Hulver's site || It's not clear who's trolling whom.

Diaries
Everything
Who's Online?
FAQ / Help

Posing

By tps12 (Wed Apr 19, 2006 at 05:16:21 AM EST) women, photography, male gaze, posing, fashion, advertising, essay (all tags)

I thought people here might be interested in this photo essay, This is not Sex: A Web Essay on the Male Gaze, Fashion Advertising, and the Pose.

We've had some debate here covering some slightly related issues. "Slightly" because technically, pose doesn't play a role in the "rack" photo except in its absence—the concept of dismemberment is of greater relevance as far as analysis goes. But discussion in that diary did stray into general explorations of what it means to photograph women (and to view photographs of women and to be photographed as a woman) in different ways in the context of our society, and the essay is related to that broader discussion, I think.

Link via Bitch. Ph.D.

< </stink> | BBC White season: 'Rivers of Blood' >

Posing | 66 comments (66 topical, 0 hidden)

What on Earth by MohammedNiyalSayeed (3.25 / 4) #1 Wed Apr 19, 2006 at 05:30:21 AM EST

made you think that people here might be interested?

Did you mean to post this at dailykos?

-
You can build the most elegant fountain in the world, but eventually a winged rat will be using it as a drinking bowl.

I think you'd have more fun with this at k5 by georgeha (4.00 / 6) #2 Wed Apr 19, 2006 at 05:33:26 AM EST

I found the photo-essay aroused equal feelings of "meh" and "duh", along with a dash of "hello, the mid 1960's are calling, they want their thesis of media objectifying women and turning them into passive objects of adornment back".

LINK IS A TROLL by sasquatchan (4.00 / 2) #3 Wed Apr 19, 2006 at 05:41:55 AM EST

it is a Shock screamer site

Some of it is overstated. by ObviousTroll (4.00 / 1) #4 Wed Apr 19, 2006 at 05:45:35 AM EST

I did find the essay interesting; but the stuff about floors being used because they are unclean, or heads cocked as a sign of submission are just silly - I sit on the floor as often as I sit on a chair, and I often cock my head when talking or looking at someone - it's a sign that you're relaxed instead of stiff, casual instead of formal.

I was also amused by the need to blame all this on western culture, rather than innate behaviors, despite an awareness that these behaviors are at least many centuries old, and that you can find similar behaviors in non-western cultures.

--
You're no good to me dead. Even half-alive would be socially awkward. - Hugh MacLeod

Only Western cultures have Cosmo by DesiredUsername (4.00 / 1) #5 Wed Apr 19, 2006 at 05:50:33 AM EST

QED

---
Now accepting suggestions for a new sigline

[ Parent ]

: Only Western cultures have tentacle pr0n by The Fool (4.00 / 2) #13 Wed Apr 19, 2006 at 06:45:24 AM EST

Oh, wait...

[ Parent ]

It was on Metafilter a few days ago by R Mutt (4.00 / 3) #6 Wed Apr 19, 2006 at 06:01:35 AM EST

Another thing it doesn't seem to realise is that adopting a "vulnerable" posture is often a signal of confidence or superiority. When a CEO stands with his hands behind his back, or a cheeky schoolboy leans lazily backwards in his chair; they are making themselves "vulnerable to attack" precisely to indicate that they don't fear being attacked.

Also, I had a quick look at the first men's fashion magazine I thought of, GQ, and clicked around to their style section. Guess what: a bunch of guys lounging around on the ground...

[ Parent ]

Actually, that's my major gripe against feminism. by ObviousTroll (2.00 / 0) #7 Wed Apr 19, 2006 at 06:14:10 AM EST

When we were being sold on feminism it was about making women equal to men. I never realized that involved teaching men to wear cosmetics and obsess about their appearance...

--
You're no good to me dead. Even half-alive would be socially awkward. - Hugh MacLeod

[ Parent ]

That's not feminism by jump the ladder (4.00 / 3) #8 Wed Apr 19, 2006 at 06:17:00 AM EST

That's consumerism...

