giving you sexual attention, but only getting defensive when the sexual attention is proffered in a harmful (insistent, inconsiderate, etc.) manner.
Really, it depends on both sides (the prudes and the perverts) adjusting their behavior and working towards a compromise. That means that whichever side you're on, you have work to do if you want to live in a more sexually healthy world (and I assure you, that you will receive more of the wrong kind of attention, or hear of others suffering the same, in a less sexually healthy world, as we have now). If you're a prude, you don't have to become a pervert, but try to think of perverts as people, and try to give them the benefit of the doubt, while suggesting ways NOT to repress their sexuality but to revel in it in a manner that is less offensive to prudes, while simultaneously learning to shrug off sexual comments and attention without getting all in a huff about it. Perverts, you don't have to become prudes, just try to be considerate of other people's sensibilities, and above all be polite, and don't give people attention you don't think they would want.
Prudes, perverts, can't we all just get along? Instead of arguing back and forth that the entire world has to either be sexually sanitized or dirty and debauched? Let's try to live and let live, without disparaging each others' chosen lifestyles. To each his or her own, with the freedom to associate with those of a like mind.
Wednesday, August 3, 2011
Friday, July 29, 2011
Sex, Strictly A Guy Thing (No Girls Allowed)
My photography gets a lot of attention from guys, and very little from girls. This is something I've known for a long time. And while I appreciate all that attention, it's a little bit frustrating, because I'd really rather be connecting with girls. I've thought a lot about why guys gravitate towards my photography more than girls, and believe me, it's a very complicated issue. It's easy to conclude that guys are just more sexual, and sexually open, than girls are. And maybe that's true. I don't like to jump into gender stereotypes, though. The old, "men are horndogs, and women are frigid icicles" is a stereotypical generalization. After all, females make up 50% of the classical depiction of sexual intercourse. Or should I be led to believe that homosexual male sex is far more natural than heterosexual sex, and that heterosexual sex ought naturally to be of the type where the man demands and the woman reluctantly complies? I'd like to believe that females can be just as interested in sex as men - and indeed, I've come across many females who would suggest this is true (see: just about any pro-porn feminist blog writer). But then, where are they? Why are they not visible? Are they truly that rare? Or is it true that the female mind is wired in such a way that their appreciation of sex is fundamentally different from a man's - specifically, that they have far less interest in visual depictions (like photography) of sexuality? Any of this can be true, but what concerns me is that we can't even know for sure as long as we discourage girls from behaving sexually and admitting their interest in sex.
There's a lot I want to do for girls' sexuality. Basically, to tell them that it's okay to like sex. That it doesn't make you a "slut", or otherwise that being a slut is not a bad thing. But of course, the majority of people out in the world participate in so-called "slut shaming". So the fact that I'll respect a girl who embraces her sexuality doesn't give her much comfort that the rest of the world will do the same. I wish I could somehow, through my work as an erotic artist, get out the message that girls being sexual is okay, and natural, and that they shouldn't be shamed for it. And a lot of my work is about fighting shame and being proud of your sexuality, but it's tricky, because I'm a guy, and the issue is a lot different for guys than it is for girls. A guy is allowed to be sexual, even encouraged and rewarded for being sexual. So, as a guy - even though I'm an atypical guy that feels girly on the inside - the message doesn't have the same effect when it's me getting out there showing my sexuality to the world and saying, "look, I'm not ashamed." And if I dare try to encourage girls to be more sexual, I can so easily be accused of serving my own selfish sexual desires (which I refuse to deny that I have).
I don't know how to accomplish my goal - whether working with girls is the answer; using my skills to enable them a venue to express their sexuality. But it's hard to even do that, because most girls are afraid, reasonably afraid, to approach the landscape of sex. They're scared of being associated with it, and many of them are probably victims of the societal brainwashing that insists that sex is dirty and icky and sinful, and that men's sexuality in particular is impulsive and predatory in nature, and should be avoided. There really is no easy answer, and trying to break girls who have already succumbed to the social programming is not only difficult, but could be construed in very destructive terms by a social system that wants to keep girls pure and virginal and asexual. I mean, think about it. The whole "sexualization of girls" debate implies two things: that girls are naturally asexual (they have to be "sexualized" by an outside force), and that the sexualization process is a bad thing - in other words, good girls are asexual girls. And for that reason, I am concerned for my own safety. I don't want to push girls into being more sexual, I just want to open up the floor, so that the girls who are, feel comfortable being so, and admitting it. It would be really nice to meet some girls who are, like me, rebellious, and have already broken out of the socially constructed mold of how one is supposed to properly act, sexually.
