[description: b/w portrait of a male torso in skimpy briefs]
We expend far too much effort in disguising the natural beauty of the human body, and the effects it has on us. What are we afraid of? That we are all animals, holding on to a semblance of civility by a fragile thread? Some of us do have self-control, and merely want to allow ourselves one of the few and most satisfying indulgences in an otherwise drab and painful existence. It's not so terrible a "sin" that it would make the Earth stop spinning on its axis, or cause the Sun to fall from the heavens. As an artist I am in rapture to Psyche [NSFW], the envy of Beauty married to Eros.
[description: b/w portrait of a nude male torso with erection]
Saturday, March 12, 2016
Friday, March 11, 2016
Sexy Clothes
I swear, it's not even spring yet (although we have been having some unseasonably warm weather lately), and I'm already hearing people complaining about how short girls' shorts are these days. Meanwhile, I'm thinking to myself, "just shut up and enjoy the view!" Seriously, this sexual repression bullshit has gone far enough. What's the point of being inundated with "porn culture" if a girl can't wear clothes that flatter her assets in public without being criticized by some neo-puritan dipwad? Are people really so whipped by their morally conservative overlords that they'll treat with utter contempt any reminder that they, too, once entered this life by crawling through a vagina? Do they really think that expressing their insensitive belief that showing skin is "skanky" makes them seem like a respectable individual? Who are they trying to impress? God? (He's not listening). Their pastors? The feminists?
Thursday, March 3, 2016
Free Speech from a Broader Perspective
Being a minority is a fast-track method of seeing the limitations of "freedom" and "tolerance" in modern society. Everything looks peaches and cream when you agree with the popular moral fashions of the day. But I believe that words like "liberty" and "diversity" should amount to more than just lip service. We should strive toward creating a sociopolitical framework that is universal - not just adequate to the present day's populist concerns.
People argue that free speech shouldn't protect unpopular and insensitive opinions. But there was a time when the merits of slavery were taken for granted. That nobody questioned the fact that women couldn't vote. That expressing the love between two people of the same sex was considered a heinous crime. Opinions on each of these subjects has changed a lot over time. How is it anything but arrogant to believe that now - this time - we've gotten it all right? What might we be taking for granted today, that in the future will make us look back and cringe?
I believe we should follow a code of law that, if transplanted back into a previous age, would not criminalize an artist or an activist for rallying behind abolitionism, women's suffrage, or the freedom to love who one wants - just because it's not how things are done at that point in history. But here's the thing. Humans are fallible, and sometimes we're wrong. Sometimes the causes we rally behind are wrong, too. We can only really know - as a collective - which of those causes is just in hindsight.
That's why freedom of speech needs to remain blind. If you spout hatred as part of some religious doctrine - just to use an example - then you should be ostracized from the people who actually care about decency, sensitivity, and respect. You should be identified as the blithering idiot that you are. But I will still defend your right to have those beliefs and to express them, because there is something far worse than a world where people cannot express hatred, or other unpopular and sometimes offensive opinions. And that is a world in which people cannot express genuine emotion, and original ideas, because they have to check their thoughts against the national register of taboos before they are allowed to open their mouths and speak.
Yes, you should think before you speak - I am a walking embodiment of that principle. But if you feel strongly enough about expressing what it is you want to say, it shouldn't matter if it defies conventional wisdom. Otherwise, how boring would this world be? We should be resistant to censorship in its myriad forms, because the chilling effect is at least as effective at chilling progressive speech as it is at chilling regressive radicalism. The whole point of free speech is that you suffer the one, for the sake of the other. It's like innocent until proven guilty. If two men were on trial - one of them guilty, and the other innocent - and had to be given the same verdict (as a hypothetical - bear with me), I'd rather let the guilty man go free, than suffer the innocent to face a punishment he doesn't deserve.
----------------------------------
Insensitivity and Free Speech
It grieves me that so much insensitivity in the world today, coupled with the censorship-happy "politically correct" mentality, is contributing to an erosion of public sentiment in defense of free speech. Honestly, in spite of what the founding document for the country I live in declares, I wonder if anyone else but me truly believes in the underlying virtue of the freedom of speech.
