Boundaries, Definitions, Intersections...

 Leila and Hana

Over the weekend I watched a movie that pushed the boundaries of erotica, pornography, and definition titled, 9 Songs.  It is a short movie about a young couple in England and their sex life through their relationship and over the course of 9 songs.   Both the sex scenes and the icy Antarctic landscape are beautifully filmed.

The scenes grow increasingly erotic, graphic, and by one point shows full penetration and male ejaculation.  Is it pornographic, hardcore, erotica, art?  Can it be all of these?  Can art be pornographic or pornography be art?

This is not the first time these questions have been asked. Bob Guccione's Caligula and John Cameron Mitchell's Shortbus pushed these same issues to the question.  Can graphic, actual sex captured through various media rise up to be art? 

Dr. L recently wrote in her blog:

Anyone who has watched porn films, even classics like "Behind the Green Door," will notice the complete lack of authentic emotion. So, for me, high emotion vs. the lack of convincing emotion separates erotica from pornography.

The balancing act, the success or failure to stop just short of going too far, determines whether it is erotica or pornography.

In a comment to her post, I wrote:

That goes back to the classic line that I am going to poorly paraphrase, "I can't define what pornography is, but I know it when I see it." I think this boundary between erotica and pornography varies from person to person and between cultures.

I like your concept of needing real emotion between the people in the photo/video to help make it erotica. I hadn't thought of that, but I think that hits the nail on the head.

When I saw Mr. and Mrs. Smith, staring the ever sexy Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie, I could tell there was a real passion between them. Even though it was a tongue-in-cheek movie, their emotions and desire for each other made it white-hot for me. It was real.

After seeing 9 Songs, I've decided that it is (for me) pornography, erotica and it maybe even has artistic merit.  The characters have a complex, caring relationship and their sex is not the usual cliche crap you find in standard commercial porn.  It feels like you are watching two people connect physically and emotionally. 

For me it is the intent of the piece that makes it erotic, pornographic, artistic or all of these and more.  If the creator's intent is to go beyond just shock, awe, and titillation, and to try to put an artistic statement on it, then it is difficult to dismiss as just porn.  I don't see all pornography as being without merit or purposes other than  masturbatory eye candy.  It can be art and erotica.

Since seeing my first Playboys, Penthouses and occasional Hustlers, through the porn videos of the 90's and the boom of porn on the internet, I've seen lots of porn.  During all those experiences, I've seen some pornography that I feel is art.  I believe some of the images I captured of Leila and Hana are pornographic.  I also consider them artistic and erotic.  One of the reasons I feel they are more than porn was my, and their, intent.  I wanted to capture graphic moments that when seen together in a series shows not only the tender and caring relationship of these two women, but also the intense physical way they celebrated it.

Some believe, including me, that subtlety and leaving things to the imagination can be more erotic than explicit depictions.  I also believe  sometimes we need to see the "whole monty."  This is true whether it is sex, war, poverty, domestic violence, and other real life issues.  If we did not see the bodies of victims killed in the name civil rights, fascism, communism, genocide, crime, drugs and other atrocities, we would not have been moved to act.  The same goes for poverty and other tough topics.  They pushed our comfort and made us think of how to react.

All of this makes me believe that what most, including myself, consider pornography can also be acceptable art and important to be created. Is sex that taboo and should we only be limited to accepting violent graphic imagery as art?

Porn and Drugs, part 2- last one, I promise... for now.

The greatest challenge of addressing the topic of pornography is the lack of definition. After an email exchange with Dr. L about life, art, and our recent pornography posts, I found another instance where drugs and porn are similar and may help with the difficulty of defining the term. It all comes down to our reaction to the subject. Some of us process the subject one way while others go in different directions.

In our emails and blogs, we discussed the definition, or lack of definition, of "pornography." The good Dr. made a great point in her email,

"It is meaningless to me. If no one knows what something means, then it doesn't exist."

How can something exist that can not be defined?