[ Parent ]

That's Your One Major Gripe? by Christopher Robin was Murdered (2.00 / 0) #9 Wed Apr 19, 2006 at 06:20:57 AM EST

Because if claiming it forced you to tuck in your shirt is the worst thing that can be said about feminism, than it comes out smelling like a rose compared to most other major ideological movements.

Besides, I think you're pinning the blame for the rise of upmarket male fashion products on the wrong Western ideology. I think there's a clue to the identity of the real culprit in your use of the phrase "When we were being sold . . ."

[ Parent ]

Well, that and... by ObviousTroll (4.00 / 1) #10 Wed Apr 19, 2006 at 06:23:00 AM EST

people who can't tell when I'm joking - but only some of those are feminists.

--
You're no good to me dead. Even half-alive would be socially awkward. - Hugh MacLeod

[ Parent ]

: How Are They Supposed to Know? by Christopher Robin was Murdered (4.00 / 4) #11 Wed Apr 19, 2006 at 06:26:32 AM EST

You should try being funny. Then they could tell.

[ Parent ]

Whoa, hold up by MohammedNiyalSayeed (4.00 / 2) #15 Wed Apr 19, 2006 at 08:09:48 AM EST

I was all in favor of feminism until you mentioned this tucked-in shirt business... Nobody ever explained that part, and by all that is good and holy, I won't stand for it! THEY CAN TUCK MY SHIRT IN WHEN THEY PRY MY BELT FROM MY COLD, DEAD HANDS, I SAY!

-
You can build the most elegant fountain in the world, but eventually a winged rat will be using it as a drinking bowl.

[ Parent ]

Most Contemporary Feminist Thinkers, by Christopher Robin was Murdered (4.00 / 3) #16 Wed Apr 19, 2006 at 08:25:07 AM EST

The so-called Third-Wave Feminists, work within a philosophical framework that includes what we call the "So Long As MNS Wears Trousers" Exception. The concept is that as long as MNS agrees to actually wear britches before leaving the home, then nobody will go so far as to demand he tuck in his shirt.

[ Parent ]

Friggin' Nazis! by MohammedNiyalSayeed (4.00 / 3) #18 Wed Apr 19, 2006 at 08:32:39 AM EST

I guess I can live with that. I guess. Wait, do boxer shorts count as trousers? If I find myself back in SF, I can't guarantee I'll always put on full-fledged "trousers" for quick errands like going to get coffee, or doing some banking, or what have you.

Still, I worry about the rest of mankind, too. I mean, it's nice to have an exception made in people's frameworks just for me, but what about you? What if you don't want to tuck your shirt in? The whole thing smacks of fascism!

-
You can build the most elegant fountain in the world, but eventually a winged rat will be using it as a drinking bowl.

[ Parent ]

: Don't Worry About Me by Christopher Robin was Murdered (4.00 / 2) #19 Wed Apr 19, 2006 at 08:42:27 AM EST

I've always said I'd rather look good than be well-governed.

[ Parent ]
: No one would really be happy about boxers. by NoMoreNicksLeft (2.00 / 0) #57 Wed Apr 19, 2006 at 08:06:26 PM EST

But if you can guarantee that the fly doesn't come open, say a few safety pins or something, we may just pretend you were wearing trousers anyway.
--
Do not look directly into laser with remaining good eye.
[ Parent ]

(Comment Deleted) by yicky yacky (2.00 / 0) #36 Wed Apr 19, 2006 at 10:30:09 AM EST

This comment has been deleted by yicky yacky

[ Parent ]

(Comment Deleted) by yicky yacky (2.00 / 0) #12 Wed Apr 19, 2006 at 06:34:17 AM EST

This comment has been deleted by yicky yacky

[ Parent ]

: Well, that's actually the patriarchy by ObviousTroll (2.00 / 0) #14 Wed Apr 19, 2006 at 07:08:05 AM EST

trying to hide the truth from the huddled masses.
Being part of the patriarchy, that bit doesn't bother me at all!

--
You're no good to me dead. Even half-alive would be socially awkward. - Hugh MacLeod
[ Parent ]

i don't get your joke either by tps12 (2.00 / 0) #22 Wed Apr 19, 2006 at 09:19:35 AM EST

I think most feminists could care less about your appearance as long as you don't apologize for rape culture, misogyny or patriarchy.