And it's weird, as a (sensitive) male who is sexually attracted to females, I feel kind of bad about having strong sexual desires for girls, when the social paradigm tells me that girls are largely uninterested in sex, and actually in a lot of cases interpret sexual advances as aggressive, predatory behavior. See, I don't want to make girls feel uncomfortable or defensive. I want them to be interested in sex the same way I am, and I want them to be able to interpret my sexual interest in the proper context - that is, as a positive and natural physiological phenomenon, and not as a threat, not as an impulse that's going to cause me to think of a girl as a piece of meat, something only to be fucked, whether she wants to or not. Really, I just want to hear girls say, yes, I like sex. I think it's really sad that we've come to a point that we've lost any conception of positive sexuality. That you either have to stay sexually pure (or strictly private), or else you're part of this sinful world of vice - the idea that if you embrace sexuality, by dressing in a certain way, or posting pictures on the internet, that you're agreeing to be objectified or treated rudely or whatever. That you have to take the one with the other. That you can't be sexually open and liberated and still respected and treated like a human being. And I just want that to change. I want sex to be a happy thing again, like it was before the Christians showed up [broken link].
And I want more people to learn - as I have learned - that if somebody anonymously sends you the message "I want to fuck you in the ass" (an activity I have no interest in participating in), you don't have to be offended and feel threatened, you're allowed to take it as a compliment, and then completely ignore it, and know that the person on the other end is just indulging his sexual desires, and he doesn't (shouldn't) expect you to be interested, and that he's NOT going to track you down and rape you if you don't patronize him. And that you're allowed to tell people to back off if they're bothering you, but that you shouldn't take a playful sexual comment as an immediate threat of rudeness and aggression. Are we not sexual beings? Why do we run away from sex so much? I get that some people just don't like sex, but how many haven't even tried peacefully coexisting with it? Because it just isn't going to go away, no matter how much we legislate it, and restrict it, and repress it within ourselves. It's not going away. And if we embrace it, and learn how to approach it properly, we can turn it into a positive life force. It doesn't have to be the icky, sinful thing that we make it out to be.
Things do NOT have to be the way they are, just because they are the way they are. Consider alternative possibilities. I'm telling you it's possible. I used to be sexually repressed. I didn't learn to masturbate until I was 17. I was tempted (brainwashed) to take an abstinence vow in high school, but it didn't make much difference because I wasn't getting any, anyway (the full story is more complicated than that, but I have no desire to get into that here and now). Now, sex is a large part of my life (and when I say sex, I mean a million things in addition to sexual intercourse, which is only a really tiny part of what constitutes "sex" - that's another critical point that so many people miss), and a very strong positive force that gives me something to enjoy, to counter all the shitty things I have to deal with in life. And I'm not diseased, I've never gotten anyone pregnant, and I can count the number of people I've been sexually intimate with on one hand (not that it matters how many people you've been with - I'm just trying to make the point that embracing sex doesn't have to have anything to do with "sleeping around", if you don't want it to). And you can follow my example.
Unfortunately, reforming the sexual landscape (and it desperately needs an overhaul) is going to be extremely difficult. It's not just a matter of tweaking some attitudes here and there. We don't live in a vacuum, and as long as those sex-negative messages are out there, they are going to continue to affect our feelings about our sexuality. Even as a sexually liberated individual, I still have to fight the very powerful sentiments floating around that insist on convincing me that sex is bad. And you have to be really strong to resist all of that negative conditioning. But I'm convinced that it's doing us more harm than good. Repressing our sexuality leads to unhealthy attitudes towards sex, and is the primary cause of all of our sexual dysfunctions in society. It's not going to be easy to flip that switch, and the results may not be clearly positive until the more positive attitudes have time to sink in (which is bound to take generations, at least - after all, we've been exposed to centuries of Christian moralism). Nevertheless, I feel it's a task that is utterly worth undertaking. I ask you to be brave and join me. Only together can we change the world...for the better.