Free speech is not about immaturely defending your "right" to utter offensive remarks. It's about maturely defending the right of the person who's insulting you to speak their mind, even though it bothers you, because you understand that only in doing so, and thereby upholding the inviolable sanctity of the principle of free speech, are you, too, guaranteed the right to speak your mind whenever your conscience dictates.
And it won't always be immature, offensive remarks that you'll be spouting. Sometimes, it will be something truly original and revolutionary, that will change the way mankind thinks about life and the world - but in a way that a conservative, habitual-minded majority would bend over backwards to prevent you from broadcasting, given the authority. Dealing with a slew of offensive remarks from the less evolved members of our species is the price we have to pay for those sparks of progressive brilliance. And I gladly pay it. Would you?
People argue that free speech shouldn't protect unpopular and insensitive opinions. But there was a time when the merits of slavery were taken for granted. That nobody questioned the fact that women couldn't vote. That expressing the love between two people of the same sex was considered a heinous crime. Opinions on each of these subjects has changed a lot over time. How is it anything but arrogant to believe that now - this time - we've gotten it all right? What might we be taking for granted today, that in the future will make us look back and cringe?
I believe we should follow a code of law that, if transplanted back into a previous age, would not criminalize an artist or an activist for rallying behind abolitionism, women's suffrage, or the freedom to love who one wants - just because it's not how things are done at that point in history. But here's the thing. Humans are fallible, and sometimes we're wrong. Sometimes the causes we rally behind are wrong, too. We can only really know - as a collective - which of those causes is just in hindsight.
That's why freedom of speech needs to remain blind. If you spout hatred as part of some religious doctrine - just to use an example - then you should be ostracized from the people who actually care about decency, sensitivity, and respect. You should be identified as the blithering idiot that you are. But I will still defend your right to have those beliefs and to express them, because there is something far worse than a world where people cannot express hatred, or other unpopular and sometimes offensive opinions. And that is a world in which people cannot express genuine emotion, and original ideas, because they have to check their thoughts against the national register of taboos before they are allowed to open their mouths and speak.
Yes, you should think before you speak - I am a walking embodiment of that principle. But if you feel strongly enough about expressing what it is you want to say, it shouldn't matter if it defies conventional wisdom. Otherwise, how boring would this world be? We should be resistant to censorship in its myriad forms, because the chilling effect is at least as effective at chilling progressive speech as it is at chilling regressive radicalism. The whole point of free speech is that you suffer the one, for the sake of the other. It's like innocent until proven guilty. If two men were on trial - one of them guilty, and the other innocent - and had to be given the same verdict (as a hypothetical - bear with me), I'd rather let the guilty man go free, than suffer the innocent to face a punishment he doesn't deserve.
----------------------------------
Insensitivity and Free Speech
It grieves me that so much insensitivity in the world today, coupled with the censorship-happy "politically correct" mentality, is contributing to an erosion of public sentiment in defense of free speech. Honestly, in spite of what the founding document for the country I live in declares, I wonder if anyone else but me truly believes in the underlying virtue of the freedom of speech.
Free speech is not about immaturely defending your "right" to utter offensive remarks. It's about maturely defending the right of the person who's insulting you to speak their mind, even though it bothers you, because you understand that only in doing so, and thereby upholding the inviolable sanctity of the principle of free speech, are you, too, guaranteed the right to speak your mind whenever your conscience dictates.
And it won't always be immature, offensive remarks that you'll be spouting. Sometimes, it will be something truly original and revolutionary, that will change the way mankind thinks about life and the world - but in a way that a conservative, habitual-minded majority would bend over backwards to prevent you from broadcasting, given the authority. Dealing with a slew of offensive remarks from the less evolved members of our species is the price we have to pay for those sparks of progressive brilliance. And I gladly pay it. Would you?
Tuesday, March 1, 2016
A free country must permit public nudity
Do you agree? If not, then prove me wrong.
I'm not going to say that there don't exist reasons to impose a blanket restriction on public nudity. I probably wouldn't agree that they are good ones, but they may at least make logical sense. But I don't understand how telling anyone - at the least - that they can't be nude on their own private property (regardless of who may see them from a public vantage point) - even leaving out entirely the question of public roads and parks - is consistent with a belief in individual liberty.
