I was going to leave all that to that greatest of all sex organs, the brain! A little imagination goes a long ways…
“And belly button, and soft skin, and, and…”
And open, receptive thighs, and that hint of a shadow below, and her flowing long hair….
Oh Jere, that is amazing. When I have sex, after we are done I breathe to match his so that as his stomach expands, mine contracts to make him room. Then I breathe in as he breathes out so I not only synchronize our in-out bodies but I am also breathing IN his breath; yet another way (besides having his semen inside me) to soak up his essence and being. :::sighing happily::::
Breath is life, love is life, and sex is life.
..I should say, “I used to be with this gal, who breathed so fast, I would lay awake at night and temper my breathing, just to match hers. Then I would take control of the breathing, and slow her breath down by synching. I was just trying to help her. But it was a sketchy path..” Won’t be doin’ that again.. But that’s a little insight into the realm I exist..
first and foremost, Friend,
Jere
exactly, mystes. and i’d add: i think that “how” applies just as much to how a spectator views a photograph as much as to the photographer.
Amanda writes: “though sometimes what we see depends even more on how we look at what’s there…”
Rightyo… Miss Amanda. And that’s what distinguishes an artist from a camera-jockey. Without even fully realizing it, artists are involved with the ‘how’ more deeply than the ‘what.’
Roots tell the tale: ‘ars’ in Latin is ‘tekne’ in Greek. More than ‘technique,’ ‘how’ means the method of approach *determines* what you will find.
Eric won’t (and shouldn’t) say much about that ‘how’ – part of it belongs to the subject, part comes from from he wants, but can’t realize. Those explanatory moments abide in the artistic outcome.
(M. popping her mind loose from ten-thousand “livelihood” details to remember her training and first passion).
I don’t know where to begin, honestly. Everyone has been so full of openness and light.
Beautiful, symbolic, free come to mind. So does the joy of sitting in warm sunlight during the cold time of the year. Sex? Yes, certainly, I have that little “Y” chromosome that drives me in particular ways. An object? No, my conscious self says – but the reptile mind says “Whoa Nelly, breasts!” And belly button, and soft skin, and, and…
And then, I remind myself to use the higher brain, and simply appreciate the beauty that is she.
..’cause nude is hot.. or dicey…
..I’m not really sure,.. I just liked it.
The vision made me smile. Now I’ll go back to my thinkin’…
..by myself..
with my guitar..
..still laughin’ with the world..
Jere
“Also, why is everyone fixated on the nudity? Doesn’t anyone get the visual pun in the image?”
Eric: Is she the Statue of Liberty with the flag flying behind?
She represents liberty to be sure and there is a welcoming patina to her loveliness.
..I need to sleep with myself, but I like to play with other folk.
Jere
..but this chick is hot! ..And if she wants to hang out in a motorhome, beading and sewing, so be it. Her and I might get along. If not, fuck it, I’ve nothin’ to lose.. And she has every right to be herself. Let this gal be free…
..and hey, if anybody is bored someday, and wants to come bead or sew, I’m here. I’d absoluteley love to kick it for a spell.. Only a spell though, I’m quite on the Hermit path. I don’t like to listen to other folks breathe. I know, it’s weird.
Jere
well carrie, i do think it’s possible to capture a person’s spirit on film, but it generally comes through their eyes (and posture and general demeanor, but esp the eyes)… so yes, i guess the visual mode of photography is limited to capturing what we can see. though sometimes what we see depends even more on how we look at what’s there…
Many of the most beautiful models you see in my photos have the same body images that anyone else might. You may not believe it; they confide that in me. When they get in front of the mirror, I usually discover something of how they feel about themselves.
Carrie, it happens.. it’s just we’re a wierdo bunch.. and yeah, I don’t like the non-feeling, agressive porn either, .. although, I do like watchin’ cats who are friendly..
I had a partner I was afraid to have sex with, ’cause she tore me up to blood..
I don’t like getting hurt during sex.
Jere
Beautiful………………….
One more thing. She looks so comfortable in her beauty and her sexuality but so many of us don’t look like her and have never been comfortable in our skins. So many of us have been beautiful and still got comments about our breasts (too small) butts (too big) bellies (too pouffy) thighs (too flabby) or what have you. Women are never allowed to just be unless we look like she does; young, firm, beautiful. Anything less is mocked, made fun of, or ignored completely.
I remember when I was beautiful and thin and firm and having a lot of sex with a lot of men. The same men who wanted me would also tell me while we were fucking that “If you got rid of that belly you would be perfect.” I guess they bought the whole 70’s hard-bodied women fad. No wonder I fucked more Arabs; they liked my belly-dancer belly and never once criticized anything about me. I remember feeling hurt and angry all at once after that particular criticism. I mean I was having sex with these guys without any requirements or recriminations, sex I initiated, sex I openly admitted to wanting, and even giving a piece of my emotional self as I did that and they could only criticize my belly? I was far more attractive in looks than most of the men I slept with so their comments were galling.
If I had said the same sort of thing to the men I was with about parts of their bodies I can only imagine the response I would have gotten.
It is unfair that one cannot capture the other attractive things about people on film; the things that are not having to do with their body shapes, types, or facial features.
I got an invite here: Such a Bohemian thread: Is this were the Uranians hang out? 😉
Do we need a paradigm here? Probably not!
What’s the difference between a perfume bottle and a champagne bottle? They are both bottles aren’t they? Is it about words or definitions primarily? Am I asking a lot of questions?
No!
It’s templated for sure. Brains use templates. You can ask some interesting questions about where these templates come from: e.g. innate or conditioned or some hybrid – it doesn’t really matter.
The article cited by fluidity is strange indeed. How far is it science? Not far. As Eric notes, the philosophy of objects over against subjects makes problematic. The whole concept of ‘object’ is laced with untenable assumptions that we just buy into.
Work out the templates. They are the givens and then you can, as I say, assess their construction.
The biggest template comes from self hypnosis – I am gay, lesbian, bi, straight, trans-whatever etc Once you choose your orientation you are like the lion with the antelope in its sights.
All templates have triggers. Shark can smell blood at significant distance, pick up electrical impulses, hear prey at considerable distance but if they aren’t hungry they don’t respond. So, not all triggers apply at all times and/or places to all phenomena.
The template will be triggered by the stimulus but bodily drives are linked to energies and in people, ultimately, volition. The study ‘shows’ that hetero/bi men are ‘triggered’ by naked female bodies – wow, science is so impressive nowadays!
I’m just glad that the reflexes are still well templated and that our brains are working properly. But don’t get me started on ‘the feminists’ – that homogeneous bunch of conformists.. 😉
Really, we humans have filters.. Let’s enjoy them. And let’s see treating people properly as behavioural in the broadest sense. I desire you is just as good as I respect you, and vice versa, and for different reasons, and at different times, and with different frequencies, and with changing moods, and…….. so on!
The flag and her open receptive thighs are screaming “America,give us your tired, poor…blah-blah-blah.” It also implies the Rapture of sex. Or the Rapture as a Return to the Origins and her open legs are the Gate of Life so to speak (in other words, The place that leads to the Origins) so the Rapture is returning us to the original womb (beyond the gate of pleasure). Too many things in this picture to count. :::laughing:::
Why the focus on the nudity? Because maybe a lot of us are feeling really sexual these days? Or the prudish society we are living in makes us notice nudity more?
The question about porn is again a currently relevant one for me because David recently expressed his desire to purchase porn for the first time since we have been together. He always said he disliked it because it exploits women. Really? I love porn; any porn, hetero or homo, group or solo, oral or anal.
::::Wait, one disclaimer; the only porn I don’t like would be violent porn. Even if it is staged, I just don’t like violence in any setting, porn or otherwise::::
I felt bad for a long time because every woman I ever talked to expressed her dislike and disgust of porn. They said it was meaningless sex without romance. What about the meaning of having a great orgasm; doesn’t that count? I also wonder why it is bad to have sex in front of a camera in order to get other people turned on. This brings more questions to mind:
If the negative connotations on sex and porn were removed, would anyone be worried about women being exploited?