[ Parent ]

Because we're not really sorry? [nt] by debacle (1.50 / 2) #46 Wed Apr 19, 2006 at 03:44:17 PM EST

IF YOU HAVE TWO FIRLES THOROWNF MONEY ART SUOCIDE GIRLS STRIPPER HPW CAN YPUS :OSE?!?!?!?(elcevisides).

[ Parent ]

: other meaning of apologize (nt) by tps12 (2.00 / 0) #60 Thu Apr 20, 2006 at 05:07:23 AM EST

[ Parent ]

and yet by tps12 (2.00 / 0) #21 Wed Apr 19, 2006 at 09:17:04 AM EST

We don't see media images of CEO's in similar poses. They do pose, but (the essay argues) the tend not to pose in these specific ways. And in response to OT's comment, the point isn't that men don't sit on the floor, but that they're not (or less often) photographed there.

Good point w/r/t GQ and such. I think the essay is a little out of date in terms of how fashion photography has expanded the male gaze to put male models in what once would have been considered feminine poses. Though I still don't think you see much of the weirdly angled backs.

[ Parent ]

You don't see women CEOs in those poses either by ObviousTroll (2.00 / 0) #25 Wed Apr 19, 2006 at 09:45:07 AM EST

and I find it telling that you seem to think all CEOs are men.

I also couldn't find any pix of Carly Fiorina (for example) sitting on the floor, nor did I find any "cute" pictures on the web of a female CEO I actually worked for.

--
You're no good to me dead. Even half-alive would be socially awkward. - Hugh MacLeod

[ Parent ]

where did i imply that all CEO's are men? by tps12 (2.00 / 0) #26 Wed Apr 19, 2006 at 09:50:15 AM EST

And I agree, while I seem to remember relaxed (and therefore arguably vulnerable) looking CEO photographs being pretty common, I don't remember encountering any (men or women) in the specific kinds of vulnerable poses (recumbent, neck or back and odd angles) we know from fashion.

[ Parent ]

: Doh! I am guilty of the same crime I accused by ObviousTroll (2.00 / 0) #30 Wed Apr 19, 2006 at 10:09:18 AM EST

Millman and DUN of committing - I read too much into your comment and jumped to the wrong conclusion.
I see what you're saying, and I think we agree.

--
You're no good to me dead. Even half-alive would be socially awkward. - Hugh MacLeod
[ Parent ]
: what conclusion are you drawing by aphrael (2.00 / 0) #54 Wed Apr 19, 2006 at 05:15:16 PM EST

from the fact that ceos are pictured differently than models who are being used to sell something?
i'm not sure it is reasonable to draw any conclusion, other than "people want different things in pictures of managers than they do in pictures of people selling perfume and clothing", which is really too banal for words.
If television is a babysitter, the internet is a drunk librarian who won't shut up.
[ Parent ]

IDWTP by R Mutt (4.00 / 5) #31 Wed Apr 19, 2006 at 10:10:36 AM EST

Bill Gates in Teenbeat

[ Parent ]

Urgh by Bob Abooey (4.00 / 2) #33 Wed Apr 19, 2006 at 10:21:37 AM EST

Please tell me you didn't have that saved to your hard drive.

Warmest regards,
--Your best pal Bob

[ Parent ]

: No by R Mutt (4.00 / 3) #37 Wed Apr 19, 2006 at 10:30:26 AM EST

We have network desktops, so our wallpaper's stored on a remote server.

Kidding.

[ Parent ]

You won't see him like that now. by calla (2.00 / 0) #35 Wed Apr 19, 2006 at 10:26:22 AM EST

I guess it's OK for men to pose submissively when they are struggling to rise to the top.

[ Parent ]

Not too different from women then, eh? [nt] by debacle (2.00 / 0) #47 Wed Apr 19, 2006 at 03:46:32 PM EST

IF YOU HAVE TWO FIRLES THOROWNF MONEY ART SUOCIDE GIRLS STRIPPER HPW CAN YPUS :OSE?!?!?!?(elcevisides).