You might not like it. You might not want to look at it. (Although the same could be said about the new paint job on your house, or the jeans your teenager wears). But the existence of nudist camps and resorts the world over lends a preponderance of evidence to the common sense notion that "seeing naked people" does not produce any real harm beyond what is generated by exposure to a lifelong and unnatural taboo on nudity. On the contrary, it would seem to suggest that the abolition of this taboo, and exposure to the great breadth and depth of body types that people possess throughout their lives, may even be healthy, and combat body image disorders, while improving sexual attitudes.
But aside from whether it's actually a good idea or not, I cannot fathom how telling a person that certain articles of clothing are mandatory - even outside of shared public spaces, schools, businesses, restaurants, private establishments, and residences that are not your own - is consistent with a fundamental belief in the virtue of individual liberty.
Does one person's private belief in the immorality of viewing a naked human body trump another person's right to choose what to wear, or not wear? And does that change if it's not one person's private belief, but the belief of a public majority? Should it?
I would argue no. Am I wrong?
I'm not going to say that there don't exist reasons to impose a blanket restriction on public nudity. I probably wouldn't agree that they are good ones, but they may at least make logical sense. But I don't understand how telling anyone - at the least - that they can't be nude on their own private property (regardless of who may see them from a public vantage point) - even leaving out entirely the question of public roads and parks - is consistent with a belief in individual liberty.
Disclaimer: Please don't presume that by "permitting public nudity", I mean a total naked free-for-all. There are a lot of shades of grey between that and fining a person hundreds of thousands of dollars for a split-second flash of nipple, and part of the problem is that we don't talk often enough about what those different variations could be. Leaving it implied leaves one person afraid to even open the shades and let some light into their house without covering up first, while another person calls the cops on their neighbor for doing just that.
But aside from whether it's actually a good idea or not, I cannot fathom how telling a person that certain articles of clothing are mandatory - even outside of shared public spaces, schools, businesses, restaurants, private establishments, and residences that are not your own - is consistent with a fundamental belief in the virtue of individual liberty.
Does one person's private belief in the immorality of viewing a naked human body trump another person's right to choose what to wear, or not wear? And does that change if it's not one person's private belief, but the belief of a public majority? Should it?
I would argue no. Am I wrong?
Monday, February 22, 2016
Fashion and "Risk Management"
Also, slut-shaming and victim-blaming.
When we tell girls, "dress like a slut, expect to get raped", we're discouraging girls from dressing like sluts, while reinforcing the stereotype of the neanderthal man who demands (out of some blind sense of entitlement) sexual satisfaction at the merest hint of arousal. But what kind of person is that? And what kind of a world would it be where women had to cover up their bodies in public so as not to "entice" men? (Doesn't this already happen in some parts of the world?). How much would that suck?
You might be one of the lucky ones who has a wife or a girlfriend who "puts out" every time you get horny. But you don't own women. You don't even own the woman who is your wife or girlfriend. If she wants to give her body - or even just the merest sight of her body - to you and only you, in the privacy of your shared bedroom, as some kind of gift, that's her business. If other women choose otherwise, that's their business, not yours.
I am a sensual creature. I like to be surrounded by eros - and it doesn't need to constantly be coupled with tactile stimulation and satisfaction. Maybe you're not like me. Maybe there is no compromise to be made between us. But I want to live in a world where all kinds of women can dress like sluts in public, and feel comfortable and confident in their safety, because the men of that world have enough self-control not to rape at the sight of a woman's body, and enough graciousness to appreciate the pleasant eye candy that those women are providing for the men, instead of insulting them for it and treating them like objects - either to dictate their wardrobes, or to punish their "impropriety" and teach them a lesson (a likely excuse for their raging hormones) by subjecting them to guilt-free acts of sexual abuse.
Seriously. Just think about that for a moment. What kind of example are we setting for mankind when we behave that way? It's enough already.
When we tell girls, "dress like a slut, expect to get raped", we're discouraging girls from dressing like sluts, while reinforcing the stereotype of the neanderthal man who demands (out of some blind sense of entitlement) sexual satisfaction at the merest hint of arousal. But what kind of person is that? And what kind of a world would it be where women had to cover up their bodies in public so as not to "entice" men? (Doesn't this already happen in some parts of the world?). How much would that suck?