If sex were not taboo for anything outside traditional marriage, would people even need porn so much to satisfy their need for sexual stimulation?
I mean if people could openly and freely get all the sex they wanted without any recriminations, controls on their sexuality or fertility, or guilt and shame, what would the porn industry be like?
um, you mean the flag, eric? is it a play on american psycho?
i just thought this form of rapture in response to The Rapture was fun, if that’s what you mean…
🙂
==Reply here for context==
The flags, Main Street USA, the open window, the American beauty. This was the picture where the old guy across the street called the cops. Melissa was more than he could stand, even at 75 feet away. –efc
oh and fluidity —
i find myself really curious about this comment you made: “i find myself worrying that i may be objectifying women when looking at their bodies and i guess this was a ‘passing on’ of those feelings of guilt.”
thanks for bringing this up: the idea that for men who are at all aware and sensitive/empathetic, the fear of engaging in the demonized objectification becomes an automatic block to other reactions. and then the guilt reflex creates even more distance internally — which, i suppose, will/may get played out as distance from others.
hmmm. i mean, i guess this is what eric and a few other commenters are getting at. but i was especially struck by that apparently-constant background fear that “i may be objectifying” — that is, the idea that you/we are not even sure when it’s happening versus when it is not. so we play it “safe” and assume we might be, so as not to be a chauvinist by accident.
yes, this definitely points to a need for clear definitions for what it is to objectify versus what it is to appreciate. and — can we truly fully separate them? i’m just kind of thinking out loud here…. maybe we can separate them.
but then again, if all recognition of another involves some level of projection by us, does that also imply some level of objectification?
ok eric — you’re right: we need a philosopher to provide some clear definitions. 🙂
because my sense of “objectify” is that it means to see a person as less than a whole person — to literally see them as a thing for my own use. hence the common argument against porn, right? that it facilitates the ability to pretend the woman pictured is just a sex toy without feelings, desires, preferences, pain, etc., and the fear is that if men do that enough, they carry that tendency into actual interactions with real-life women.
that seemed to be one question the scientific study wants to explore: if we know that brain activity linked to objectifying thoughts is triggered by certain types of images, is it valid to limit those types of images from, say, the workplace, so that people’s brains aren’t more likely to be in “objectification mode” when they encounter coworkers who might not otherwise trigger that reaction?
hmmm…
Also, why is everyone fixated on the nudity? Doesn’t anyone get the visual pun in the image?
“What to do about this thing we call projection is another issue.”
That’s what reality checks are for, both in yourself and with the other person/s the projection is aimed at. Reality checks do pose the possibility of being found wrong and embarrassed but clarifying things with a good dose of reality helps you see the projection and then figure out what it is saying about you.
I think that intention and context are relevant — and related. I have debated this so much with one particular correspondent that I am reluctant to do so now, but I will say that a porno shoot designed to make fast cash has a different purpose than a photo project designed to elicit understanding, create beauty and experiment with relationships (in the broadest sense of the term).
I say this as a lover of pornography. Where else could I possibly find bondage lactation videos except for that awesome industry? My main issues with porn are the relentless drive for fast, huge profits, and the bad lighting and directing. Both relate to intention. However, the antiporn feminists have proven again and again that they are doing gymnastics on quicksand; they actually don’t have an argument or data, they merely have a lot of emotional bluster, a huge attitude and a desperate need to hang out with Betty Dodson.
I would ask, however, what is “wrong” with an image like this being designed to help people get hot? And what makes you think it’s all about nipples? I had an orgasm looking at a detail in a waterfall the other day that was AMAZINGLY erotic, to my mind.
“You might think, in theory, that licking her belly button makes her an object (or portraying her in an image, but if so you may be reading or influenced by too much jive bullshit 70s feminism if so). In real life she would, most likely, manifest for you as a human critter with whom you’re in mutually conscious relationship.”
That’s true. My desire to lick her belly button is mine. It doesn’t consider her feelings at that point. If I were to try and act on it though, then her feelings would definitely come into it because I could not in fact just “lick her belly button” without knowing if she would like my intrusion into her physical space.
As to ” jive bullshit 70s feminism;” don’t get me started about that!
::::climbing on soapbox:::: I am most definitely not a feminist nor do I read their writings. In fact I really dislike it that feminism pushed women into being men and men into being women. What women did before feminism, including child rearing, homekeeping and the like, was not elevated to a valued position by feminism. What men did before feminism was valued..but only for women. Basically feminism wanted to allow women to have all the powers men had while stripping men of these and denigrating even further women who still do so-called traditionally female roles such as mother and wife. :::stepping off soapbox sheepishly:::
I know feminists have negative responses to pictures of nude women but I don’t. A lot of women I know like being photographed nude. It has nothing to do with being an object, though most women I know love being the object of adoration and attention.
“Women, especially, need to stop living in their bodies like it is someone else’s responsibility to make them have an orgasm.” ~ Amen to that!
“Gee, we need some discussion of philosophy here.”
um, paging dr. dewitte!
eric, any chance you mean “presence” rather than “presents”? i certainly often find myself altered by both presents and presence, but i have a feeling you mean the former. 😉
i haven’t had time to read all of the thoughtful comments here. but the subject-object questions do bring up whether or not there is a difference, and what kind of difference, between the relationship between photographer and model, model and photographer, and viewer and photograph.
without even getting into variables such as style of image, vibe of the photo shoot as it happens, historical context of nude photography, the individual personal contexts of the photographer, model and viewer, i’m wondering this:
is there a qualitative difference between the kind of viewing done by the photographer and the kind of viewing done by the test subjects in the article fluidity linked to below?
does it all come down to intention? or is intention irrelevant?
btw — if you have not yet read the article fluidity links to in one of the earliest comments, please do. it’s pretty fascinating. personally, i’d love to see the experiment repeated with a set of test subjects (of both genders) who are taking photographs of nude/scantily clad models.
how interesting would it be to compare brain activity with the first group of men tested, along with stated reactions??!
Thank you Eric, that last post made me laugh. Deep, hard laugh. After some tears with Len and Jude, that was most welcomed. (And thanks, Len and Jude).
Philosophy was my 3rd major, after Botany and Physics. (Of course, real life and the World trumped it all..). I’m that drop-out kid.
..and yup, that which is in our reality is something we are akin too, in some capacity…
..Not sure how it all works.. the disco ball facets.. all the same.. but I look forward to a day of not feeling any constraints on my being. Able to enjoy the sunshine with a smile. The air with a grin… This Earth, with passion.
..When I get there, I’ll have the invitations flowing..
Me
Gee, we need some discussion of philosophy here. What is a subject and what is an object? What is the subject-object relationship in different contexts? What makes her an object, as opposed to a subject? What’s so great about being a subject as opposed to being an object? Are there alternatives to these concepts?
Next, is anyone familiar with physics experiments where the presence of the observer alters the experiment? Everything in the universe is influenced by everything else in the universe. You might think, in theory, that licking her belly button makes her an object (or portraying her in an image, but if so you may be reading or influenced by too much jive bullshit 70s feminism if so). In real life she would, most likely, manifest for you as a human critter with whom you’re in mutually conscious relationship.
What to do about this thing we call projection is another issue. If the whole world is a mirror, then the whole world is a mirror. No part of the mirror is any more or less a mirror. If we are in direct relationship to the world, then we are in relationship to it and we’re not more or less in relationship to any other part.
“I do not see the woman in this photograph as a sex object to be acted upon. i do feel admiration..”
I agree and I also feel like she is experiencing that feeling you get when you are so in the moment with your own body and the joyous pleasure of it.