Think about a word of something physical like "pencil." According to Wikipedia,

A pencil is a writing implement or art medium usually constructed of a narrow, solid pigment core inside a protective casing. The case prevents the core from breaking, and also from marking the user’s hand during use. Pencils create marks via physical abrasion, leaving behind a trail of solid core material that adheres to a sheet of paper or other surface. They are noticeably distinct from pens, which dispense liquid or gel ink that stain the light color of the paper.

That pretty much sums up a pencil. How about something more challenging like "love". According to Wikipedia,

Love is any of a number of emotions related to a sense of strong affection and attachment. 

Love then can be defined from different cultural views, physiological reasons.  It was broken down into different types of love by the Greeks. These types were:

• agape - divine, unconditional love, eros - passionate, sensual, longing
• philia - a practical love with loyalty to the family, community, and those around you
• storge - natural affection and caring, like parent to child
• xenia - love through hospitality.

Even though "love" is much more abstract than "pencil", it still has a definition that most can understand and agree on. Pornography doesn't have that going for it.

Drugs and Metabolism - a connection to porn

I am amazed how our body works with things to either hurt or help us. Our body stores fat in the belly to keep organs warm and maintain a fuel supply near them when food is scarce. It also causes health issues when we store too much fat there.

The body metabolizes things differently and can change things ingested or breathed in into completely different things. We breathe in oxygen and exhale carbon dioxide. Our body changed it.

In a more complex example, our body ingests a drug and changes it into a different compound. Capecitabine is a colorectal and breast cancer treatment taken orally via a tablet. When some patients take capecitabine, it is changed in the body to a substance called 5-fluorouracil (5-FU). For some patients, 5-FU stops cancer cells from growing and decreases tumor size.

This is amazing.  The drug is taken and the body decides how to digest it and interpret it into something different. Not all patients have the same response. This means it is up to the individual patient's body to decide what happens when the product is taken.

"I can't define obscenity, but I know it when I see it."

This is where I see the relationship of drugs and metabolism to pornography. Pornography is defined by the individual in how his or her mind digests it. Depending on her/his beliefs, experiences, desires, likes/dislikes, exposure, education, and many other factors, the viewer interprets and defines the material differently. With the definition being unique to each individual, it is impossible to create a communal definition of pornography. 

End note - I want to leave this poor beaten dead horse alone.  Being related to a pheonix though, the porno horse will rise again and I am sure I will write about it then.

"Sex. In America an obsession. In other parts of the world a fact"

"Sex. In America an obsession. In other parts of the world a fact."

-- Marlene Dietrich

I am breaking one of my new rules for this blog.  I am straying away from art and photography and am going to write about freedom of speech and sexual health.  All of this came from hearing a story on first amendment issues on NPR and then reading a photo/video essay at Slate.com on the differences between the United States and Europe concerning teen condom education and advertisements.

PART 1

Video Game Ad at Ground Zero, NYC - 2010

Here is the story.   The Supreme Court is considering a California law that bans the sale of violent video games to those under 18.  The proponents use the argument that these games are dangerous and should follow the same restrictions as pornography.  The opponents (primarily video game makers) claim this is an infringement of free speech.  Many cite the court's decision earlier this year allowing the sale of crushing videos (where animals are tortured, fought, or crushed to death) as potential precedence.

What the fuck is wrong with this country?  In that last paragraph we basically equated pornography may equal violent video games but is more offensive and damaging than animal snuff films?  I understand two of the issues deal with selling adult content to minors and the third concerns free speech of creating a type of speech that is controversial (and unforgivable in my mind).  If the supreme court decides that violent video games can be sold to minors then they are giving the indirect message of sex is worse than virtual graphic killing and/or the sale of products depicting the ultimate animal cruelty.

I support the bans on selling pornography AND violent video games to minors.  Both bans are easy to get around with the internet and permissive/absent parenting, but at least there is some legal protection.  While the pornography laws have become draconian and suppresses free speech through the evolution of 2257, the original intent has validity.

Once again America has stated, violence is good, sex is bad.


PART 2

Please read and watch the essay on safe sex/condom promotions aimed toward European and American teens.  It is an eye opener.  Here is the link.