There's a lot I want to do for girls' sexuality. Basically, to tell them that it's okay to like sex. That it doesn't make you a "slut", or otherwise that being a slut is not a bad thing. But of course, the majority of people out in the world participate in so-called "slut shaming". So the fact that I'll respect a girl who embraces her sexuality doesn't give her much comfort that the rest of the world will do the same. I wish I could somehow, through my work as an erotic artist, get out the message that girls being sexual is okay, and natural, and that they shouldn't be shamed for it. And a lot of my work is about fighting shame and being proud of your sexuality, but it's tricky, because I'm a guy, and the issue is a lot different for guys than it is for girls. A guy is allowed to be sexual, even encouraged and rewarded for being sexual. So, as a guy - even though I'm an atypical guy that feels girly on the inside - the message doesn't have the same effect when it's me getting out there showing my sexuality to the world and saying, "look, I'm not ashamed." And if I dare try to encourage girls to be more sexual, I can so easily be accused of serving my own selfish sexual desires (which I refuse to deny that I have).
I don't know how to accomplish my goal - whether working with girls is the answer; using my skills to enable them a venue to express their sexuality. But it's hard to even do that, because most girls are afraid, reasonably afraid, to approach the landscape of sex. They're scared of being associated with it, and many of them are probably victims of the societal brainwashing that insists that sex is dirty and icky and sinful, and that men's sexuality in particular is impulsive and predatory in nature, and should be avoided. There really is no easy answer, and trying to break girls who have already succumbed to the social programming is not only difficult, but could be construed in very destructive terms by a social system that wants to keep girls pure and virginal and asexual. I mean, think about it. The whole "sexualization of girls" debate implies two things: that girls are naturally asexual (they have to be "sexualized" by an outside force), and that the sexualization process is a bad thing - in other words, good girls are asexual girls. And for that reason, I am concerned for my own safety. I don't want to push girls into being more sexual, I just want to open up the floor, so that the girls who are, feel comfortable being so, and admitting it. It would be really nice to meet some girls who are, like me, rebellious, and have already broken out of the socially constructed mold of how one is supposed to properly act, sexually.
And it's weird, as a (sensitive) male who is sexually attracted to females, I feel kind of bad about having strong sexual desires for girls, when the social paradigm tells me that girls are largely uninterested in sex, and actually in a lot of cases interpret sexual advances as aggressive, predatory behavior. See, I don't want to make girls feel uncomfortable or defensive. I want them to be interested in sex the same way I am, and I want them to be able to interpret my sexual interest in the proper context - that is, as a positive and natural physiological phenomenon, and not as a threat, not as an impulse that's going to cause me to think of a girl as a piece of meat, something only to be fucked, whether she wants to or not. Really, I just want to hear girls say, yes, I like sex. I think it's really sad that we've come to a point that we've lost any conception of positive sexuality. That you either have to stay sexually pure (or strictly private), or else you're part of this sinful world of vice - the idea that if you embrace sexuality, by dressing in a certain way, or posting pictures on the internet, that you're agreeing to be objectified or treated rudely or whatever. That you have to take the one with the other. That you can't be sexually open and liberated and still respected and treated like a human being. And I just want that to change. I want sex to be a happy thing again, like it was before the Christians showed up [broken link].
And I want more people to learn - as I have learned - that if somebody anonymously sends you the message "I want to fuck you in the ass" (an activity I have no interest in participating in), you don't have to be offended and feel threatened, you're allowed to take it as a compliment, and then completely ignore it, and know that the person on the other end is just indulging his sexual desires, and he doesn't (shouldn't) expect you to be interested, and that he's NOT going to track you down and rape you if you don't patronize him. And that you're allowed to tell people to back off if they're bothering you, but that you shouldn't take a playful sexual comment as an immediate threat of rudeness and aggression. Are we not sexual beings? Why do we run away from sex so much? I get that some people just don't like sex, but how many haven't even tried peacefully coexisting with it? Because it just isn't going to go away, no matter how much we legislate it, and restrict it, and repress it within ourselves. It's not going away. And if we embrace it, and learn how to approach it properly, we can turn it into a positive life force. It doesn't have to be the icky, sinful thing that we make it out to be.