Personally, I am fond of licking belly buttons and hers is beautiful because it resides within the sweetest little pillow of her belly. But that thought is, again, seeing her as an object to be acted on. Society seems to see women as objects to be acted on but that also goes for men sometimes. Last year I saw a picture of a naked man who was in the throes of orgasm; I wanted to touch him and feel him and act on him just as much as I feel like acting on her. Yet both he and the woman in this picture are people, not objects.
“Many, particularly in their 40s and 50s, are confused as to why men either seem aggressive, or seem to be unable to take action. My observation is that (most) women who say they don’t want men to assert their desire, erring on the side of too much rather than too little, are lying.”
David and I also talked about men and women and how men are the ones who end up having to be the sexually assertive ones. Eric has it right; women say they want a sensitive man (David said this as well) but the sexually aggressive asshole men seem to get laid more often. As David said, “How can a man get it right? If he is assertive, it is hit or miss because the woman might not be “in the mood” for that. If he is gentle and considerate of her feelings, he isn’t “manly” enough. How should he handle things then?” I think women need to make up their minds and be more honest with themselves.
All I know is, when I try to articulate this issue it is difficult for me. I do want him to want me; just not when I am dealing with yet another teenager’s emotional crisis or when I am on a deadline for typing out a major term paper or when I am tired or in “work” mode.
Women have been programmed that if we resist our male partners too often, they will go elsewhere. This means a potential loss of his support, love, care, and attention. So when he lets me know he wants me, I feel intense pressure to give in to him even if I am up to my neck in stress over other things. I do need his sexual assertiveness but I am also willing to assert myself with him because after he explained things to me, I no longer take it personally if he is not wanting to have sex at that time.
Women have also been raised to believe that they are not supposed to want sex (or admit to wanting it) because doing so earns them the “slut” title. So they have to do these elaborate games to get sex and still maintain their “good girl” status. They subconsciously allow themselves to get drunk which lowers their resistance yet upon the sober light of day, they will often accuse the man of getting them dunk to have sex. They send out signals that they want sex yet cry NO but then as the man presses, they finally say “maybe” and then yield and tell themselves “he seduced me” so they can keep their “decent-woman” identity intact. They lay the blame for their pleasure squarely at the feet of the men they have sex with.
If society would stop vilifying women for wanting sex, liking sex, and having sex, how would that change the sexual dance between men and women? If I want sex and can admit to that and ask for it, if the man agrees….we have sex and no recriminations or blame against the man for doing it will come after. Instead, both parties will enjoy it and leave the encounter well satisfied and with their reputations accepted in society. I know this because I did that when I was young and single (though I was not accepted in society for doing it).
Yet part of the reason society casts women in the roles of “good girl” vs “slut” is because men want to control female fertility for their own purposes. This means female fertility must be controlled and regulated. The biggest threat to that is female sexual desire and agency. The way to make sure that threat does not materialize is to socially pressure the woman with the loss of her standing in the community if she openly and honestly indulges her sexual desires. So the very gender which hates being blamed for the sex the woman eventually does (and also gets accused of rape even when the woman secretly wanted sex) is the same gender who created this whole issue because of their controls on female fertility. How is that working for everyone?
This social pressure works on men as well. After the women’s movement; men are told they must surrender their lustful desires in the service of female sensibilities. Funny thing is, too often women go cold when this happens; without his lust and desire, she feels no response because she feels undesired and unattractive. Women have also been raised to be submissive and passive (watch porn and see, the woman is indeed acted on and not moving her hips in these). The message is “wait, he makes the first move, lie back and be rammed.” The most erotic movie I ever saw had a sex scene in which the woman was moving as much as the man; she had agency. As a woman, I wonder where the line is between me having agency and being the submissive receptacle I have been programmed to be?
David even admitted that between the sexually aggressive virago and the submissive receptive woman, he prefers the latter . Amazingly enough, I prefer he be sensitive to the timing of sex but aggressive in the doing of it. When I was in my twenties, I would actually approach men and give them my phone number with the suggestion that they call me because I wanted them. They were wonderfully surprised but once we got in the room and began having sex, I would turn submissive and respond to his maleness while being a very active partner. They all really loved this because of three things (so they said): first because I initiated the encounter, second I didn’t rebuff them when they became sexually assertive and I actively participated, and third I didn’t blame them afterward as though the whole thing were their fault.
So how do we solve this issue? David and I are working on that now.
[It is so nice to be done with school. I have time to write and reply now; hence my increased activity here at PW.]
This is such a powerful place at PW because we can all discuss sex and our feelings about it openly. Thank you Eric and Company for holding this space open for us.
“We’ve all been so conditioned that the only way one should have sex is to feel desire, fall in love, and have it. it is the accepted formula. and the result of that formula, the answer to that formula is one sum called monogamy. And if you “fall in love” with someone else, their “sum” must replace your current “sum”.”
This is well written and for most people, it is THE programing. On the outside, my marriage with my husband looks like it falls under that very scenario. Yet when peered at with the lens or honesty, it is actually very different. Neither he nor I felt we had to be monogamous in order to have that desire; we both had very sexually active pasts in which we slept around. His only long-term relationship (when I met him) had been with a gay man; mine had been with both straight and bi men. We discussed open relating but an over-arching factor for both of us was the issue of children.
Both of us wanted children (he more than I because of the real emotional attachment it would cause me). Both of us are well read and educated people and everything we had read, experienced, and learned about children said they need stability. Poly relationships CAN be stable, but too often they are not. I had grown up in a divorced family and had to deal with my mother’s parade of lovers and husbands. I would get used to the new guy and start the attachment that kids do to parental figures only to have him leave. Between that and not seeing my father much I felt instability directly and it damaged me. Children need stability. Dave (my husband) agreed so we married and began raising a family.
David did seem to want more exclusivity; I said at the outset that if he wanted anyone else he needs to let me know so can try to accommodate that (I am such a malleable Pisces) but he didn’t want the same for me (he is very much the fixed Scorpio). Even as I said that to him, my fear of abandonment was there. He also had fear of abandonment which is another reason why neither of us really wanted to add any more people to our very close, passionate, stable relationship.
Now that I have a connection with another person, David and I have been talking about that and exploring how that doesn’t mean I am replacing him with the other person; the part I share with the other person is one David was not as comfortable (or able) to share with me anyway so how is he missing out? Nor am I “in love” with this other person; I care about them and have feelings about them but I know the difference between that and the love I experience with David. These are not the same.
David and I also talked about men and women and how men are the ones who end up having to be the sexually assertive ones. Eric has it right; women say they want a sensitive man (David said this as well) but the sexually aggressive asshole men seem to get laid more often. As David said, “How can a man get it right? If he is assertive, it is hit or miss because the woman might not be “in the mood” for that. If he is gentle and considerate of her feelings, he isn’t “manly” enough. How should he handle things then?” I think women need to make up their minds.
All I know is, when I try to articulate this issue it is difficult for me. I do want him to want me; just not when I am dealing with yet another teenager’s emotional crisis or when I am on a deadline for typing out a major term paper or when I am tired or in “work” mode. I do need his sexual assertiveness but I am also willing to assert myself with him because after he explained things to me, I no longer take it personally if he is not wanting to have sex at that time.
A lot of these issues require open and honest discussions; the kind people are not raised to do.
I’m the person that Eric quoted in this blog. I have really be touched (pun intended) by Eric’s writings.
I wanted to say that I agree with Stellium in Sag. Women, especially, need to stop living in their bodies like it is someone else’s responsibility to make them have an orgasm.
I am reminded of a bumper sticker I had from days of yore: A woman without a man is like a fish without a bicycle.
Eric, I have a question/suggestion…why not some pictures of beautiful men on this here amazing forum?
==Reply==
Hi Mindy, I’m replying down here to preserve context. Your comment gut hug up in moderation overnight, I just caught it.
I am happy to publish photos of men that are provided by the artist, and I have a relationship with the artists (such as a phone call or two). I personally choose to photograph women, most of the time anyway, and I usually save my self-portraits for Book of Blue. However, if there are portrait artists who work with men — you are invited to send me your photographs. I would love to see them.