I find the European ads (especially the Netherlands) very interesting, humorous, effective, and refreshing in how they accept teen sexuality.  While not promoting it, they want to educate the teen lovers  of what to do when the moment arises.  The two most interesting bits are on slides 12 and 15.  On slide 12 they interview Dutch and American teens about the perception of carrying condoms for both young men and women.  On slide 15, you can see a video I watch regularly to inspire me to use condoms.  I know not all kids are like that and I know that boy needs love too, but I remember being that brat and never want to be responsible for that brat either.

Ok, back to regular programming. In my next post I will write about something photographic or artistic.  Ciao.


More of my writing on these issues.


Stuff about 2257. 

Porn and Drugs

Classic Modern Leila

Dr. L over at What We Saw Today wrote about pornography again.  She discusses how the vague boundaries of porn makes it so hard to discuss and define.  All of this makes me think porn and drugs are related, but not in the way you may think.

I've written about pornography a bit too.  I've stated that I believe porn can be art, but not all porn is art.  I've made what most would consider porn.  I've viewed porn.  I am not going to define the boundaries between art, porn and erotica since all three can blend a bit for me.  While the content of the pornography varies and can be defended or blamed, I am not writing about content now.  I want to focus on porn usage.  My belief about porn usage is similar to that of drugs.  Neither are good or bad, it is the intention of the use that is "good" or "bad."

Along the way to getting my psychology degree I had to take both Use and Abuse of Drugs and Human Sexuality.  Both were great classes.  Both came with warnings and caveats.  Both courses were held in the largest auditorium on campus, seating 499 people.  Both classes were full. 

Follow the Arc

In the sex class, we were told on the first day that we could not bring friends, family or any other guest to the class unless they were registered.  The professors (one a behavioral biologist covering the physiology of sex, the other a social anthropologist, covering the cultural, historic, and other contextual aspects of sexuality) told us that we would become used to talking about sex openly and seeing explicit imagery in the class.  If we brought anybody from the outside, they would not  be "desensitized" to the this content and may become distressed.  What a titillating hook!  That made me want to attend class even more.  It was a great class where I learned more about human sexuality than the rest of life could teach me.  We always joked that the lectures were good, but the labs were the best!

The drugs course was a tough class.  We had to learn about the different classifications, uses, and outcomes of using drugs.  Twenty-one years later, I think I've forgotten most of that stuff, which is funny since I work for a drug company.  The main lesson I learned was something the professor stated on the first overhead transparency (pre-Power Point days).

Drugs are neither good or bad, it is how we use them that are good or bad.

The Blessed Ludivica Albertoni 1 - Classic Porn?

All pharmaceutical companies have to monitor the safety of their products.  Every drug has side effects and issues.  By tracking each adverse event and determining the risk/benefit of the product in a process called pharmacovigilance, we strive to give the patients and their health care providers the best information to make needed decisions.

Risk/benefit is a very gray area.    Here is a fictional, but common scenario, I have cancer that will kill me in 5 months.  If I take drug X, it has shown to increase survival rates by up to three years.  The major side effects are nausea and joint pain.  There is a toxicity issue that if taken more than five years, the drug will cause serious and permanent kidney and liver damage that is probably fatal.  Those are pretty bad risks, but the probability that I would live past five years is almost nil making the kidney and liver damage issue moot.  As for the nausea and joint pain, I have to decide if the quality of life issues caused by those side effects are worth it to live another few years.   The risk/benefit equation tips toward benefit.

The Blessed Ludivica Albertoni 2 - Detail

Now lets take the same scenario, but make the disease psoriasis.  Psoriasis is a severe disease, but not fatal.  The risk/benefit equation tips toward risk and the drug should not be given.

If we look at risk/benefit for illegal drugs or drugs that can be used for illegal purposes, it gets complicated.  Marijuana has both risks and benefits.  For cancer and AIDS patients, it can help them survive and lessen the symptoms.  For the pot smokers just wanting a great afternoon of watching Threes Company and toking a bowl, the equation is different.  When we look at E, ruffies, heroin, cocaine, crack, vicodin, huffing glue, meth, the risk/benefit equation heavily tilts toward risk.


Good/Bad, Risk/Benefit as related to porn usage.

