Thank you. At least you've but me in good company.
:-) Cheers, frank Paul Stenquist <pnstenqu...@comcast.net> wrote: > > >Paul via phone > >> On Nov 24, 2013, at 9:58 PM, knarf <knarftheria...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Crusade? >> >> Run amok? >> >> Are you serious? Really > >Of course. Why else would you even comment on someone's choice of >subject matter? First it was MJ on cats; now knarf on female nudes. >> >> frank >> >> >> >> Paul Stenquist <pnstenqu...@comcast.net> wrote: >>> As a footnote to this, female artists who portray the human body >choose >>> to celebrate the female form by a wide margin. A woman friend who >works >>> in oils once told me that she finds the curves of a woman's body >much >>> more inspiring. She much prefers males for other purposes. Your >crusade >>> is political correctness >>> run amok. Try to get free of the liberal leash. >>> >>> Paul via phone >>> >>>> On Nov 24, 2013, at 9:35 PM, knarf <knarftheria...@gmail.com> >wrote: >>>> >>>> What makes you think I haven't protested museums and galleries? >>>> >>>> Besides, just because another venue objectifies females doesn't >mean >>> it should be done here. >>>> >>>> And there are surely many reasons other than beauty to portray the >>> male form. Power, athleticism, eroticism, are they not valid >reasons? >>>> >>>> Not that I accept your statement that female forms are more >beautiful >>> than male. That strikes as pure opinion not backed by any facts >>> whatsoever. How could it be anything other than opinion? >>>> >>>> Keep in mind that the art world, from artists to curators to >gallery >>> owners to purchasers is male-dominated. >>>> >>>> Cheers, >>>> frank >>>> >>>> Paul Stenquist <pnstenqu...@comcast.net> wrote: >>>>> Mature male bodies simply aren't as attractive as female bodies. >Art >>>>> history weighs heavily in favor of the female form. Perhaps you >>> should >>>>> mount a protest at the Met. >>>>> >>>>> Paul via phone >>>>> >>>>>> On Nov 24, 2013, at 9:14 PM, knarf <knarftheria...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> The catalyst for this little missive, I must admit, is Bruce's >>> recent >>>>> series of NSFW semi-nudes. That being said, it's not directed >>>>> specifically to or at Bruce. It's more a comment on the whole >female >>>>> nude thing. Others have posted similar photos in the past and >likely >>>>> will do so again. >>>>>> >>>>>> My problem, of course, is the objectification of women. And it's >>> not >>>>> because they're sexualized by showing "dirty parts". It's because >>>>> there's such a huge disparity between male nudes and female nudes. >>>>>> >>>>>> As in: there has never been a male nude shown here (that I've >seen >>> in >>>>> some thirteen years). I don't believe I've ever seen a penis here. >>>>>> >>>>>> A couple of year “Analysis kills spontaneity.” -- Henri-Frederic Amiel -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