Lately some of us are sorting and evaluating my sexuality writing. One of the editors I’m working with wrote to me last night after listening to an audio presentation called Community and Compersion, which addresses this issue of eroticism and violent impulses, of which I think that jealousy is the first hint. We tend to be tolerant and encouraging of jealousy, looking to it as a clue to true love and so on. But I associate jealousy with suppression and murder. My sense, from much experience, is that opening the taboo on masturbation is the way out of jealousy and into the investigation — and release — of sexual violence. For different reasons, this works equally effectively for men and women.
In any event, with no reference to this discussion, my friend who is helping me edit wrote to me last night:
Really enjoyed the audio. When you say “masturbate together to recognize each other’s autonomy” it goes to lessening jealousy because it is in your face (pun intended), experiential proof that a person provides their own pleasure to themselves. Masturbating to orgasm, is in its purest form, proves that nothing need be supplied by another person.
Another person may stimulate you directly or be stimulating to your mind; but the passion and desire are one’s own. One directly experiences that by masturbating to one’s desires of another person; doing that is one’s own self from first touch to sweet surrender orgasm to blissful, sated denouement.
Why, and how futile, to be jealous of what a person supplies to themselves?
We’ve all been so conditioned that the only way one should have sex is to feel desire, fall in love, and have it. it is the accepted formula. and the result of that formula, the answer to that formula is one sum called monogamy. And if you “fall in love” with someone else, their “sum” must replace your current “sum”.
Last Friday evening a handsome Muslim man, whose advances I rebuffed not long ago, let loose with a barrage of abuse in a public bar. Directed at me. ( I’d have considered dating him back then, religion aside, had he not reeled of all his sexual conquests). I could have taken refuge in ignorance and used that ‘ruthlessness’ my sign is famous for (Scorpio) on a counter attack. But, I have knowledge. Planets lined up in Taurus over the weekend , including Mars, and this man is a Taurus sun. I had to weigh up my inherent knowledge of his matriarchal sign against what his culture has taught him about suppressing the feminine. I just managed to stay centered and offer some comments which diffused the situation.
Sexual aggression is a disease.
Eric you right, so very right.
almost forgot: all that sniffing going on: WOOF!
Len: Agreed. fully. couldn’t say it better
” i know women are supposedly less visual sexually”- except female visual artists, right!
it’s interesting to me the power of photography and the reactions/dialogues which can spring fr. it, meaning, its power to (potentially) really connect on multiple levels. making it an interesting medium. many truths may be revealed on both sides of the equation; the photo telling a story, and the viewer and their reaction to it, yes?
fascinating.
would we be having this discussion if this was a sculpture of a nude woman, same pose, same light, etc. that I had chiseled out of marble or cast fr. bronze?
OR if the photo credits had borne a woman’s name????huh? huh???
final thoughts male/female dynamics
I sympathize with both men & women re: “job of desire”, but I totally agree, it’s usually the man who has to put himself out there time and time again. unfortunately, I know a lot of women who actually require that as part of their ‘worthiness test(s)’ (part of the infamous list). the guy has to prove themselves again and again…actually many women are amused by watching the man squirm during this ‘proving’.
I say What a fucking burden!! shit!! it’s really inhumane. and must feel almost impossible, right? I mean a lot of women say they want a sweet, sensitive, caring, compassionate man, but then he has to be a fucking Gladiator too??? don’t get it. does.not. compute.
and we wonder why there are issues with power dynamics once the relationship is ‘rolling’. well what was the foundation?
you’re part of the problem, unless you participate in the solution. -compassion!-
start today if you aren’t on board yet: the Charter for Compassion, it was on that other post.
oh, and the term “man up”
well, personally I think there needs to be a little more “woman up”
holding the torch: female warrior energy
peace. sweet dreams~
I’ve discussed sex with a lot of women for about 20 years (just counting my time as an astrologer/card reader), and I’ve heard very nearly everything. Many, particularly in their 40s and 50s, are confused as to why men either seem aggressive, or seem to be unable to take action. My observation is that (most) women who say they don’t want men to assert their desire, erring on the side of too much rather than too little, are lying. The exception would be someone who has been so seriously hurt in the past and wants no attention at all — not a good place to be, and most who are there want out. Many who think they have ceased to be ‘objects’ of desire miss the men who used to come sniffing around.
So many people right now are starving for affection and attention and have no idea where it’s gone to. We have turned attraction into allegedly criminal behavior.
However, most of us know that nothing is going to happen unless men make their desire known and are willing to act on it, clumsy and wrought with rejection though it may be. Everyone has had instances of their desire being rebuffed, and I’ve read on these very pages many times women who lament that being affirmative and saying yes ‘doesn’t work’. So in the cultural game the job of desire generally gets left to men, and it’s a tough game. You might find a place in your heart for how much rejection women dole out at men, and how mean some of them are when they do it. But if anyone thinks conditioning men out connecting with our desire, be it social or sexual (essentially, feminizing us) is going to help matters, I invite you to tell me how that works out for you.
Healthy guys figure out that to get anything happening they have to assert themselves. I encourage the young men around me to do that politely, with absolutely no guilt.
Both men and women experience guilt and shame associated with desire. We all need to go through a process of understanding where this conditioning came from, and learning how to release it and affirm our own and one another’s vital force. It’s a sickness that runs so deep as to be invisible, and we’re going to need to help one another out of this, unless we want to push one another deeper into it (and that happens plenty). Just remember how many of the people who told you desire was wrong, or their peers, have been indicted or sued for raping kids. Boston Archdiocese alone has paid out $100 million in settlements.
I understand the connection of violence and desire that seems to be inherent in the process of desire on a cultural level. I see guilt as the source of that violence and not its solution.
Yes our model depicted above is gorgeous and vibrates with pleasure, just like she intended to. Looking at this image, my first impulse is to sniff her armpit.
yes, firstly i do apologize to the woman in the picture and to eric,
this was not really meant as a comment on the photo
and i guess now this discussion may take away from the power of it
i hadn’t even more than glanced at the photo,
just kind of a recognition, ‘here’s another nude woman on planet waves’
and had just seen/listened to that link
so posted it
i find myself worrying that i may be objectifying women when looking at their bodies
and i guess this was a ‘passing on’ of those feelings of guilt
(hey, it’s ‘scientifically proven’)
taking a closer look, i do offer my appreciation
and got a laugh out of eric’s link
fluidity — really fascinating article. thanks for the link! i definitely suggest everyone read the article — it is short.
my first thought, as i read about what the scientists were measuring in the brains of the test subjects, was that maybe something about female nudity was activating a part of the brain that is active in infants. that is, that maybe seeing these female bodies as objects/tools had something to do with nursing & pre-verbal development.
but then i read the part about how in the men who were the more hostile sexists, the part of the brain that register’s another person’s intentions gets deactivated. so… yes, food for thought. and, as the scientists note, it is a *preliminary* study, they know they have a ways to go on fleshing out these results (apologies for the pun – not intended) and making conclusions.
this is not to suggest len’s reply is in any way untrue or not genuine, or to suggest that we can assume most men deactivate that part of the brain (the scientists even note it is a rare occurance). nor do i assume eric or all male artists who photograph/draw nudes would necessarily match this study.
but i do find it curious when something like brain activity gets measured in response to specific stimuli/ It’s not the whole picture, but it’s a damn interesting piece. believe me, i really want to see the test repeated with women looking at scantily-clad men, as well as same-sex trial on both sides. i know women are supposedly less visual sexually, but i’m still curious. and if photos don’t do it, i wonder what *would* instigate those two sets of brain activity in women?
all of that said, it’s a lovely photo of the lass. and yes, she does look simply rapturous.