In Dr. L's post, she mentions that serial killer Ted Bundy blamed porn as the cause of his crimes.  Whether his statement is true and how true it is, his usage suggests a bad use for porn.  I doubt that porn made him do it, but I can't rule out that it had an influence.  With his case, my assessment is bad use, heavy risk.

Many men in committed relationships view porn.  For some it is just a quick tension release and doesn't affect relations with their partners and family.  It is similar to enjoying a beer after a day's work and relaxing.  In that case I would assess it as good use, good benefits.

Stirred 2 (still baffled why you would need wifi at a brothel)

Many men in committed relationships view porn for hours, masturbating with it daily or even more frequently.  They would rather do that than have sex with their significant others.  There could be many reasons they are not seeking their partner (partner is not interested or is unable to have sex, emotional issues, etc.).  If this use of porn is leading to problems and addictions, I assess it as bad use, risky.

Those are enough scenarios, you can look at how it can help couples explore and have more fun or how it leads people into riskier activities in search of the next hot stimulating thing.  All of them are on that good/bad, risk/benefit scale.

So, which is it for you?  Do you abstain from using it?  Are you a recovering addict?  Are you a recreational user?  Do you use it to improve a healthy sex life?


Side not that is barely related to the topic.
My city of 135K+ souls has only two bookstores, both "adult" and neither really have any books in them.  We have Pier One Imports, Best Buy, Home Depot, Petco, Costco, Target, Walmart, Olive Garden, and sales lots for every major car manufacturer, except Ford.  Makes me wonder what our community really thinks is important to consume.  Literature is not on the list.

Going Down Farm Road 2257

I got bored and typed "2257" into Google and then I laughed. Other than a Wikipedia article about the regulations, all the rest of the hits were the 2257 compliance statements for various adult websites.

I then selected the images and the road sign above appeared for FM 2257 (Farm Road) in Texas. I had to find out where that road is. Here is a map of its location. I then took the Google drive down the road to see what it was like living on 2257. It was full of pretty trees and farms. It was very straight and narrow. After the first few miles it all looked the same. Green trees and not many people. After a few more miles I gave up because the scenery along 2257 is too boring.


Please look at the screen capture of FM2257 above. You can see how boring it is. The interesting part though is the advertisement at the bottom,
"Gay Welcoming Church - www.UUA.org - We stand for marriage equality A faith that reaches out to BGLT"

I support the Unitarian Universalist's open and progressive beliefs, but I find it interesting that a church is the sponsored ad for this lonely section of road. Did they know I live near San Franciso? Do they assume I am gay? Is everyone driving down FM2257 searching for a church?

While I was researching this road, I thought of so many ways this lonely road in Texas is a metaphor (or analogy - I always get those two mixed up) for the regulations. Since Texas is about as conservative (except for the communist hub of Austin) as San Francisco is liberal, I wanted to classify the empty road and the people along it as a bunch of backward ignorant bible thumpers. I wanted to rant about how their narrow-minded world views are limiting my freedoms and restricting art. I changed my mind though because of the UUA church ad.

I don't know the people along FM2257. My gross generalizations about them may be unfounded, false and wrong. I should not prejudge them as the creators of regulation 2257 have prejudged that all artistic/erotic nude photographers create child pornography.

Palin - the flash in the pan. Some thoughts on her "celebrity", pregnancy in red and blue states and gratuitious dirty pictures.

Leila 1 - 052010

Part 1
Stephen first introduced the subject of the "conservative feminist" through citing a quote by Sarah Palin.  Dr. L.  took that and wrote a great post discussing the history of the possible blending of conservative values and feminism and then went on about the limitations of some of the beliefs.  Even if you do not read my post, PLEASE read both of theirs. 

Leila 2 - 052010

I cringe when I hear Sarah Palin speak much like I did with our last President.  She is dumber than George W. Bush and even more outspoken.   She hides behind her smarmy wink and "true American gal" persona as she spreads lies and overly-simple statements about complex issues.  Sadly though, she is gaining traction in the ignorant section of the conservative base (as an aside, both parties have ignorant sections of their party that believe the overly simplistic and bombastic messages that fire up their emotions, yet lack the truth and proof to back it up.)

