Is there a perception bias here? There are many many fine art nudes of men in existence. And if you look at the body of work for nude sculpture then many are male - Pope Pius IX was so enraged by this he even went around sticking fig leaves over all the cocks in the vatican*, an utter travesty in art.
If you wander around the Louvre you will see lots of nude men on display. Modern advertising? Again perception bias I think - buy any girly mag (and I've been subjected to many) and they are littered with pictures of half-dressed blokes. Case in point; the famous image of Beckham in very small undies. One of my friends in advertising likes to say something along the lines of "well one good thing you can say about this industry; at the very least we are not sexists". Nude people are popular pretty much in general :) Tom * ahem, that might be construed wrongly :S On 2 May 2012 17:55, Ryan Kaldari <rkald...@wikimedia.org> wrote: > ** > That's a good point. Even here in San Francisco it's much easier to find > female nudity in art and advertising than male nudity. I just wish people > would stick to commenting on the art instead of the woman's body. > > Ryan Kaldari > > > > On 5/2/12 12:40 AM, Caroline Becker wrote: > > The problem is, we live in a biased world where you can find much, much > more female nudity in fine art musem than male nudity. I'm currently > post-treating and uploading pictures from the Museum of Fine Arts of Rennes > (France) and the only naked male body is a sculpture of a boy/young > teenager playing, while they are lot of naked women, both in sculpture and > paintings. Half-naked men are more often corpses than sexy budies. (If you > want I can create a gallery with all artworks showing naked or half-naked > women). > > What can I do with that ? Not uploaded pictures of artworks with naked > women ? Working harder to have awesome pictures of artworks with naked men > ? > > Caroline > > > 2012/5/2 Pete Forsyth <petefors...@gmail.com> > >> It seems strange to talk about "Featured Pictured Candidates" as though >> it is a process, or talk about "bias" -- from what I could discern when I >> looked into it last time around, it's basically a system that lets anybody >> promote their own work, as long as they know how to jump through a couple >> pretty straightforward hoops and wait a few months. >> >> I still think that simply, clearly, *documenting* the process in a >> practical sense would be a useful first step toward thinking up and >> building interest in a more refined system. Until somebody puts in the >> effort to do something like that, we're going to continue to see weird >> entries on the front page of Commons (and many other projects that use >> Commons' front page image on their own front page) simply because one >> person took the initiative to make it happen. >> >> Not because the "community" at Commons made a bad decision. The >> "community" didn't make a decision at all. >> >> -Pete >> >> >> On May 1, 2012, at 10:23 PM, Ryan Kaldari wrote: >> >> > Speaking of gender and nudity, it seems the bias towards female nudity >> at en.wiki's Featured Picture Candidates is still as strong as ever. And >> check out the quality comments at >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Featured_picture_candidates/The_Pearl_and_the_Wave >> > >> > After you guys are finished photographing your all-male cumshots, maybe >> you could find some nice nude male art to nominate at Featured Picture >> Candidates. Too bad Robert Mapplethorpe is still copyrighted. >> > >> > Ryan Kaldari >> > >> > On 4/28/12 12:17 AM, Paolo Massa wrote: >> >> If you are curious about the images used in the same article on other >> >> language editions of Wikipedia you can use Manypedia. >> >> For the page "Cumshot", it seems currently the same image is used on >> >> all language editions, while the Spanish one uses one more image >> >> http://www.manypedia.com/#|en|Cumshot|es >> >> and the Japanese a different additional one. >> >> http://www.manypedia.com/#|en|Cumshot|ja >> >> >> >> Of course this is not to say that if all language editions of >> >> Wikipedia represent the same concept using the same images, this is >> >> the best way of representing it. But at least you can appreciate >> >> differences in representations of different language communities. >> >> For example see the page Underwear on English and Arabic Wikipedia, >> >> http://www.manypedia.com/#|en|Underwear|ar >> >> >> >> Hope it helps. >> >> >> >> On Sat, Apr 28, 2012 at 3:42 AM, Emily Monroe<emilymonro...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> I'm not sure the technical term for it either, but the laymen's term >> is >> >>> female ejactulation. *shrugs* >> >>> >> >>> From, >> >>> Emily >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 8:39 PM, Carol Moore DC< >> carolmoor...@verizon.net> >> >>> wrote: >> >>>> On 4/27/2012 3:45 PM, Andreas Kolbe wrote: >> >>>> >> >>>> I could have a go again, Carol.>:) >> >>>> >> >>>> Gay porn is underrepresented in these articles. >> >>>> >> >>>> Andreas >> >>>> >> >>>> So if I was too implicit in my statement. As Andreas surmised, I >> meant >> >>>> re-do that photo to make it male on male. Or do a second one that's >> male on >> >>>> male. Go for it! >> >>>> >> >>>> As for female "ejaculation" since ejaculation is putting out sperm, I >> >>>> don't think women do it. >> >>>> >> >>>> Women obviously -- geez, I don't what you call it besides "get wet." >> And >> >>>> maybe orgasms squeeze some of it out an orifice. But I don't think >> that's >> >>>> ejaculation. But I do now know I don't what the technical terms are >> or if >> >>>> there are any!! >> >>>> >> >>>> CM >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> _______________________________________________ >> >>>> Gendergap mailing list >> >>>> Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org >> >>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap >> >>>> >> >>> >> >>> _______________________________________________ >> >>> Gendergap mailing list >> >>> Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org >> >>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap >> >>> >> >> >> >> >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > Gendergap mailing list >> > Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org >> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap >> >> Pete Forsyth >> petefors...@gmail.com >> 503-383-9454 mobile >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Gendergap mailing list >> Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap >> > > > _______________________________________________ > Gendergap mailing > listGendergap@lists.wikimedia.orghttps://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap > > > _______________________________________________ > Gendergap mailing list > Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap > >
_______________________________________________ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