🙂
fluidity:
i do not see the woman in this photograph as a sex object to be acted upon. i do feel admiration for her spirited courage and compassion for the pain she has evidently had to endure. Please see her, and me, as a human being like you.
The photograph is a great and understated piece of art. Perhaps you should take another look and give the photographer some credit.
Carrie,
I was going to leave all that to that greatest of all sex organs, the brain! A little imagination goes a long ways…
“And belly button, and soft skin, and, and…”
And open, receptive thighs, and that hint of a shadow below, and her flowing long hair….
Oh Jere, that is amazing. When I have sex, after we are done I breathe to match his so that as his stomach expands, mine contracts to make him room. Then I breathe in as he breathes out so I not only synchronize our in-out bodies but I am also breathing IN his breath; yet another way (besides having his semen inside me) to soak up his essence and being. :::sighing happily::::
Breath is life, love is life, and sex is life.
..I should say, “I used to be with this gal, who breathed so fast, I would lay awake at night and temper my breathing, just to match hers. Then I would take control of the breathing, and slow her breath down by synching. I was just trying to help her. But it was a sketchy path..” Won’t be doin’ that again.. But that’s a little insight into the realm I exist..
first and foremost, Friend,
Jere
exactly, mystes. and i’d add: i think that “how” applies just as much to how a spectator views a photograph as much as to the photographer.
Amanda writes: “though sometimes what we see depends even more on how we look at what’s there…”
Rightyo… Miss Amanda. And that’s what distinguishes an artist from a camera-jockey. Without even fully realizing it, artists are involved with the ‘how’ more deeply than the ‘what.’
Roots tell the tale: ‘ars’ in Latin is ‘tekne’ in Greek. More than ‘technique,’ ‘how’ means the method of approach *determines* what you will find.
Eric won’t (and shouldn’t) say much about that ‘how’ – part of it belongs to the subject, part comes from from he wants, but can’t realize. Those explanatory moments abide in the artistic outcome.
(M. popping her mind loose from ten-thousand “livelihood” details to remember her training and first passion).
I don’t know where to begin, honestly. Everyone has been so full of openness and light.
Beautiful, symbolic, free come to mind. So does the joy of sitting in warm sunlight during the cold time of the year. Sex? Yes, certainly, I have that little “Y” chromosome that drives me in particular ways. An object? No, my conscious self says – but the reptile mind says “Whoa Nelly, breasts!” And belly button, and soft skin, and, and…
And then, I remind myself to use the higher brain, and simply appreciate the beauty that is she.
..’cause nude is hot.. or dicey…
..I’m not really sure,.. I just liked it.
The vision made me smile. Now I’ll go back to my thinkin’…
..by myself..
with my guitar..
..still laughin’ with the world..
Jere
“Also, why is everyone fixated on the nudity? Doesn’t anyone get the visual pun in the image?”
Eric: Is she the Statue of Liberty with the flag flying behind?
She represents liberty to be sure and there is a welcoming patina to her loveliness.
..I need to sleep with myself, but I like to play with other folk.
Jere
..but this chick is hot! ..And if she wants to hang out in a motorhome, beading and sewing, so be it. Her and I might get along. If not, fuck it, I’ve nothin’ to lose.. And she has every right to be herself. Let this gal be free…
..and hey, if anybody is bored someday, and wants to come bead or sew, I’m here. I’d absoluteley love to kick it for a spell.. Only a spell though, I’m quite on the Hermit path. I don’t like to listen to other folks breathe. I know, it’s weird.
Jere
well carrie, i do think it’s possible to capture a person’s spirit on film, but it generally comes through their eyes (and posture and general demeanor, but esp the eyes)… so yes, i guess the visual mode of photography is limited to capturing what we can see. though sometimes what we see depends even more on how we look at what’s there…
Many of the most beautiful models you see in my photos have the same body images that anyone else might. You may not believe it; they confide that in me. When they get in front of the mirror, I usually discover something of how they feel about themselves.
Carrie, it happens.. it’s just we’re a wierdo bunch.. and yeah, I don’t like the non-feeling, agressive porn either, .. although, I do like watchin’ cats who are friendly..
I had a partner I was afraid to have sex with, ’cause she tore me up to blood..
I don’t like getting hurt during sex.
Jere
Beautiful………………….
One more thing. She looks so comfortable in her beauty and her sexuality but so many of us don’t look like her and have never been comfortable in our skins. So many of us have been beautiful and still got comments about our breasts (too small) butts (too big) bellies (too pouffy) thighs (too flabby) or what have you. Women are never allowed to just be unless we look like she does; young, firm, beautiful. Anything less is mocked, made fun of, or ignored completely.
I remember when I was beautiful and thin and firm and having a lot of sex with a lot of men. The same men who wanted me would also tell me while we were fucking that “If you got rid of that belly you would be perfect.” I guess they bought the whole 70’s hard-bodied women fad. No wonder I fucked more Arabs; they liked my belly-dancer belly and never once criticized anything about me. I remember feeling hurt and angry all at once after that particular criticism. I mean I was having sex with these guys without any requirements or recriminations, sex I initiated, sex I openly admitted to wanting, and even giving a piece of my emotional self as I did that and they could only criticize my belly? I was far more attractive in looks than most of the men I slept with so their comments were galling.
If I had said the same sort of thing to the men I was with about parts of their bodies I can only imagine the response I would have gotten.
It is unfair that one cannot capture the other attractive things about people on film; the things that are not having to do with their body shapes, types, or facial features.
I got an invite here: Such a Bohemian thread: Is this were the Uranians hang out? 😉
Do we need a paradigm here? Probably not!
What’s the difference between a perfume bottle and a champagne bottle? They are both bottles aren’t they? Is it about words or definitions primarily? Am I asking a lot of questions?
No!
It’s templated for sure. Brains use templates. You can ask some interesting questions about where these templates come from: e.g. innate or conditioned or some hybrid – it doesn’t really matter.
The article cited by fluidity is strange indeed. How far is it science? Not far. As Eric notes, the philosophy of objects over against subjects makes problematic. The whole concept of ‘object’ is laced with untenable assumptions that we just buy into.
Work out the templates. They are the givens and then you can, as I say, assess their construction.
The biggest template comes from self hypnosis – I am gay, lesbian, bi, straight, trans-whatever etc Once you choose your orientation you are like the lion with the antelope in its sights.
All templates have triggers. Shark can smell blood at significant distance, pick up electrical impulses, hear prey at considerable distance but if they aren’t hungry they don’t respond. So, not all triggers apply at all times and/or places to all phenomena.
The template will be triggered by the stimulus but bodily drives are linked to energies and in people, ultimately, volition. The study ‘shows’ that hetero/bi men are ‘triggered’ by naked female bodies – wow, science is so impressive nowadays!
I’m just glad that the reflexes are still well templated and that our brains are working properly. But don’t get me started on ‘the feminists’ – that homogeneous bunch of conformists.. 😉
Really, we humans have filters.. Let’s enjoy them. And let’s see treating people properly as behavioural in the broadest sense. I desire you is just as good as I respect you, and vice versa, and for different reasons, and at different times, and with different frequencies, and with changing moods, and…….. so on!
The flag and her open receptive thighs are screaming “America,give us your tired, poor…blah-blah-blah.” It also implies the Rapture of sex. Or the Rapture as a Return to the Origins and her open legs are the Gate of Life so to speak (in other words, The place that leads to the Origins) so the Rapture is returning us to the original womb (beyond the gate of pleasure). Too many things in this picture to count. :::laughing:::
Why the focus on the nudity? Because maybe a lot of us are feeling really sexual these days? Or the prudish society we are living in makes us notice nudity more?
The question about porn is again a currently relevant one for me because David recently expressed his desire to purchase porn for the first time since we have been together. He always said he disliked it because it exploits women. Really? I love porn; any porn, hetero or homo, group or solo, oral or anal.