You might be one of the lucky ones who has a wife or a girlfriend who "puts out" every time you get horny. But you don't own women. You don't even own the woman who is your wife or girlfriend. If she wants to give her body - or even just the merest sight of her body - to you and only you, in the privacy of your shared bedroom, as some kind of gift, that's her business. If other women choose otherwise, that's their business, not yours.
I am a sensual creature. I like to be surrounded by eros - and it doesn't need to constantly be coupled with tactile stimulation and satisfaction. Maybe you're not like me. Maybe there is no compromise to be made between us. But I want to live in a world where all kinds of women can dress like sluts in public, and feel comfortable and confident in their safety, because the men of that world have enough self-control not to rape at the sight of a woman's body, and enough graciousness to appreciate the pleasant eye candy that those women are providing for the men, instead of insulting them for it and treating them like objects - either to dictate their wardrobes, or to punish their "impropriety" and teach them a lesson (a likely excuse for their raging hormones) by subjecting them to guilt-free acts of sexual abuse.
Seriously. Just think about that for a moment. What kind of example are we setting for mankind when we behave that way? It's enough already.
Friday, February 19, 2016
Life, Liberty, and the Freedom of Diversity
"In a free society, what one encounters in the public square will be challenging, not comforting."
- zharth
I respect your right to hold an opinion, to choose your own beliefs, and to lead a life according to your own personal set of guiding principles. It might sound clichéd, but I will defend that right to the death, even if I happen to disagree with you, because it's no different than my freedom to hold an opinion, choose my own beliefs, and lead a life according to my own guiding principles.
But that doesn't mean I will always respect what your opinions, beliefs, and guiding principles are. Sometimes those things end up infringing on the rights of others. Diversity is a celebration of differences. It does not mean everyone coming together and compromising on a single lifestyle that offends the statistically smallest sample of the population. Diversity means growing a backbone, and learning to look the other way in the face of other people making choices about their own lives that you don't agree with.
Democracy relies on people getting along (or, barring that, a competent justice system), but this can only come as the result of a mature understanding of the difference between harm and offense, and the duty one has to take responsibility for one's own feelings, rather than impose their beliefs and views on others. Forcing somebody to change their lifestyle because you don't like it is the antithesis of freedom and diversity.
And if you disagree with me, I will respect your right to do so. But don't expect me to respect the angle of your viewpoint. Because I sure as hell am not going to change the way I live my life just to satisfy the arrogant illusion that your principles are better than mine, or anyone else's. Remember what I said about defending to the death? Well that goes for my viewpoints, as well.
--------------------------
Seriously, I don't get this. If a woman wants to wear pants and work in construction, we support her freedom to do so. If a man wants to walk hand in hand through the park with his boyfriend, we support his freedom to do so. But if I want to go out and work in my garden in the nude, I'm a public menace? Because the sight of my naked body might offend someone's delicate sensibilities? Because people have the "right" not to be exposed to other people's nude bodies? What the hell kind of world are we living in?
I'm not asking you to join me. I'm not even asking you to like it. I'm just asking you to extend the same courtesy I've extended you - the freedom to wear clothes if that makes you more comfortable. And "forcing" you to look at my naked body (it's not like I'm tying you down and holding your eyes open) might not feel like a courtesy (on the other hand, how about all those times that you take for granted when I've covered up just to satisfy your beliefs?), but that's only because you have the privilege of agreeing with the majority view.
In a hypothetical nudist world - provided you feel the same way you do now, and don't become a nudist just because it's common - don't you think you would advocate for the right to dress before leaving the privacy of your house, if being publicly clothed were not allowed? Yeah, that's what I thought. So, do you support freedom and diversity, or do you just support going along with whatever the majority view happens to be? I know a lot of people whose beliefs align with the latter - and, again, you have the freedom to think that way. But you only have that freedom because other people disagree with you, and are willing to defend that right to disagree. Otherwise, in some way or another - be it hairstyle, dress, language, lifestyle, relationship, hobbies, choice of food or drink, etc. - you would be forced to live according to somebody else's mandate.
And if that thought doesn't bother you, you are still within your rights. But know that you are no supporter of freedom. And it's disingenuous of you to claim your view represents freedom, in the hopes of luring in more blind followers of your creed - people like you who like the sound of freedom, because it's more socially acceptable, but really believe in authoritarianism. Of course, authoritarianism is nice if you're the one in authority. But the whole point of democracy is fairness. We can't all be in authority. That no one is fully in authority in a democracy is just the price we pay in order to avoid being bossed around by somebody else. So quit bossing me around. This is a democracy we're living in here.