Things do NOT have to be the way they are, just because they are the way they are. Consider alternative possibilities. I'm telling you it's possible. I used to be sexually repressed. I didn't learn to masturbate until I was 17. I was tempted (brainwashed) to take an abstinence vow in high school, but it didn't make much difference because I wasn't getting any, anyway (the full story is more complicated than that, but I have no desire to get into that here and now). Now, sex is a large part of my life (and when I say sex, I mean a million things in addition to sexual intercourse, which is only a really tiny part of what constitutes "sex" - that's another critical point that so many people miss), and a very strong positive force that gives me something to enjoy, to counter all the shitty things I have to deal with in life. And I'm not diseased, I've never gotten anyone pregnant, and I can count the number of people I've been sexually intimate with on one hand (not that it matters how many people you've been with - I'm just trying to make the point that embracing sex doesn't have to have anything to do with "sleeping around", if you don't want it to). And you can follow my example.
Unfortunately, reforming the sexual landscape (and it desperately needs an overhaul) is going to be extremely difficult. It's not just a matter of tweaking some attitudes here and there. We don't live in a vacuum, and as long as those sex-negative messages are out there, they are going to continue to affect our feelings about our sexuality. Even as a sexually liberated individual, I still have to fight the very powerful sentiments floating around that insist on convincing me that sex is bad. And you have to be really strong to resist all of that negative conditioning. But I'm convinced that it's doing us more harm than good. Repressing our sexuality leads to unhealthy attitudes towards sex, and is the primary cause of all of our sexual dysfunctions in society. It's not going to be easy to flip that switch, and the results may not be clearly positive until the more positive attitudes have time to sink in (which is bound to take generations, at least - after all, we've been exposed to centuries of Christian moralism). Nevertheless, I feel it's a task that is utterly worth undertaking. I ask you to be brave and join me. Only together can we change the world...for the better.
Wednesday, July 27, 2011
The appreciation of erotic beauty - as an end in and of itself.
What is the purpose of erotic art? What is the goal in appreciating erotic beauty? The satisfaction of sexual desire? My stance is that this is one component, but not the only one. If erotic beauty satisfies one's sexual desires, then that is perfectly fine. And in fact, that is the primary element that sets erotic beauty apart from other kinds of beauty - that's what makes it special, and so very alluring. Yet the true connoisseur of erotic art understands that it is not simply the satisfaction of sexual desire that makes erotic art so appealing - after all, for that there is crude pornography. Erotic art taps into the romantic sensualism of beauty; it takes a sexy image, and drapes it in meaning and desire. It is, put simply, sexy but more. And it is this "more" that makes the erotic image far more appealing to some (even in a sexual way) than crude pornography. It is, in a sense, divine bliss, as opposed to earthly pleasure.
But is an appreciation for erotic art purely a means towards acquiring the goal of sexual satisfaction? Does one look at erotic images to pass the time between acts of fucking? Does one use those images as a catalyst or motivator for their other sexual behaviors? I'm sure some people do. Especially those who view porn. Yet, this is not the only possibility, and restrictions on erotic imagery should not assume that it is, while ignoring other, less 'salacious' uses of erotic images. In my own unique personal case, I have a suspicion that I actually enjoy the pursuit and appreciation of erotic imagery above and beyond the carnal act of sex itself. I'd rather create (or discover) and share a work of lasting erotic beauty, than spend a few moments attaining temporal carnal bliss. Should my interest in erotica (and eroticism) be belittled because some people (perhaps even a majority) have crude intentions? Should 'fine art' be dumbed down for the sake of the unsophisticated majority who are incapable of proper artistic interpretation?
No, absolutely not. That some people get off on images in crude ways is not an argument that those images should be in any way restricted. And that's without even touching on the argument that perhaps people getting off in crude ways is good for their health (and by extension, good for the rest of society, too).