::::Wait, one disclaimer; the only porn I don’t like would be violent porn. Even if it is staged, I just don’t like violence in any setting, porn or otherwise::::
I felt bad for a long time because every woman I ever talked to expressed her dislike and disgust of porn. They said it was meaningless sex without romance. What about the meaning of having a great orgasm; doesn’t that count? I also wonder why it is bad to have sex in front of a camera in order to get other people turned on. This brings more questions to mind:
If the negative connotations on sex and porn were removed, would anyone be worried about women being exploited?
If sex were not taboo for anything outside traditional marriage, would people even need porn so much to satisfy their need for sexual stimulation?
I mean if people could openly and freely get all the sex they wanted without any recriminations, controls on their sexuality or fertility, or guilt and shame, what would the porn industry be like?
um, you mean the flag, eric? is it a play on american psycho?
i just thought this form of rapture in response to The Rapture was fun, if that’s what you mean…
🙂
==Reply here for context==
The flags, Main Street USA, the open window, the American beauty. This was the picture where the old guy across the street called the cops. Melissa was more than he could stand, even at 75 feet away. –efc
oh and fluidity —
i find myself really curious about this comment you made: “i find myself worrying that i may be objectifying women when looking at their bodies and i guess this was a ‘passing on’ of those feelings of guilt.”
thanks for bringing this up: the idea that for men who are at all aware and sensitive/empathetic, the fear of engaging in the demonized objectification becomes an automatic block to other reactions. and then the guilt reflex creates even more distance internally — which, i suppose, will/may get played out as distance from others.
hmmm. i mean, i guess this is what eric and a few other commenters are getting at. but i was especially struck by that apparently-constant background fear that “i may be objectifying” — that is, the idea that you/we are not even sure when it’s happening versus when it is not. so we play it “safe” and assume we might be, so as not to be a chauvinist by accident.
yes, this definitely points to a need for clear definitions for what it is to objectify versus what it is to appreciate. and — can we truly fully separate them? i’m just kind of thinking out loud here…. maybe we can separate them.
but then again, if all recognition of another involves some level of projection by us, does that also imply some level of objectification?
ok eric — you’re right: we need a philosopher to provide some clear definitions. 🙂
because my sense of “objectify” is that it means to see a person as less than a whole person — to literally see them as a thing for my own use. hence the common argument against porn, right? that it facilitates the ability to pretend the woman pictured is just a sex toy without feelings, desires, preferences, pain, etc., and the fear is that if men do that enough, they carry that tendency into actual interactions with real-life women.
that seemed to be one question the scientific study wants to explore: if we know that brain activity linked to objectifying thoughts is triggered by certain types of images, is it valid to limit those types of images from, say, the workplace, so that people’s brains aren’t more likely to be in “objectification mode” when they encounter coworkers who might not otherwise trigger that reaction?
hmmm…
Also, why is everyone fixated on the nudity? Doesn’t anyone get the visual pun in the image?
“What to do about this thing we call projection is another issue.”
That’s what reality checks are for, both in yourself and with the other person/s the projection is aimed at. Reality checks do pose the possibility of being found wrong and embarrassed but clarifying things with a good dose of reality helps you see the projection and then figure out what it is saying about you.
I think that intention and context are relevant — and related. I have debated this so much with one particular correspondent that I am reluctant to do so now, but I will say that a porno shoot designed to make fast cash has a different purpose than a photo project designed to elicit understanding, create beauty and experiment with relationships (in the broadest sense of the term).
I say this as a lover of pornography. Where else could I possibly find bondage lactation videos except for that awesome industry? My main issues with porn are the relentless drive for fast, huge profits, and the bad lighting and directing. Both relate to intention. However, the antiporn feminists have proven again and again that they are doing gymnastics on quicksand; they actually don’t have an argument or data, they merely have a lot of emotional bluster, a huge attitude and a desperate need to hang out with Betty Dodson.
I would ask, however, what is “wrong” with an image like this being designed to help people get hot? And what makes you think it’s all about nipples? I had an orgasm looking at a detail in a waterfall the other day that was AMAZINGLY erotic, to my mind.
“You might think, in theory, that licking her belly button makes her an object (or portraying her in an image, but if so you may be reading or influenced by too much jive bullshit 70s feminism if so). In real life she would, most likely, manifest for you as a human critter with whom you’re in mutually conscious relationship.”
That’s true. My desire to lick her belly button is mine. It doesn’t consider her feelings at that point. If I were to try and act on it though, then her feelings would definitely come into it because I could not in fact just “lick her belly button” without knowing if she would like my intrusion into her physical space.
As to ” jive bullshit 70s feminism;” don’t get me started about that!
::::climbing on soapbox:::: I am most definitely not a feminist nor do I read their writings. In fact I really dislike it that feminism pushed women into being men and men into being women. What women did before feminism, including child rearing, homekeeping and the like, was not elevated to a valued position by feminism. What men did before feminism was valued..but only for women. Basically feminism wanted to allow women to have all the powers men had while stripping men of these and denigrating even further women who still do so-called traditionally female roles such as mother and wife. :::stepping off soapbox sheepishly:::
I know feminists have negative responses to pictures of nude women but I don’t. A lot of women I know like being photographed nude. It has nothing to do with being an object, though most women I know love being the object of adoration and attention.
“Women, especially, need to stop living in their bodies like it is someone else’s responsibility to make them have an orgasm.” ~ Amen to that!
“Gee, we need some discussion of philosophy here.”
um, paging dr. dewitte!
eric, any chance you mean “presence” rather than “presents”? i certainly often find myself altered by both presents and presence, but i have a feeling you mean the former. 😉
i haven’t had time to read all of the thoughtful comments here. but the subject-object questions do bring up whether or not there is a difference, and what kind of difference, between the relationship between photographer and model, model and photographer, and viewer and photograph.
without even getting into variables such as style of image, vibe of the photo shoot as it happens, historical context of nude photography, the individual personal contexts of the photographer, model and viewer, i’m wondering this:
is there a qualitative difference between the kind of viewing done by the photographer and the kind of viewing done by the test subjects in the article fluidity linked to below?
does it all come down to intention? or is intention irrelevant?
btw — if you have not yet read the article fluidity links to in one of the earliest comments, please do. it’s pretty fascinating. personally, i’d love to see the experiment repeated with a set of test subjects (of both genders) who are taking photographs of nude/scantily clad models.
how interesting would it be to compare brain activity with the first group of men tested, along with stated reactions??!
Thank you Eric, that last post made me laugh. Deep, hard laugh. After some tears with Len and Jude, that was most welcomed. (And thanks, Len and Jude).
Philosophy was my 3rd major, after Botany and Physics. (Of course, real life and the World trumped it all..). I’m that drop-out kid.
..and yup, that which is in our reality is something we are akin too, in some capacity…
..Not sure how it all works.. the disco ball facets.. all the same.. but I look forward to a day of not feeling any constraints on my being. Able to enjoy the sunshine with a smile. The air with a grin… This Earth, with passion.
..When I get there, I’ll have the invitations flowing..
Me
Gee, we need some discussion of philosophy here. What is a subject and what is an object? What is the subject-object relationship in different contexts? What makes her an object, as opposed to a subject? What’s so great about being a subject as opposed to being an object? Are there alternatives to these concepts?
Next, is anyone familiar with physics experiments where the presence of the observer alters the experiment? Everything in the universe is influenced by everything else in the universe. You might think, in theory, that licking her belly button makes her an object (or portraying her in an image, but if so you may be reading or influenced by too much jive bullshit 70s feminism if so). In real life she would, most likely, manifest for you as a human critter with whom you’re in mutually conscious relationship.
What to do about this thing we call projection is another issue. If the whole world is a mirror, then the whole world is a mirror. No part of the mirror is any more or less a mirror. If we are in direct relationship to the world, then we are in relationship to it and we’re not more or less in relationship to any other part.
“I do not see the woman in this photograph as a sex object to be acted upon. i do feel admiration..”