I will not comment on resigned Gov. Palin's statements on "conservative feminism."  Dr. L stated things far better than I can on the topic.  Palin has a right to say them and she may even have an interesting point or two.  What I want to comment on is how she is now the darling of the conservative movement.

Up until Palin was picked as McCain's running mate, Ann Coulter was the darling of the conservatives.  Her abrasive attack dog style wowed her popularity base.  Too bad they often missed her lies because so many loved her sentiment (and probably her physical appearance as well.)  One thing I've always believed about her was that she was mean.  She made it very personal when she attacked someone.  The only time I saw justice was when she was called out on her ignorance and tendency to overstate things.  Below is a great video of her and Al Frankin in a conversation at the Connecticut Forum.   Her expression right after Frankin mentions the holocaust shows she knew she lost the moment.



Palin took Coulter's crown as the Queen of the GOP.  Her influence is much different.  She is not as openly abrasive or caustic as Coulter.  Her mean edge is veiled under a good ol' girl "ah-shucks" persona.  Coulter tried to carry an intellectual persona while Palin mocks intellectual thought.

Leila3 052010

I believe Palin is more dangerous because of her two-sided push.  She not only attacks liberals on their progressive agenda, but also on their intellect.  Her message basically is, "They think they are smarter than us, but they don't understand us real Americans."  This scares me because she is fueling a class war based on intellect.  Scary stuff.

There is one good thing about Palin's growing celebrity.  She is getting so much exposure as a commentator, pundit, and "expert."  Palin is sharing her opinions on everything, including the melding of conservatism and feminism.  With all of this stuff being recorded, she is killing her chances of running for President due to all the contradictory statements she has made.  She will be buried in a debate when any opponent can dig up evidence of her ignorant contradictions to her own statements.  By becoming the conservative darling and reaping the rewards of her celebrity, she probably killed her chances for high-level public office in the future.

Part 2

I've read Dr. L's, Stephen's, Z's and many others opinions about defining pornography.  I've written a bit about it myself sharing that I've created stuff I might even label as porn.   One thing that pisses me off though, why do ignorant people get to define my intent of my images and what I like?

I am tired of the conservative side getting to frame the issues and the progressives always being on the defensive.  Fuck, I thought we decisively won the last election, but we sure don't act like it.

Leila 3b - 052010

There have only been two times since the new administration came in that I felt the progressives framed the issues.  Pelosi and Obama took charge and framed the issue in the last months of the health care legislation battle and got the thing passed.  It is not a perfect piece of legislation, but much better than the prior systems.  The second was when progressive lawmakers made banking officials and conservatives squirm during the recent financial reform battles.  Thanks to the shenanigans of Goldman Sachs, AIG, and other big institutions, they made it even easier to point out the need for more discipline.  As a lady on the bus told me yesterday, "Any game, whether football, life, or the banks, needs lines to set the boundaries and referees to keep an eye on the game.  Without them, it would stop being an organized system and go into chaos."

It is time we frame the argument.  Instead of defending our art, culture, and lives, why don't we ask the Palins/Coulters, "Why are you ashamed of your bodies?  Why should we be ashamed of enjoying and seeking sex?  Why are you ruining it for everyone?  What are you trying to teach your children?  Sex is the devil's toy??  Does all that moral teaching of the dangers of sex work?"



On NPR, I heard a story that blue states tend to have people getting married at an older age (late twenties and older), having children at an older age, and staying married longer and in higher numbers than red states.  (Please listen to the story) Red states tend to socialize their children that sex is bad and avoid giving realistic education in general, and sex especially, to them.  That is part of the reason young adults in red states tend to get pregnant much younger (under 25), getting married before they have defined who they are as adults, and then divorcing when they discover they married the wrong person for the wrong reasons.  I wont even get into how many of these divorces are caused by people who got married too young and finally accepted they were gay as they grew older.  I wonder if Bristol Palin would have learned something living in a blue state?

How can the red states defend this track record of crappy "family values" of unwed mothers, early marriage and divorces?  The blue states are the ones truly supporting family values by educating their kids better in both sex and all other subjects, teaching them to enjoy life, be careful, find out who you are, establish yourself as an adult and then maybe get married and have kids.  Who cares if your spouse is the same sex or not.  At least you are more likely to stay together.