But is an appreciation for erotic art purely a means towards acquiring the goal of sexual satisfaction? Does one look at erotic images to pass the time between acts of fucking? Does one use those images as a catalyst or motivator for their other sexual behaviors? I'm sure some people do. Especially those who view porn. Yet, this is not the only possibility, and restrictions on erotic imagery should not assume that it is, while ignoring other, less 'salacious' uses of erotic images. In my own unique personal case, I have a suspicion that I actually enjoy the pursuit and appreciation of erotic imagery above and beyond the carnal act of sex itself. I'd rather create (or discover) and share a work of lasting erotic beauty, than spend a few moments attaining temporal carnal bliss. Should my interest in erotica (and eroticism) be belittled because some people (perhaps even a majority) have crude intentions? Should 'fine art' be dumbed down for the sake of the unsophisticated majority who are incapable of proper artistic interpretation?
No, absolutely not. That some people get off on images in crude ways is not an argument that those images should be in any way restricted. And that's without even touching on the argument that perhaps people getting off in crude ways is good for their health (and by extension, good for the rest of society, too).
Tuesday, July 26, 2011
Body Acceptance
Body Acceptance is recognizing that you're not the prettiest girl in the room, and being okay with that. It's not pretending that there is no difference between you and her. Acknowledging the worth of inner beauty does not eliminate or negate the value of outer beauty. Having body acceptance means understanding that your worth as a person depends on a whole lot more than your physical appearance - not thinking that physical appearance has no importance.
I know I'm not the most beautiful model on flickr. And I accept that, because my character and personality enriches my work with a depth and style that makes it unique. However, I would be a fool not to recognize that the fact that I am at least moderately attractive is a huge benefit to my work. If I were considerably less attractive, I might very well not bother attempting the kind of photography I've been focused on. After all, photography is primarily a visual medium, and it would be silly for me to ignore the aesthetics of visual beauty as I approach my work.
Total body acceptance recognizes both of those tenets. And that is the truth about beauty.
Beauty is not everything there is to life, but it does have a certain appeal. Not everyone is intelligent. Not everyone is athletic. Not everyone is strong. Not everyone is funny. Lacking any one of these traits does not make you worthless. Find your individual strengths, and revel in them. Don't dwell on the qualities you do not, by chance, possess. You may regret that you are not pretty - well I regret that I am not even a girl to begin with. But I have other qualities that I can be proud of. My not being a pretty girl, while unfortunate, doesn't ruin my life completely, and it doesn't stop me from being able to positively appreciate others who are pretty girls.
So let the beautiful model, and do not condemn them for it. Meanwhile, if you are not counted among the beautiful, find the place where you do belong, and pour your heart into that important work. If you do, you are bound to find others who will admire you for it.
I know I'm not the most beautiful model on flickr. And I accept that, because my character and personality enriches my work with a depth and style that makes it unique. However, I would be a fool not to recognize that the fact that I am at least moderately attractive is a huge benefit to my work. If I were considerably less attractive, I might very well not bother attempting the kind of photography I've been focused on. After all, photography is primarily a visual medium, and it would be silly for me to ignore the aesthetics of visual beauty as I approach my work.
"Image is not everything. But it is something."
Total body acceptance recognizes both of those tenets. And that is the truth about beauty.
Beauty is not everything there is to life, but it does have a certain appeal. Not everyone is intelligent. Not everyone is athletic. Not everyone is strong. Not everyone is funny. Lacking any one of these traits does not make you worthless. Find your individual strengths, and revel in them. Don't dwell on the qualities you do not, by chance, possess. You may regret that you are not pretty - well I regret that I am not even a girl to begin with. But I have other qualities that I can be proud of. My not being a pretty girl, while unfortunate, doesn't ruin my life completely, and it doesn't stop me from being able to positively appreciate others who are pretty girls.
So let the beautiful model, and do not condemn them for it. Meanwhile, if you are not counted among the beautiful, find the place where you do belong, and pour your heart into that important work. If you do, you are bound to find others who will admire you for it.
Monday, July 18, 2011
Pet Peeve
Pet Peeve: people who would make me feel bad about wanting to take pictures of pretty girls nude. Like as if doing so makes me a bad person - for "degrading" or "objectifying" women (I call it "honoring" and "celebrating") - or that it makes me a weak person - for giving in to temptations of the flesh (as if we weren't supposed to enjoy the few pleasures there are in life).