[ Parent ]

Difference is by calla (2.00 / 0) #50 Wed Apr 19, 2006 at 04:03:48 PM EST

women remain submissive.

[ Parent ]

I disagree by debacle (4.00 / 1) #51 Wed Apr 19, 2006 at 04:13:20 PM EST

Women are like badgers.

IF YOU HAVE TWO FIRLES THOROWNF MONEY ART SUOCIDE GIRLS STRIPPER HPW CAN YPUS :OSE?!?!?!?(elcevisides).

[ Parent ]

Mushroom Mushroom? by edward (4.00 / 1) #52 Wed Apr 19, 2006 at 04:45:22 PM EST

[ Parent ]

: Mushrooms are a fungus by debacle (4.00 / 1) #53 Wed Apr 19, 2006 at 05:01:21 PM EST

And are, in no way, related to badgers.
Or snakes.
IF YOU HAVE TWO FIRLES THOROWNF MONEY ART SUOCIDE GIRLS STRIPPER HPW CAN YPUS :OSE?!?!?!?(elcevisides).

[ Parent ]

overstatement by tps12 (2.00 / 0) #28 Wed Apr 19, 2006 at 10:02:38 AM EST

I don't know. I think it's pretty well accepted that the elevation someone sits at conveys some power status: we have judges and tennis umpires literally elevated over the proceedings they officiate, and there's that Andy Kaufmann talk show with him as the host at like a twenty-foot high desk, towering over his guests. You cock your head to look relaxed and flexible—not aggressive—which is I think all that was being claimed.

I don't know if the non-Western cultures objection really makes sense. The existence of similar conventions in, e.g., East Asian art would be expected if we suspect there is some association between the male gaze and an historically misogynist culture.

[ Parent ]

Well.. by ObviousTroll (4.00 / 3) #32 Wed Apr 19, 2006 at 10:16:21 AM EST

Tennis judges sit high so they can see the game; not to intimidate the players.

Which is the general point - high==intimidation factor, but that sort of body language is meaningless in a photograph; all photographs lose that subliminal suggestion unless the print is literally larger than life.

As for the cultural objection - you're dodging the point. Why would the male gaze be associated with misogyny or, more correctly, a patriarchal culture?

The point is that most birds and mammals - including primates - have sex linked behaviors and it is odd to try and place the blame for all our sex linked behavior on culture and not genetic predisposition.

We've reached an odd point in our culture where we assert that homosexuality is genetic but the male reaction to the sight of a sexually attractive female is merely cultural conditioning.

--
You're no good to me dead. Even half-alive would be socially awkward. - Hugh MacLeod

[ Parent ]

: some of this is subjective by tps12 (2.00 / 0) #41 Wed Apr 19, 2006 at 11:34:23 AM EST

You're right that there is a practical reason for tennis umpires to sit high up. OTOH, isn't there a noticeable air of authority that comes from their position above the players? Same goes for lifeguards at the Y.
I don't see why prints would need to be larger than real size for body language to come across. Reproduction size and body language interpretation just seem unrelated to me.
I don't know that "we" assert that sexual preference is genetic or that reactions to attractiveness are purely cultural. I do think that most people would agree that sexual preference is not something people consciously choose (which doesn't mean it's genetic) and that, while reactions to attractiveness are pretty much biologically determined (read: we get boners), which people are perceived as attractive is pretty fungible.

[ Parent ]
: Homosexuality is not genetic by debacle (1.50 / 2) #48 Wed Apr 19, 2006 at 03:48:12 PM EST

It's an inhereted trait. My dad touched my junk liberally because his dad touched his junk liberally.
IF YOU HAVE TWO FIRLES THOROWNF MONEY ART SUOCIDE GIRLS STRIPPER HPW CAN YPUS :OSE?!?!?!?(elcevisides).

[ Parent ]

That's pretty impressive. by Driusan (4.00 / 3) #17 Wed Apr 19, 2006 at 08:30:57 AM EST

I don't think I've seen someone do such a thorough job of assuming a thesis is true, and then supporting it with bald assertions predicated on the assumption that the thesis is true since the last time I tried to read something you posted.