[description: a nude man stands on a balcony, surrounded by ice and snow]
- zharth
I respect your right to hold an opinion, to choose your own beliefs, and to lead a life according to your own personal set of guiding principles. It might sound clichéd, but I will defend that right to the death, even if I happen to disagree with you, because it's no different than my freedom to hold an opinion, choose my own beliefs, and lead a life according to my own guiding principles.
But that doesn't mean I will always respect what your opinions, beliefs, and guiding principles are. Sometimes those things end up infringing on the rights of others. Diversity is a celebration of differences. It does not mean everyone coming together and compromising on a single lifestyle that offends the statistically smallest sample of the population. Diversity means growing a backbone, and learning to look the other way in the face of other people making choices about their own lives that you don't agree with.
Democracy relies on people getting along (or, barring that, a competent justice system), but this can only come as the result of a mature understanding of the difference between harm and offense, and the duty one has to take responsibility for one's own feelings, rather than impose their beliefs and views on others. Forcing somebody to change their lifestyle because you don't like it is the antithesis of freedom and diversity.
And if you disagree with me, I will respect your right to do so. But don't expect me to respect the angle of your viewpoint. Because I sure as hell am not going to change the way I live my life just to satisfy the arrogant illusion that your principles are better than mine, or anyone else's. Remember what I said about defending to the death? Well that goes for my viewpoints, as well.
--------------------------
Seriously, I don't get this. If a woman wants to wear pants and work in construction, we support her freedom to do so. If a man wants to walk hand in hand through the park with his boyfriend, we support his freedom to do so. But if I want to go out and work in my garden in the nude, I'm a public menace? Because the sight of my naked body might offend someone's delicate sensibilities? Because people have the "right" not to be exposed to other people's nude bodies? What the hell kind of world are we living in?
I'm not asking you to join me. I'm not even asking you to like it. I'm just asking you to extend the same courtesy I've extended you - the freedom to wear clothes if that makes you more comfortable. And "forcing" you to look at my naked body (it's not like I'm tying you down and holding your eyes open) might not feel like a courtesy (on the other hand, how about all those times that you take for granted when I've covered up just to satisfy your beliefs?), but that's only because you have the privilege of agreeing with the majority view.
In a hypothetical nudist world - provided you feel the same way you do now, and don't become a nudist just because it's common - don't you think you would advocate for the right to dress before leaving the privacy of your house, if being publicly clothed were not allowed? Yeah, that's what I thought. So, do you support freedom and diversity, or do you just support going along with whatever the majority view happens to be? I know a lot of people whose beliefs align with the latter - and, again, you have the freedom to think that way. But you only have that freedom because other people disagree with you, and are willing to defend that right to disagree. Otherwise, in some way or another - be it hairstyle, dress, language, lifestyle, relationship, hobbies, choice of food or drink, etc. - you would be forced to live according to somebody else's mandate.
And if that thought doesn't bother you, you are still within your rights. But know that you are no supporter of freedom. And it's disingenuous of you to claim your view represents freedom, in the hopes of luring in more blind followers of your creed - people like you who like the sound of freedom, because it's more socially acceptable, but really believe in authoritarianism. Of course, authoritarianism is nice if you're the one in authority. But the whole point of democracy is fairness. We can't all be in authority. That no one is fully in authority in a democracy is just the price we pay in order to avoid being bossed around by somebody else. So quit bossing me around. This is a democracy we're living in here.
[description: a nude man stands on a balcony, surrounded by ice and snow]
Saturday, February 13, 2016
Love and Lust
Some people say that "lust" is nothing but an inferior analog to love. Some will even go so far as to declare it a sin, to contrast love's virtue. But let me tell you something. I used to be one of those people who would get depressed on Valentine's Day, my thoughts turning inevitably toward how lonely my life has been, on that night when couples everywhere go out to have romantic, candlelit dinners, and profess their [allegedly] undying love for one another. I confess that I myself am a romantic at heart. And to be fair, I have to disclaim the fact that I've had more luck than some (for which I am grateful). But I just wasn't dealt the card for an abundance of romantic love in my life, whether that's something I want or not.