I am an artist, and it is my calling to seek out beauty, in the perfect form in which it appears to me, and to capture it and share it with the world. What I do (or rather, at this point, what I'd like to be doing) is beautiful, in spite of your body shame, religious guilt, and sexual hang-ups. And if you have nothing good to say about what I do, then you've got nothing for me to hear. Go find another target for your psychological abuse.
I am an artist, and it is my calling to seek out beauty, in the perfect form in which it appears to me, and to capture it and share it with the world. What I do (or rather, at this point, what I'd like to be doing) is beautiful, in spite of your body shame, religious guilt, and sexual hang-ups. And if you have nothing good to say about what I do, then you've got nothing for me to hear. Go find another target for your psychological abuse.
Sunday, July 17, 2011
Nudists Who Don't Mind Being Photographed
As a photographer, one of my goals is to photograph social nudism. Unfortunately, many nudists (at least in America) are paranoid about having their picture taken, to the point of embracing a pretty general across-the-board "no cameras" policy at nudist resorts and events. Naturally, they are worried about voyeurs, as well as the ramifications of family, friends, and/or coworkers finding out about their practice of nudism. And while the latter is a valid concern, I feel it is an unfortunate result of how wider society views nudism, with a particular focus on how it misunderstands nudism. And hiding in the shadows only helps to reinforce the status quo.
That's why I believe it's important for nudists to stand up for nudism. And for us to embrace our own ideals and be less self-conscious about what people will think if they see us naked. Most nudists will perhaps not be so bold, but I'm certain that some of us are willing to stand up to the task, for the benefit of nudism. But even on a more basic level, for a photographer interested in shooting nudist recreation, it is more imperative than ever that he (or she) find a group of nudists who are prepared to give their explicit consent to being photographed, knowing that those photographs may end up in view of the public.
So I'm thinking that maybe it would be a good idea to start some kind of group - a network of people who aren't afraid to contribute to the public database of nudist photography. We could also provide education and discussions about both the risks and the importance of not hiding one's lifestyle, and of nudist photography in general.
I know that the people involved would probably be too few and far between for them to actually get together and do shoots, but I think that it would be helpful for people of this sort to band together and reinforce one another, while also hopefully getting the word out to the wider nudist community, if not society at large. Plus, having some centralization, with a focus on defending the merits of nudist photography, would help fringe nudists and photographers who may be out there worrying that they're the only one, and that there's no hope of ever finding other nudists who might want to contribute to a photography project they've been dreaming of for years.
Obviously, the focus of a group like this would be on legitimate nudist photography, so there would have to be an emphasis on the family-friendly, nonsexual context of the photography. And this is about nudists who aren't afraid to say to the world "I am a nudist", so it will have nothing whatsoever to do with the heaps of anonymous men who want to expose their junk to the world without showing their faces, nor with the private photo-sharing groups that are so popular. It's not necessary that one be a prude to join the group, just that they understand the group is not prurient in nature, and are willing to behave themselves, up to nudist standards. As far as fear of voyeurs go - if you're willing to unselfconsciously show your naked body to the world, then you have to accept the fact that voyeurs are going to look. Really, it's not a problem. It's just looking. Abusive behavior, on the other hand, is easy to combat.
So that's my idea. I know there are tons of nudist groups on the web, some better than others, and most of them have photography sub-groups, but they're all so small and fragmented and inactive. And it's just nudists talking about photography, it's not like there's any emphasis on educating the world about what they're doing, or even just the wider importance among the nudist movement that taking (and sharing) a nudist picture encompasses.
Maybe I am alone in this. But even so, discussing the merits of nudist photography might encourage others to get on board. As usual, I'm better at coming up with ideas than I am at actually executing them, so I'm not sure what to do. But, if you're reading this, and you're on board with what I've described, leave a comment and let me know you're out there.
