This is NOT about political correctness, Paul. I know those are among the biggest swear-words in your vocabulary, so anything that you strongly disagree with has to do with "political correctness".
I really don't give a flying F about the story or the stageplay or the movie. On the face of them, these photos objectify and demean women. They portray women in a sexual way that men are not generally portrayed. That's why they are sexist. Why is that so difficult to understand? If men dressed and posed this way it would look ridiculous. Yet when women do it, it's okay? I will reiterate yet again: This is NOT about nudity. This is not about skin. This is about a sexual depiction of a woman in a way that a man would never be depicted. As for Renoir and Michelangelo, their depictions of female nudes were neither suggestive nor sexual. And in the case of Michelangelo, he also did male nudes (hello: David?) so at least there was some balance. There is, quite frankly, no comparison between the female nude in Western art and Bruce's Cabaret photos. I'm not calling for the banning of anything, I'm not calling for censorship. I'm asking that we try to understand why depictions like the Cabaret series can be harmful to an identifiable group (in this case, women) and govern ouselves accordingly. Here's a question to honestly ask yourself: How would you feel if it was your daughter or grand daughter in those photos? Would you be okay with that? Wouldn't make you feel uncomfortable in the least? Really? I know how I'd feel. And that's why I know that this is not something I feel right about. Cheers, frank On 23 August, 2015 10:37:44 PM EDT, paul stenquist <pnstenqu...@comcast.net> wrote: >I’m hesitant to address this, but I’m also confused, so I think I’ll >speak up. These photos are a very accurate depiction of Cabaret, they >capture the essence of the story, as produced both in the theater and >on film Are they exploitative merely because they are mildly erotic, as >was the original? And if these photos are exploitative does that mean >Renoir and Michelangelo and countless other artists who depicted the >female form are somehow violating some kind of arbitrary moral standard >as well? I think that if we were to agree that is the case, it would be >a sad commentary on the human condition. Eroticism banned. A new >Puritan age. A banal existence, mandated by political correctness. > >Paul >> On Aug 23, 2015, at 10:01 PM, Knarf <knarftheria...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Nah, not riled up. Just not happy about the subject matter (I don't >mean Dorrie, of course, I mean what I see as the exploitative way she's >portrayed). >> >> But I've said my piece on that score. I'll simply not comment on >these types of photos, except maybe every couple of months or so, as a >"these are demeaning to women" reminder. >> >> Bruce knows I think he's a wonderful photographer, both technically >and artistically, and I'm sure he understands that my lack of comment >is not a lack of opinion on his work. >> >> Cheers, >> >> frank >> >> cheers, >> >> frank >> >> On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 10:14 AM, Daniel J. Matyola ><danmaty...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> Now you have really done it! This will certainly get Knarf all >riled >>> up . . . . >>> >>> Very well done indeed. My only negative is the pasties. They are >not >>> attractive or tasteful, and they actually give a greater feeling of >>> exploitation, rather than less. >>> Dan Matyola >>> http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/danieljmatyola >>> >>> >>> On Thu, Aug 20, 2015 at 4:20 PM, Bruce Walker ><bruce.wal...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> A creative project that my designer and I worked on over 8 weeks, >then >>>> 6 hours shooting, and a month waiting for the publication embargo >to >>>> end ... has finally been published. >>>> >>>> http://nifmagazine.com/cabaret-by-bruce-walker/ >>>> >>>> An image from it will also appear in the UK print magazine Femme >>>> Rebelle in September. >>>> >>>> All images: K-3, DA* 16-50/2.8 >>>> Lighting is from three Einsteins with an assortment of mods and >>>> shtuff. My lighting design. >>>> >>>> Model: Dorrie Mack >>>> Makeup and hair: Coral Brandenburg >>>> Designer and stylist: Eva Mocek/GearPunk’D >>>> Assistant: Anique Alletson >>>> Photographer and Artistic Director: Bruce Walker >>>> >>>> GearPunk’D (Eva) custom made a gold jacket, punk-influenced >long-line >>>> corset and matching choker, shorts and pasties for Dorrie. >>>> >>>> Comments will be warmly embraced! >>>> >>>> -- >>>> -bmw >>>> >>>> -- >>>> 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. >>> >>> -- >>> 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. >> >> >> >> -- >> "Sharpness is a bourgeois concept." -Henri Cartier-Bresson >> >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. >> >> -- >> 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. > > >-- >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. -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. -- 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.