--
Vive le Montréal libre.

it's one reading of a specific body of text by tps12 (2.00 / 0) #24 Wed Apr 19, 2006 at 09:29:08 AM EST

It's just the result of the reader's analysis, so there is no thesis to support (or, if you like, the thesis is "here is my analysis, do with it what you will"). You're welcome to your own analysis (R Mutt has suggested alternate analyses such as another interpretation of the recumbent figure and the expansion of the text to include men's fashion photography), but judging "truth" of this one is sort of beside the point.

[ Parent ]

What? by Driusan (4.00 / 1) #27 Wed Apr 19, 2006 at 09:53:12 AM EST

It's a self described web essay.

The introduction for it reads as follows:

It is now routine to speak critically of the way that women are depicted in our popular visual media. There's too much sex in movies, television and magazines, people say. And this is often coupled to complaints that the media represent women as sex objects, provide unrealistic beauty standards, or focus only on women's outer beauty, instead of the more important attributes of character and accomplishment. There is truth in all of this. But often these claims seem to imply that there is an obvious "thing" called beauty or sexual attractiveness, and that the question is simply whether or not the media should display so much of this "thing."
The following web essay casts doubt on the belief that there is such a simple, self-evident "thing" as beauty. It looks at beauty as a cultural construct, at how beauty is defined, at how fashion magazines cultivate a very particular notion of what it means to be attractive or beautiful. And it suggests that this particular notion may be less about sex, less about actual human sexual behaviors, than it is about power.

Do you know what an essay is? Do you know what a thesis is?

And for the fucking love of god and all that is holy, do the people who wrote that know what a conjunction is and their relation to the start of a sentence?

--
Vive le Montréal libre.

[ Parent ]

yeah by tps12 (2.00 / 0) #29 Wed Apr 19, 2006 at 10:03:31 AM EST

They didn't even follow the five-paragraph format! D-!

[ Parent ]

Look by Driusan (4.00 / 1) #38 Wed Apr 19, 2006 at 11:03:42 AM EST

There are at least three thesises which can be taken from that introduction:

1. There's too much sex in movies, and this is coupled with unrealistic beauty standards.
2. There is no such thing as beauty.
3. The notion of beauty isn't about sex, but is really about power.

1. is pretty much ignored after the intro. That's fine, it just means I don't get to use my dead horse flogging image again.
2. Is an assertion which is supported by comparing photos of professional female models, to amateur male models in similar poses. Based on that and the fact that the females look better than males, we're supposed to conclude that there's no such thing as beauty.

It also happens to be a testable assertion.. either via cross-cultural studies or studies involving people who aren't old enough to have been influenced by their culture (ie. do a statisticly significant portion of infants turn their gaze to look towards "beautiful" women when presented with them?) The essay seems to either be ignorant of, or intentionally ignore all scientific studies that have been done on such things. I wonder why?

3. Is the thesis which you and the "web essay" is mostly focused on. It supports the thesis by:

a) Assuming the thesis is true and
b) Making assertions predicated on the assumption that the thesis is true.

3. is what my original comment was pointing out. Somehow, I'm not surprised that you completely missed the point and just claimed that there was no thesis.

Here are three. They're taken directly from the link you provided. Do you have anything other than circular logic to back them up?

--
Vive le Montréal libre.

[ Parent ]

i will grant by tps12 (2.00 / 0) #39 Wed Apr 19, 2006 at 11:23:32 AM EST

The introduction overstates the scope of the essay. The essay might cause one to muse on the possible non-existence of a non–socially constructed notion of beauty, but it doesn't cast doubt on that existence in itself.

I don't think there is a clear thesis statement in the introduction at all, actually (D-!!!!).

[ Parent ]

"No", then? by Driusan (4.00 / 1) #40 Wed Apr 19, 2006 at 11:32:32 AM EST

--
Vive le Montréal libre.

[ Parent ]

yes, no by tps12 (2.00 / 0) #42 Wed Apr 19, 2006 at 11:41:30 AM EST

In case you are not picking up on the "D-" thing, my point is that not having a thesis statement in the introduction of an inductive essay is perfectly valid outside of high school.