That's why I believe it's important for nudists to stand up for nudism. And for us to embrace our own ideals and be less self-conscious about what people will think if they see us naked. Most nudists will perhaps not be so bold, but I'm certain that some of us are willing to stand up to the task, for the benefit of nudism. But even on a more basic level, for a photographer interested in shooting nudist recreation, it is more imperative than ever that he (or she) find a group of nudists who are prepared to give their explicit consent to being photographed, knowing that those photographs may end up in view of the public.
So I'm thinking that maybe it would be a good idea to start some kind of group - a network of people who aren't afraid to contribute to the public database of nudist photography. We could also provide education and discussions about both the risks and the importance of not hiding one's lifestyle, and of nudist photography in general.
I know that the people involved would probably be too few and far between for them to actually get together and do shoots, but I think that it would be helpful for people of this sort to band together and reinforce one another, while also hopefully getting the word out to the wider nudist community, if not society at large. Plus, having some centralization, with a focus on defending the merits of nudist photography, would help fringe nudists and photographers who may be out there worrying that they're the only one, and that there's no hope of ever finding other nudists who might want to contribute to a photography project they've been dreaming of for years.
Obviously, the focus of a group like this would be on legitimate nudist photography, so there would have to be an emphasis on the family-friendly, nonsexual context of the photography. And this is about nudists who aren't afraid to say to the world "I am a nudist", so it will have nothing whatsoever to do with the heaps of anonymous men who want to expose their junk to the world without showing their faces, nor with the private photo-sharing groups that are so popular. It's not necessary that one be a prude to join the group, just that they understand the group is not prurient in nature, and are willing to behave themselves, up to nudist standards. As far as fear of voyeurs go - if you're willing to unselfconsciously show your naked body to the world, then you have to accept the fact that voyeurs are going to look. Really, it's not a problem. It's just looking. Abusive behavior, on the other hand, is easy to combat.
So that's my idea. I know there are tons of nudist groups on the web, some better than others, and most of them have photography sub-groups, but they're all so small and fragmented and inactive. And it's just nudists talking about photography, it's not like there's any emphasis on educating the world about what they're doing, or even just the wider importance among the nudist movement that taking (and sharing) a nudist picture encompasses.
Maybe I am alone in this. But even so, discussing the merits of nudist photography might encourage others to get on board. As usual, I'm better at coming up with ideas than I am at actually executing them, so I'm not sure what to do. But, if you're reading this, and you're on board with what I've described, leave a comment and let me know you're out there.
Saturday, July 16, 2011
Irony
If you don't want people to view your images in a sexual light, it doesn't help to bring up the topic of sexualization in the description for your images. Telling perverts to "stop it" isn't going to keep them from thinking perverted thoughts. And on the other hand, introducing the subject encourages everyone else to entertain those thoughts as well. After all, if I tell you not to think about elephants, what's the first thing you're going to think of?
So what does it accomplish? The perverts see your warning (which also acts as a billboard directing them to your content) and go about their business more secretively than before (which is perhaps the best you could hope for). And yet, the images are still sexualized - except you're the one responsible for it. Good job.
This effect is particularly striking when it is the result of an excessive paranoia over pictures of kids. Just like with the elephants, if you have to follow every "look at this picture of my kid" with a "don't you dare think any sexy thoughts", then what can you expect? You think you're checking other people's compulsion to think sexy thoughts, but you're the one whose mind immediately goes there. In fact, it may not be a coincidence at all, as it's often the people who complain the loudest [link to Wikipedia article]...
Personally, I don't have much time for self-righteous moral crusaders or cowardly hypocrites.
So what does it accomplish? The perverts see your warning (which also acts as a billboard directing them to your content) and go about their business more secretively than before (which is perhaps the best you could hope for). And yet, the images are still sexualized - except you're the one responsible for it. Good job.
This effect is particularly striking when it is the result of an excessive paranoia over pictures of kids. Just like with the elephants, if you have to follow every "look at this picture of my kid" with a "don't you dare think any sexy thoughts", then what can you expect? You think you're checking other people's compulsion to think sexy thoughts, but you're the one whose mind immediately goes there. In fact, it may not be a coincidence at all, as it's often the people who complain the loudest [link to Wikipedia article]...
Personally, I don't have much time for self-righteous moral crusaders or cowardly hypocrites.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)