I offer up this deal to all of Palin's  uptight followers.  I promise I will not judge your plain vanilla, under-the- blankets, in-the-dark, without-foreplay sex if you don't judge my sexual interests, fetishes, kinks, and practices either.  The funny thing is though, I know most of you do the same "dirty" things too.  The difference is I enjoy mine without guilt.  Can you say the same thing?

Leila and Hanna - Triptych of the same image 052010

Now, a note on a few risque photos.  Some may define them as porn, but I put them here for both artistic and prurient pleasures.  I am not ashamed of enjoying such images in both artistic and erotic ways.  Why should I be, Ann and (resigned) Gov. Palin?

NOTE - On Leila3b, a enlargement of Leila3, I love the four or so pubic hairs that are rebelling out of the top of her panties.  It brings back memories of the rich posts from last year cherishing the beauty of pubic hair.  It is damn sexy.

Others' words.

I am enjoying a clear morning break after days of rain and gray.  I love the dark days and the rain, but the sunny Berkeley morning is nice too.

My friend Valya posted one of our harsh photos on her blog and wrote a great bit of prose that summarizes our work.  I highly recommend you visit her blog.  Her work can be soft and sensual or rough with jagged sharp edges, and everything in between.  Her words are important and used sparingly to keep from overstating the point.  One of my goals is to work with her again in the next year.  She is a true artist.


Alex wrote a powerful post on erotic imagery, pornography, and a potentially new form of racism.  I guess one purpose of art is to push boundaries and expose truths in society.  Too bad some of those truths still live.

Gluttony of Visuals - Conference Presentations

Vintage Berkeley

On the Friday night of the conference, I listened to Robbert Flick talk about Looking at Then and Now. He talked about two themes of current photography and his art, the difference between photography in the 70's and now, and how he uses the ideas of time/temporal themes as well as geographical distance in his photo compilations. For today's post, I will expand on the first point.

There are over 10 billion (10,000,000,000!) images on the internet. The population of the world is around 6.8 billion. That is 1.4 photos for every person. I am probably responsible for a few hundred of them.

Flick mentioned this number to make a point. With the over saturation of images by anybody with a camera, the meaning of each image is diminished. It is like how Christmas carols lose their specialness since every year another performer has to give their special rendition to the songs. I sometimes think this is also true about pornography. The first time I saw it, I felt shocked, aroused, squeamish, and many other emotions. Now I don't really notice it because of the flood of it around me. Sometimes seeing images of people clothed feels like the rarity.

Prior to the internet, our only opportunities to view photos (other than the photos we took) was in magazines, books, and galleries. The only photos we touched were our own taken by us or a family member. Almost no one had a dark room so it was very rare to actually create, manipulate and edit the print into the desired final product. Those days are gone.

I can get a good digital camera for under $500 and be able to manage the images on a multi-use tool (the computer). I can use Photoshop Elements (about $100) to greatly manipulate and edit the image. After I get it to where I want it, I can publish it in my own book, prints, blog, Flickr, and multiple other venues instantly. It is very easy to be prolific with imagery. (The notable exception though is the art gallery. It is still a pain in the butt to get into those.)

It has always been stated that everyone has a great photo in them, but great photographers are able to create a body of excellence. With that said, some of these images in a master's body of work become iconic while others fade away. If I mention Pepper Number 30 by Edward Weston or Piss Christ by Andres Serrano, we can probably visualize them. Has this ability to create important single images been taken away by the gluttony of photos?

Sprout

With this gluttony of the visual stills (and home videos), our individual photos lose their individual power. Robert Frank took over 28,000 images for his series, The Americans. He chose 88 of those images for his final cut. In our current world, we would be tempted to post most or all of these images online and flood the market even more.

Maybe it is time to look at the single image as just a part of the grander single portfolio. With this view, we can have each image transfer a bit of conceptual richness to a greater whole of the series. Maybe we have been struggling too hard making each photo contain deep conceptual context to avoid didactic messages. If I create fifty didactic images of various aspects of a theme, together they can be taken and discussed as a whole, refined product. The message of the sum of the images is greater than the whole.

