29 mellow crop poster

29 mellow crop poster, originally uploaded by ClioLune.

Beautiful, isn't it? Oh, and isn't iteresting that your eyes can so easily fill in the missing lines? The human form is hardwired into our brains...

Permalink to full story.

Imperfect

Imperfect, originally uploaded by Bum Fluff.

Gutsy and provocotive in a way no prude would ever have contemplated.

A longer exploration of this image at Graphictruth: "Imperfect" ?

Permalink to full story.

Fabio Borquez - Clothing women in Light

casisindecirnosnada, originally uploaded by fabio borquez.

Favio uses light and shadow in a way I find very familiar; it's similar to my own artistic process; to reduce an image to it's essentials, to carve away until I am showing what I think the model or the image is saying to me.

If you visit Borquez's photo-stream, you can see that he is engaged in a dialogue with his models; his art is as much portraiture, or collaboration as it is a consistent artistic vision.

There are a very, very few photographers of this caliber every generation, and I would strongly suggest that people invest in his work now, while it's affordable. Not just due to the investment value, of course - it will encourage him to do more and better work - and that will enrich everyone.

Permalink to full story.

Shower Scene, Internal

Shower Scene, Internal, originally uploaded by Bob King.

Erotic images need not be explicit to be powerfully clear in their intent. I do not think this image could be more erotic than it is, no matter how many breasts and wabbly bits were added.

Now, this is not an argument against explicit images; to the contrary. It is an argument against prudery, for all prudery amounts to is seeing sexual connotations in everything.

A prude looking at this image will be offended and disturbed, probably about as much as if the image explicitly showed the subject masturbating with a waterproof vibrator.

But it's not the vibrator - seen OR unseen, or even it's existence that makes this image sexually moving. It's the clear expression of erotic self absorption. And yet, there is nothing in this image that would keep t from a "G" rating.

This is why I snap my fingers at anatomically driven ideas of what is "porn" and what is art.

Speaking personally, my nakedness has very little relationship to what's on MY mind, especially in the shower - and generally, a full -frontal image would prove that beyond doubt!

Artists such as myself have been coining money based on this sort of "plausible deniability" for at least a thousand years. We don't paint nekkid people for prurient reasons, oh no, never! We paint "classical scenes." And of course, in ancient Greece, all the women were pretty and mostly buck-nekkid.

Or shall we leer at the religious art of the Renaissance? Oh, those portraits of Sampson and Delilah.

Yep. And this image is no different. But I made it because I liked it, not to appeal to or repel prudes or those who appreciate sexual images and yet wish to avoid being officially busted for the porn on their walls.

It is a portrait of an actual person, from a photo she took herself. All I did was to de-emphasise the brestage so that you would notice the parts that were being sexual. - That is to say, her face, and presumably, her brain. Boobs, being mostly inert fatty tissue (not unlike the brains of prudes and many porn-surfers), are just along for the ride.

tag: erotica, erotic art, pornography, prudery, prudes, sexual, sexy, sexually explicit

Permalink to full story.

On the matter of boobs, and what sort deserves more consideration.

I found this lingering on the spike. Very old news, and yet, likely to erupt again at any moment, because this is an issue that cannot, will not and should not go away.

Breast isn't best: readers tell US parenting magazine - Yahoo! News:

"The picture in Babytalk was aimed at illustrating the controversy surrounding breastfeeding in the United States, where a national survey by the American Dietetic Association found that 57 percent of those polled are opposed to women breastfeeding in public and 72 percent think it is inappropriate to show a woman breastfeeding on television programs.

Babytalk executive editor Lisa Moran said though most of those who responded to the poll about the cover photo gave the magazine a thumbs up, she was surprised that some 25 percent expressed outrage.

'There is a real puritanical streak in America,' Moran told AFP. 'You see celebrities practically baring their breasts all the time and no one seems to mind in this sort of sexual context.

'But in this very natural context of feeding your child, a lot of Americans are very uncomfortable with it.'"

It seems to me that this is such an wholesome and innocent image that taking offense at it amounts to a genuine perversion; a degree of fetishism and outright filthy-mindedness that it needs far more, widespread and consistent mockery.

The idea that a breast is always sexual and never just there is an astonishingly juvenile view. Sometimes breasts are sexy. Sometimes they are nurturing. And sometimes, I've been told, they get in the way. That's a more grown-up way of looking at boobs. Context matters. And the fact that a woman's breast is partially exposed when a baby is attached should not bother you. Why? Because babies are good things, and don't deserve having their feeding disrupted by their prudery, or stuffed under a hot blanket so that you are "spared" the vision of a nipple being used as nature intended.

When a breast is displayed partially covered by a scrap of fabric that manages to be just barely adequate in a legal sense, there is little outcry, even in the same context where people would be upset at this. Lo, the baby covers more than many bikini tops.

I've been long convinced that cultural taboos involving the human body create the very pervesions they are supposedly intended to prevent. While they may serve to spare the delecate sensiblities of a few prudes here and there, I question the legitamacy of that demand, or why rigid, shame based conentions that have the effect of warping our natural sexual behavior into paths that are often compulsive and distructive. It seems to me that a modicum of courtesy would be a far better way of going about not scaring the horse-faced. Permalink to full story.

The allure of the Vampyre

Ever since Bram Stoker brought Dracula into popular culture, there has been a magnetic sexual attraction to the entire concept of vampirism , when understanding the needs, drives and ethical challenges of the vampire would make a sane person snicker.

Unless the attraction is the needs, the drives and the ethical challenges - and possibly the struggles of being sane in the face of them.

Of late we have vampure role-playing games and, of course, such hit shows as "Buffy the Vampire Slayer" and "Angel."

It occurs to me that one of the things that appeals in the theme of vampirism is the identification with a social or sexual drive that is socially taboo, such as homosexuality, bisexuality and, of course, the unavoidably obvious references to sadomasochistic drives so well illustrated by Anne Rice.

The question is not whether vampire culture is a good thing or a bad thing, moral or immoral. The question is why there is such obvious allure and so many different ways of covertly exploring themes that, were they expressed in plain words, would have us imprisoned, committed or worse.

I'm in favor of safely exploring such concepts in ways that are not too close to the visceral bone, and I must confess being vulnerable myself to the image of a pale throat bared to me. That is very probably a signal that goes straight to the hind-brain. I've learned that the trick to these things is to explore them conciously, lest they explore me without my knowlege. The first approach may not lead to an ethical outcome, but the second absolutely will not. And ethical outcomes are, aside from all considerations of right and wrong, far less painful as a rule of thumb.

I am a very visual person obviously, and ordinarily I'd illustrate such an article with a pure picture. But there is no more powerful statement in our culture than literally wearing your literal desires on your shirt - in the daytime. I mean, who goes to a goth club in a t-shirt? It shows you just aren't trying.

This is intended as a mass-market item. The creator may be wrong or right on that point, but my gut speaks to me of obligatory rebellion, the proud, the defiant, the polymorphously "perverse" among us coming out of the closet, with our fangs bared.

Kindred
by
SophiaDeer

Get this custom t-shirt at Zazzle

Permalink to full story.