I agree and I also feel like she is experiencing that feeling you get when you are so in the moment with your own body and the joyous pleasure of it.
Personally, I am fond of licking belly buttons and hers is beautiful because it resides within the sweetest little pillow of her belly. But that thought is, again, seeing her as an object to be acted on. Society seems to see women as objects to be acted on but that also goes for men sometimes. Last year I saw a picture of a naked man who was in the throes of orgasm; I wanted to touch him and feel him and act on him just as much as I feel like acting on her. Yet both he and the woman in this picture are people, not objects.
“Many, particularly in their 40s and 50s, are confused as to why men either seem aggressive, or seem to be unable to take action. My observation is that (most) women who say they don’t want men to assert their desire, erring on the side of too much rather than too little, are lying.”
David and I also talked about men and women and how men are the ones who end up having to be the sexually assertive ones. Eric has it right; women say they want a sensitive man (David said this as well) but the sexually aggressive asshole men seem to get laid more often. As David said, “How can a man get it right? If he is assertive, it is hit or miss because the woman might not be “in the mood” for that. If he is gentle and considerate of her feelings, he isn’t “manly” enough. How should he handle things then?” I think women need to make up their minds and be more honest with themselves.
All I know is, when I try to articulate this issue it is difficult for me. I do want him to want me; just not when I am dealing with yet another teenager’s emotional crisis or when I am on a deadline for typing out a major term paper or when I am tired or in “work” mode.
Women have been programmed that if we resist our male partners too often, they will go elsewhere. This means a potential loss of his support, love, care, and attention. So when he lets me know he wants me, I feel intense pressure to give in to him even if I am up to my neck in stress over other things. I do need his sexual assertiveness but I am also willing to assert myself with him because after he explained things to me, I no longer take it personally if he is not wanting to have sex at that time.
Women have also been raised to believe that they are not supposed to want sex (or admit to wanting it) because doing so earns them the “slut” title. So they have to do these elaborate games to get sex and still maintain their “good girl” status. They subconsciously allow themselves to get drunk which lowers their resistance yet upon the sober light of day, they will often accuse the man of getting them dunk to have sex. They send out signals that they want sex yet cry NO but then as the man presses, they finally say “maybe” and then yield and tell themselves “he seduced me” so they can keep their “decent-woman” identity intact. They lay the blame for their pleasure squarely at the feet of the men they have sex with.
If society would stop vilifying women for wanting sex, liking sex, and having sex, how would that change the sexual dance between men and women? If I want sex and can admit to that and ask for it, if the man agrees….we have sex and no recriminations or blame against the man for doing it will come after. Instead, both parties will enjoy it and leave the encounter well satisfied and with their reputations accepted in society. I know this because I did that when I was young and single (though I was not accepted in society for doing it).
Yet part of the reason society casts women in the roles of “good girl” vs “slut” is because men want to control female fertility for their own purposes. This means female fertility must be controlled and regulated. The biggest threat to that is female sexual desire and agency. The way to make sure that threat does not materialize is to socially pressure the woman with the loss of her standing in the community if she openly and honestly indulges her sexual desires. So the very gender which hates being blamed for the sex the woman eventually does (and also gets accused of rape even when the woman secretly wanted sex) is the same gender who created this whole issue because of their controls on female fertility. How is that working for everyone?
This social pressure works on men as well. After the women’s movement; men are told they must surrender their lustful desires in the service of female sensibilities. Funny thing is, too often women go cold when this happens; without his lust and desire, she feels no response because she feels undesired and unattractive. Women have also been raised to be submissive and passive (watch porn and see, the woman is indeed acted on and not moving her hips in these). The message is “wait, he makes the first move, lie back and be rammed.” The most erotic movie I ever saw had a sex scene in which the woman was moving as much as the man; she had agency. As a woman, I wonder where the line is between me having agency and being the submissive receptacle I have been programmed to be?
David even admitted that between the sexually aggressive virago and the submissive receptive woman, he prefers the latter . Amazingly enough, I prefer he be sensitive to the timing of sex but aggressive in the doing of it. When I was in my twenties, I would actually approach men and give them my phone number with the suggestion that they call me because I wanted them. They were wonderfully surprised but once we got in the room and began having sex, I would turn submissive and respond to his maleness while being a very active partner. They all really loved this because of three things (so they said): first because I initiated the encounter, second I didn’t rebuff them when they became sexually assertive and I actively participated, and third I didn’t blame them afterward as though the whole thing were their fault.
So how do we solve this issue? David and I are working on that now.
[It is so nice to be done with school. I have time to write and reply now; hence my increased activity here at PW.]
This is such a powerful place at PW because we can all discuss sex and our feelings about it openly. Thank you Eric and Company for holding this space open for us.
“We’ve all been so conditioned that the only way one should have sex is to feel desire, fall in love, and have it. it is the accepted formula. and the result of that formula, the answer to that formula is one sum called monogamy. And if you “fall in love” with someone else, their “sum” must replace your current “sum”.”
This is well written and for most people, it is THE programing. On the outside, my marriage with my husband looks like it falls under that very scenario. Yet when peered at with the lens or honesty, it is actually very different. Neither he nor I felt we had to be monogamous in order to have that desire; we both had very sexually active pasts in which we slept around. His only long-term relationship (when I met him) had been with a gay man; mine had been with both straight and bi men. We discussed open relating but an over-arching factor for both of us was the issue of children.
Both of us wanted children (he more than I because of the real emotional attachment it would cause me). Both of us are well read and educated people and everything we had read, experienced, and learned about children said they need stability. Poly relationships CAN be stable, but too often they are not. I had grown up in a divorced family and had to deal with my mother’s parade of lovers and husbands. I would get used to the new guy and start the attachment that kids do to parental figures only to have him leave. Between that and not seeing my father much I felt instability directly and it damaged me. Children need stability. Dave (my husband) agreed so we married and began raising a family.
David did seem to want more exclusivity; I said at the outset that if he wanted anyone else he needs to let me know so can try to accommodate that (I am such a malleable Pisces) but he didn’t want the same for me (he is very much the fixed Scorpio). Even as I said that to him, my fear of abandonment was there. He also had fear of abandonment which is another reason why neither of us really wanted to add any more people to our very close, passionate, stable relationship.
Now that I have a connection with another person, David and I have been talking about that and exploring how that doesn’t mean I am replacing him with the other person; the part I share with the other person is one David was not as comfortable (or able) to share with me anyway so how is he missing out? Nor am I “in love” with this other person; I care about them and have feelings about them but I know the difference between that and the love I experience with David. These are not the same.
David and I also talked about men and women and how men are the ones who end up having to be the sexually assertive ones. Eric has it right; women say they want a sensitive man (David said this as well) but the sexually aggressive asshole men seem to get laid more often. As David said, “How can a man get it right? If he is assertive, it is hit or miss because the woman might not be “in the mood” for that. If he is gentle and considerate of her feelings, he isn’t “manly” enough. How should he handle things then?” I think women need to make up their minds.
All I know is, when I try to articulate this issue it is difficult for me. I do want him to want me; just not when I am dealing with yet another teenager’s emotional crisis or when I am on a deadline for typing out a major term paper or when I am tired or in “work” mode. I do need his sexual assertiveness but I am also willing to assert myself with him because after he explained things to me, I no longer take it personally if he is not wanting to have sex at that time.
A lot of these issues require open and honest discussions; the kind people are not raised to do.
I’m the person that Eric quoted in this blog. I have really be touched (pun intended) by Eric’s writings.
I wanted to say that I agree with Stellium in Sag. Women, especially, need to stop living in their bodies like it is someone else’s responsibility to make them have an orgasm.
I am reminded of a bumper sticker I had from days of yore: A woman without a man is like a fish without a bicycle.
Eric, I have a question/suggestion…why not some pictures of beautiful men on this here amazing forum?
==Reply==
Hi Mindy, I’m replying down here to preserve context. Your comment gut hug up in moderation overnight, I just caught it.