[ Parent ]

: if you are trying to show something is true by garlic (2.00 / 0) #62 Thu Apr 20, 2006 at 07:29:42 PM EST

it helps to state what the hell you're trying to show is true at some point that makes sense. Calling it a 'web essay' leads one to believe its more formal than a blog entry, but in reading the first few pages, the statements and conclusions seem pretty blog class.

[ Parent ]

in common parlance by aphrael (2.00 / 0) #55 Wed Apr 19, 2006 at 05:17:10 PM EST

the plural of 'thesis' is 'theses'.
If television is a babysitter, the internet is a drunk librarian who won't shut up.

[ Parent ]

A picture is worth a paragraph by duxup (2.00 / 0) #20 Wed Apr 19, 2006 at 08:54:21 AM EST

Call me an Uneducated Simpleton (really that’s my given name . . . * sigh * ) but this is one of those cases where my response is:

So men and women are posed differently in the media, so the #### what? They are different, and I don’t entirely buy into these theories that an image conveys an entire paragraph of information.

Personally I’ve got some weird attraction to Kelly Martin and I’ll be darned if she’d have to pose awkwardly to get my attention. Of course, that’s not the point as the page notes the images are in women’s magazines for other women but I felt the need to say it just in case Kelly didn’t know that I’m getting married this fall so time is running short for her . . .

I’m not fond of advertising or how it portrays most people, yet the whole deal was focused on magazine imgs. If magazine images were the only problem when it comes to pigeonholing gender roles and such I would there wouldn’t be much of a problem. I’m not saying that nullifies what that site is trying to say, but I think it is worth noting.

____

well yeah by tps12 (4.00 / 1) #23 Wed Apr 19, 2006 at 09:23:12 AM EST

You can say "so the #### what" about anything, and that's valid...I just thought some people might find it interesting, and indeed there are some comments indicating I might have been right.

I don't know if "conveys an entire paragraph of information" is exactly right...the information isn't encoded by the photographer or publisher or anything, so it's more like "inspires an entire paragraph of thoughts in this reader."

[ Parent ]

Maybe you'll be more interested once by calla (4.00 / 1) #34 Wed Apr 19, 2006 at 10:23:27 AM EST

you are married and have kids. Personally, I'll put up with stuff that I'd never want my kids to have to suffer with.

I don't want society to set limits for my daughter. She's beautiful, but so much more than something for men to gaze at. She deserves the chance to achieve whatever she wants.

Acknowledging that the submission of women is so pervasive in our society that it shows even in the way women are photographed, opens the way to breaking down the stereotypes and limits set by society.

[ Parent ]

Hello? by duxup (4.00 / 1) #43 Wed Apr 19, 2006 at 01:42:04 PM EST

All that is mentioned on that site is the way women are photographed. Personally I think both genders get the shaft in a lot of ways (education, the media, etc). As I said above the way they’re portrayed in magazine photographs is just a small part IMO.
____

[ Parent ]

: Agreed. by calla (2.00 / 0) #45 Wed Apr 19, 2006 at 01:58:05 PM EST

Women are photographed in submissive postures in women's magazines. I don't believe I made any other claims.

[ Parent ]

I think I've just entered crazy-land by garlic (4.00 / 1) #63 Thu Apr 20, 2006 at 07:31:35 PM EST

I thought you're job was to vehemently disagree with mr 12, not agree with him. Or am I confused here?

[ Parent ]

: I'll make no comment on your mental state. by calla (2.00 / 0) #64 Thu Apr 20, 2006 at 08:10:15 PM EST

I've always been fond of tps12. We've lived in the same cities and he's got a cute cat.
Did I miss the part in my contract where I was supposed to always vehemently disagree with him? I don't remember where I put that damn contract anyway.