Maybe we are getting to a point where a single image is not enough. We need to incorporate subtlety in communication throughout the span of many works. This though could increase the gluttony of images around us instead of creating the rare gems.

The Appeal of Sapphos and Threesomes

Just Two
Photo by SB

In Stephen Hayne's blog, Magic Flute Nudes, he asked what the appeal of lesbian erotic photos is for heterosexual males. I wrote a brief summary of some of the psychological theories I found through a quick internet search on the topic. Here is what I wrote.

Let me dust off my 20 year old psychology degree and try to find a theory about why guys like lesbian erotica. I did a quick internet search for theories on this. Here is a stab at it.

When a guy sees erotic photos of a man and a woman, they can feel intimidated by having a man there. This guy in the photo is competition. It is difficult to feel a part of the scene with another guy there. Only when the photos are closeups and hardcore can most men disassociate the guy and put their own feelings, presence and desires into the photo.

If the photo is of two women, the sense of competition is reduced or eliminated because of a misogynistic impulse to think, "All those women need is a real man, and that is me." The lesbians I know definitely disagree that is "what they need."

This is one of theories I found. There were others though centering on the idea of 3-somes and also being dominated by two women.

I need to think on my own feelings concerning these types of images, since I have made some myself. Maybe that could be a future post.

Good questions. Good photo. Good post.

I believe there are subtle variations and combinations of reasons that are more applicable for an individual's desires. As for mine, they have evolved.

From the beginning of my viewing of erotic, pornographic, artistic, implied lesbian erotica, I found them very arousing. I love looking at the feminine physique and seeing two women together in a sexual presentation was even better. If the content was video, the sounds and movements were even more enticing and arousing. The content did not have to be explicit to make me appreciate it.

A few years back, I enjoyed photographing Leila and Hana together. Their genuine affection for each other made the moment feel real and not so scripted. During the photo shoot, I did not feel like a voyeur since I had a participatory role in it. My role was behind the camera and capturing the event and adding direction as needed. I wasn't just a viewer. Was I aroused during the shoot? Not really. Later that night though I did have some very sensual dreams.

Not long ago, my views of lesbian erotica greatly changed due to a very personal issue between my wife and myself. I am still uncomfortable writing out the full issue here, but if you go through my entire blog you will see I've softly touched on it a number of times and you can get the idea of what happened. Because of this I am torn between being aroused seeing the images, but also feeling emotionally hurt by them.

As I mentioned in the theory comment I put on Stephen's post;

If the photo is of two women, the sense of competition is reduced or eliminated because of a misogynistic impulse to think, "All those women need is a real man, and that is me." The lesbians I know definitely disagree that is "what they need."

This is very true. I recently saw an interesting scene from Showtime's The L Word. A homophobic and deep-in-the-closet older police officer has pulled over one of the main male characters who caught his girlfriend with her lesbian lover. The cop asks why he was speeding and the upset boyfriend tells him the story. The cop offers this.

Sammy is the cop, Tim is the boyfriend in the script.

Sammy: You ever watch pornography?
Tim: Um...
Sammy: You don't have to answer that. We all do. You know, we spend our whole lives watchin' porn. We never see the warning. There it is. You know that scene, where, uh, two women are gettin' it on? Guy comes in, he's all hard, y'know, he's gonna give it to 'em, he's gonna fuck 'em good. We think that's what those chicks want. The meat. That's not it. They're having a good time without him. They're going down on each other, you know, they're, uh... they're up in there, they're licking everything, a guy comes in, he's ready to unload... that's not what they want. They got their eyes squinted up, like, uh... someone's gonna pour gasoline on 'em. There's your warning. (stands up) That's why this country's homosexuals... are so dangerous. (leans back down) When you got two people... they got the same equipment... and they both know how to treat it... how could anybody of the opposite sex compete with that? That's how they get ya. (a beat) You, uh... try to drive the speed limit, okay?
Tim: (a beat) (nods) I will.