I am happy to publish photos of men that are provided by the artist, and I have a relationship with the artists (such as a phone call or two). I personally choose to photograph women, most of the time anyway, and I usually save my self-portraits for Book of Blue. However, if there are portrait artists who work with men — you are invited to send me your photographs. I would love to see them.
Lately some of us are sorting and evaluating my sexuality writing. One of the editors I’m working with wrote to me last night after listening to an audio presentation called Community and Compersion, which addresses this issue of eroticism and violent impulses, of which I think that jealousy is the first hint. We tend to be tolerant and encouraging of jealousy, looking to it as a clue to true love and so on. But I associate jealousy with suppression and murder. My sense, from much experience, is that opening the taboo on masturbation is the way out of jealousy and into the investigation — and release — of sexual violence. For different reasons, this works equally effectively for men and women.
In any event, with no reference to this discussion, my friend who is helping me edit wrote to me last night:
Last Friday evening a handsome Muslim man, whose advances I rebuffed not long ago, let loose with a barrage of abuse in a public bar. Directed at me. ( I’d have considered dating him back then, religion aside, had he not reeled of all his sexual conquests). I could have taken refuge in ignorance and used that ‘ruthlessness’ my sign is famous for (Scorpio) on a counter attack. But, I have knowledge. Planets lined up in Taurus over the weekend , including Mars, and this man is a Taurus sun. I had to weigh up my inherent knowledge of his matriarchal sign against what his culture has taught him about suppressing the feminine. I just managed to stay centered and offer some comments which diffused the situation.
Sexual aggression is a disease.
Eric you right, so very right.
almost forgot: all that sniffing going on: WOOF!
Len: Agreed. fully. couldn’t say it better
” i know women are supposedly less visual sexually”- except female visual artists, right!
it’s interesting to me the power of photography and the reactions/dialogues which can spring fr. it, meaning, its power to (potentially) really connect on multiple levels. making it an interesting medium. many truths may be revealed on both sides of the equation; the photo telling a story, and the viewer and their reaction to it, yes?
fascinating.
would we be having this discussion if this was a sculpture of a nude woman, same pose, same light, etc. that I had chiseled out of marble or cast fr. bronze?
OR if the photo credits had borne a woman’s name????huh? huh???
final thoughts male/female dynamics
I sympathize with both men & women re: “job of desire”, but I totally agree, it’s usually the man who has to put himself out there time and time again. unfortunately, I know a lot of women who actually require that as part of their ‘worthiness test(s)’ (part of the infamous list). the guy has to prove themselves again and again…actually many women are amused by watching the man squirm during this ‘proving’.
I say What a fucking burden!! shit!! it’s really inhumane. and must feel almost impossible, right? I mean a lot of women say they want a sweet, sensitive, caring, compassionate man, but then he has to be a fucking Gladiator too??? don’t get it. does.not. compute.
and we wonder why there are issues with power dynamics once the relationship is ‘rolling’. well what was the foundation?
you’re part of the problem, unless you participate in the solution. -compassion!-
start today if you aren’t on board yet: the Charter for Compassion, it was on that other post.
oh, and the term “man up”
well, personally I think there needs to be a little more “woman up”
holding the torch: female warrior energy
peace. sweet dreams~
I’ve discussed sex with a lot of women for about 20 years (just counting my time as an astrologer/card reader), and I’ve heard very nearly everything. Many, particularly in their 40s and 50s, are confused as to why men either seem aggressive, or seem to be unable to take action. My observation is that (most) women who say they don’t want men to assert their desire, erring on the side of too much rather than too little, are lying. The exception would be someone who has been so seriously hurt in the past and wants no attention at all — not a good place to be, and most who are there want out. Many who think they have ceased to be ‘objects’ of desire miss the men who used to come sniffing around.
So many people right now are starving for affection and attention and have no idea where it’s gone to. We have turned attraction into allegedly criminal behavior.
However, most of us know that nothing is going to happen unless men make their desire known and are willing to act on it, clumsy and wrought with rejection though it may be. Everyone has had instances of their desire being rebuffed, and I’ve read on these very pages many times women who lament that being affirmative and saying yes ‘doesn’t work’. So in the cultural game the job of desire generally gets left to men, and it’s a tough game. You might find a place in your heart for how much rejection women dole out at men, and how mean some of them are when they do it. But if anyone thinks conditioning men out connecting with our desire, be it social or sexual (essentially, feminizing us) is going to help matters, I invite you to tell me how that works out for you.
Healthy guys figure out that to get anything happening they have to assert themselves. I encourage the young men around me to do that politely, with absolutely no guilt.
Both men and women experience guilt and shame associated with desire. We all need to go through a process of understanding where this conditioning came from, and learning how to release it and affirm our own and one another’s vital force. It’s a sickness that runs so deep as to be invisible, and we’re going to need to help one another out of this, unless we want to push one another deeper into it (and that happens plenty). Just remember how many of the people who told you desire was wrong, or their peers, have been indicted or sued for raping kids. Boston Archdiocese alone has paid out $100 million in settlements.
I understand the connection of violence and desire that seems to be inherent in the process of desire on a cultural level. I see guilt as the source of that violence and not its solution.
Yes our model depicted above is gorgeous and vibrates with pleasure, just like she intended to. Looking at this image, my first impulse is to sniff her armpit.
yes, firstly i do apologize to the woman in the picture and to eric,
this was not really meant as a comment on the photo
and i guess now this discussion may take away from the power of it
i hadn’t even more than glanced at the photo,
just kind of a recognition, ‘here’s another nude woman on planet waves’
and had just seen/listened to that link
so posted it
i find myself worrying that i may be objectifying women when looking at their bodies
and i guess this was a ‘passing on’ of those feelings of guilt
(hey, it’s ‘scientifically proven’)
taking a closer look, i do offer my appreciation
and got a laugh out of eric’s link
fluidity — really fascinating article. thanks for the link! i definitely suggest everyone read the article — it is short.
my first thought, as i read about what the scientists were measuring in the brains of the test subjects, was that maybe something about female nudity was activating a part of the brain that is active in infants. that is, that maybe seeing these female bodies as objects/tools had something to do with nursing & pre-verbal development.
but then i read the part about how in the men who were the more hostile sexists, the part of the brain that register’s another person’s intentions gets deactivated. so… yes, food for thought. and, as the scientists note, it is a *preliminary* study, they know they have a ways to go on fleshing out these results (apologies for the pun – not intended) and making conclusions.
this is not to suggest len’s reply is in any way untrue or not genuine, or to suggest that we can assume most men deactivate that part of the brain (the scientists even note it is a rare occurance). nor do i assume eric or all male artists who photograph/draw nudes would necessarily match this study.
but i do find it curious when something like brain activity gets measured in response to specific stimuli/ It’s not the whole picture, but it’s a damn interesting piece. believe me, i really want to see the test repeated with women looking at scantily-clad men, as well as same-sex trial on both sides. i know women are supposedly less visual sexually, but i’m still curious. and if photos don’t do it, i wonder what *would* instigate those two sets of brain activity in women?
all of that said, it’s a lovely photo of the lass. and yes, she does look simply rapturous.
🙂
fluidity:
i do not see the woman in this photograph as a sex object to be acted upon. i do feel admiration for her spirited courage and compassion for the pain she has evidently had to endure. Please see her, and me, as a human being like you.
The photograph is a great and understated piece of art. Perhaps you should take another look and give the photographer some credit.
Area Man has Naked Lady Fetish
http://www.theonion.com/articles/area-man-has-nakedlady-fetish,498/
Study finds (hetero/bi) men think of (scantily clad) women as (sex) objects (to be acted on)
http://www.scientificamerican.com/podcast/episode.cfm?id=84F4BA3B-A506-BB88-CE97C91970A5C9A8
very beautiful
A wonderful piece of art. Beauty earned is beauty owned.