(I'll say that being involved in an unconventional, largely non-romantic "relationship" of sorts has me thinking that the headache of anxiety that comes with the obligation of dinner reservations and flower bouquets is almost certainly more trouble than it's worth. But who's to say that romance has to look like a Hallmark card? If I had my way, I'd already redesign the way we celebrate holidays - so why stop there?).
But here's the thing. Ever since I've re-dedicated Valentine's Day to a celebration of self-love, its approach hasn't once caused me to dwell on despair, but rather to look ahead with excitement to a day of shameless indulgence in some of the most consistent pleasures that life has to offer - pornography and masturbation! Imagine it. A warm bath, candles, and your favorite bodice ripper - or better yet, your trusty vibrator.* No obligations, no commitments, and no distractions. A day devoted entirely to you. Remember that self-love is the most important love of all.
So, you prudes can disparage the realm of the senses all you want - I know you'll do it whether you have my permission or not - but too many people underestimate the value of sexual pleasure, and its importance to happiness. Lust is not evil. It is essential to life. And like a flower in the rain, life withers in its absence. Neglect it, and you're bound to suffer. What better purpose, then, can Valentine's Day have than to reaffirm its central position in your life?
[description: portrait of a nude man with erection, sitting at a computer displaying pornography]
* For those visual creatures out there, like myself, the internet has an abundance of porn (of all varieties!) just waiting to respond to the touch of your fingertips. You don't even have to pay any money or breach any credit card barriers to get to the good stuff! (For better and worse - better for the consumers, not so much for the producers of this content).
If you're new to the world wide web of porn, it's as simple as conducting a Google image search with the SafeSearch turned off. A careful selection of search terms will help guide you to the content of your dreams (although some of the juicier stuff might require a more expert touch).
If you want my personal recommendation, avoid the tacky porn sites and pay tumblr a visit. Whatever you might say about that site (and you might say a lot), it is undoubtedly a treasure trove of erotic photography. It's my go-to destination for erotic stimulation these days, better than flickr and deviantART - even if, like me, you prefer the artsier stuff.
Or, you know, you could always just browse the pictures here on my blog...
(I'll say that being involved in an unconventional, largely non-romantic "relationship" of sorts has me thinking that the headache of anxiety that comes with the obligation of dinner reservations and flower bouquets is almost certainly more trouble than it's worth. But who's to say that romance has to look like a Hallmark card? If I had my way, I'd already redesign the way we celebrate holidays - so why stop there?).
But here's the thing. Ever since I've re-dedicated Valentine's Day to a celebration of self-love, its approach hasn't once caused me to dwell on despair, but rather to look ahead with excitement to a day of shameless indulgence in some of the most consistent pleasures that life has to offer - pornography and masturbation! Imagine it. A warm bath, candles, and your favorite bodice ripper - or better yet, your trusty vibrator.* No obligations, no commitments, and no distractions. A day devoted entirely to you. Remember that self-love is the most important love of all.
So, you prudes can disparage the realm of the senses all you want - I know you'll do it whether you have my permission or not - but too many people underestimate the value of sexual pleasure, and its importance to happiness. Lust is not evil. It is essential to life. And like a flower in the rain, life withers in its absence. Neglect it, and you're bound to suffer. What better purpose, then, can Valentine's Day have than to reaffirm its central position in your life?
[description: portrait of a nude man with erection, sitting at a computer displaying pornography]
* For those visual creatures out there, like myself, the internet has an abundance of porn (of all varieties!) just waiting to respond to the touch of your fingertips. You don't even have to pay any money or breach any credit card barriers to get to the good stuff! (For better and worse - better for the consumers, not so much for the producers of this content).
If you're new to the world wide web of porn, it's as simple as conducting a Google image search with the SafeSearch turned off. A careful selection of search terms will help guide you to the content of your dreams (although some of the juicier stuff might require a more expert touch).
If you want my personal recommendation, avoid the tacky porn sites and pay tumblr a visit. Whatever you might say about that site (and you might say a lot), it is undoubtedly a treasure trove of erotic photography. It's my go-to destination for erotic stimulation these days, better than flickr and deviantART - even if, like me, you prefer the artsier stuff.
Or, you know, you could always just browse the pictures here on my blog...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)