[ Parent ]

uh, dude... by rmg (4.00 / 2) #44 Wed Apr 19, 2006 at 01:50:05 PM EST

you realize that this sort of stuff is based on highly subjective research done by deeply wounded and, frankly, nerdy people. i don't see why we would take their social commentary to carry any real authority.

i would like to specifically take issue with the treatment of the concept of power.

first, of course, i agree with the basic premise that fashion modelling often places women in submissive poses (though there are certainly examples where the opposite sort of pose or expression is used for seductive effect) -- and that this tendency is absolutely designed to appeal to certain aspects of "the male psyche" (whatever we take that to mean). i don't think any serious person could contest that. if you extend the discussion to include the sort of "modeling" you see in pornography, this is dead obvious.

now returning to the situation in fashion -- i specifically do not want to address pornography in this paragraph -- i don't think i buy the moral connotation attached to these power relations. it seems perfectly possible to me that males might, either by nature or by some kind of socialization process (note: i'm not a big believer in socialization) have some kind of desire to dominate that they like to see reflected in advertising, for example, and that this would have no moral content. amongst other things, i'm not sure i believe women are worse off on the whole because some women appear in silly or submissive poses in advertising.

secondly, if we assume that men and women are psychologically identical by nature, then i think the observations about poses made and the comparisons to men in comparable poses have some teeth -- but i'm not sure i'm ready to grant that. i would tend to think that if this were the case, there would be a substantial market for male modeling with poses like the ones discussed. the relative absense of them (although, you might convincingly point to certain japanese cartoons) seems tricky to me. unless you believe that the publishing industry is tightly and entirely controlled by a bunch of old white men (as perhaps the author of the essay does), it seems difficult to account for this phenomenon. in other words, it seems entirely possible to me that women might not be particularly interested in seeing men in such poses (nor might men) -- and that this might be the case without revealing some shocking moral truth about cats and dogs.

finally, in support of my remarks on the nerdiness of people involved in this sort of thing, i point to the decidedly bloggish tone of the writing (particularly its matter-of-fact-look-at-this-and-think-what-i-say style).

oh yes, and i notice you didn't participate in my laundry day. that means you're out of the three letter club. well, unless you have some kind of reasonable excuse.

p.s.: people like the author of this essay are why people like bush become presidents.

[t]rolling retards conversation, period.

: Look at this and think what I say by debacle (2.00 / 0) #49 Wed Apr 19, 2006 at 03:52:03 PM EST

Couldn't have said it better. I read shit like this because it's a test of will. Like staring into the hyponotist's pocketwatch.
IF YOU HAVE TWO FIRLES THOROWNF MONEY ART SUOCIDE GIRLS STRIPPER HPW CAN YPUS :OSE?!?!?!?(elcevisides).

[ Parent ]

Mr. TPS XII, Sir, by Weapon of Pack Destruction (2.00 / 0) #56 Wed Apr 19, 2006 at 07:41:35 PM EST

What would be the significance of this picture then?

Also, why do I find the last picture in the essay more alluring than all the others. Except for Sarah Jessica Parker. I'd throw my marriage away for the 15 seconds it would take for me to defile her.

I'm sorry, I seem to have lost my train of thought. What were we talking about?

Yeah, SJP's "hot". by ammoniacal (2.00 / 0) #58 Wed Apr 19, 2006 at 08:46:36 PM EST

To begin, give her a sugar cube, or an apple, and she'll learn to canter within two days.

"To this day that was the most bullshit caesar salad I have every experienced..." - triggerfinger

[ Parent ]

You, sir, have no appreciation for SanDeE* by Weapon of Pack Destruction (4.00 / 1) #59 Wed Apr 19, 2006 at 09:31:46 PM EST

"Your breasts feel weird!"

"Oh, that's because they're real"

[ Parent ]

: or by calla (2.00 / 0) #61 Thu Apr 20, 2006 at 08:38:14 AM EST

Patty Greene.

[ Parent ]

Hey, I've seen that picture somewhere by ajf (4.00 / 1) #65 Fri Apr 21, 2006 at 06:21:53 PM EST

before.

"I am not buying this jam, it's full of conservatives"

[ Parent ]

: Pthththt! by Weapon of Pack Destruction (2.00 / 0) #66 Sat Apr 22, 2006 at 06:09:53 PM EST

I didn't want that soda anyway.
The fishbowl link is dead, but Google Cache zombiefies the net!

[ Parent ]

Posing | 66 comments (66 topical, 0 hidden)