I don't agree with Sammy's pessimism or defensive attitudes against homosexual sex as being "so dangerous." The male fantasy to join two lesbians and believing, "..all they need is a real man." is dishonest and false. I don't think there is a part for a third in a threesome or between two lesbians that don't need a man. They are together for each other and a man will not make it complete. I doubt a woman would have much success joining two gay male lovers in the same circumstances either.

A few of my friends have tried the different combinations of threesomes. MMF, FFM, FFF, and MMM. All of them said it was at best a failed experiment and at worst, an end of a relationship. If you throw in the factor of love and someone feeling left out and jealous, then mutually rewarding and beautiful threesomes are only a myth of the porn industry.

For better or worse, the appeal of lesbian erotica and threesomes has greatly diminished or evaporated completely for me. I encourage photographers to photograph these scenes, but I am not sure if I will. I still like looking at the pictures though, but the erotic personal connection to them is both arousing and hurting.


Personal note. This is not a well-argued point. I am just trying to figure out how I feel about this topic. As we all know... feelings and logic are not friends.

PHOTO NOTE. I scanned this on my dusty old scanner. Sorry for the millions of dust spots. I tried to get rid of as many of them as I could.

Thanks Stephen Haynes...

http://www.modelmayhem.com/sidebphotography
Me and the book
Note - I am trying to redact (cover up) her tush with my hand, hoping this photo does not fall under 2257)

Look what came in the mail last night. I finally got Stephen's book and started reading it on the bus to and from work. I will get my early review of it out of the way first. I have read about half of it and here are some of my thoughts.

I work in a highly-regulated industry (big pharma) and have read my fair share of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFRs). They are dry, boring, dense, confusing, and too often vague. Stephen's book helps make the CFRs concerning nude photography (2257 and other numbers) understandable. His interpretations are down-to-earth and well thought out. As a small time photographer of nudes (very different than a nude photographer... I doubt too many models would like to see a nude guy behind the camera) I need this book and highly recommend it.

Here are my first impressions of 2257. Stephen, as well as a friend of mine who is in the UC Berkeley school of law summarized one aspect of 2257 well. It is a "chiller." It will chill the enthusiasm of the photographer since the burden of documentation is so high. Most will abandon the daunting project of CYA in terms of this law.

So, how compliant am I with 2257? After reading a bit of the book, I would say I am ok, but not bullet proof. The problem is that saying I am sort of protected is like saying I am sort of pregnant. I definitely need to get some things better organized and controlled. I am comforted to know that I have the basic model information documented and saved.



My big question to everyone is, "how do you fight it?" I can tell my progressive friends about it and they will agree that it is censorship and join the cause. The hard part is to make a logical, factual, and convincing argument to the fence-sitters and even the proponents of this piece of crap regulation.

How do you answer the statement and question, "This protects kids from being exploited into making child pornography. Are you for lessening their protection?" How do you logically (and succinctly since the fundamentalist mentals who support this love sound bytes) rebut this and go on the offensive?

Seriously, does anyone have suggestions for talking points when presenting this topic? I can always talk about my experiences, but I want to go beyond that and have a strong argument against this censorship law.

The Nature of the Beast

 Menage a...

Last night I wrote a long post about the rights of the models and the subjects of photos.  I was in a pretty defensive mood and felt undervalued as a photographer when I wrote it.  This morning I was very enthused to see Dr. L had left two great comments.  Both were very enlightening.

When I look at glamor and celebrity (not paparazzi) photography, I know the purposes of the images are about the person and/or what they are wearing.  The photographer is usually the silent partner in the final image and is rarely given credit to the photographer.  The reader of the magazine turns the page or the driver passes the billboard never knowing, needing to know, or caring about who took that photo.  Any photographer in that line of work knows their name will not be known outside the industry, but will be known inside by the media companies, models, and other photographers.  That is the nature of the beast of glam/fashion/celebrity photography. 

On rare occasions, media companies will hire big named photographers like Annie Leibovitz, Richard Avedon  or Dan Winters to create fashion and/or celebrity images.  In those instances, it is the media company's desire to leverage the names of the products, celebrities and photographer.  If they can hire all that talent, it would be foolish not to use all the names.  It is the nature of that beast.

When art models work with photographers, the balance is very complicated.  I've been blessed to work with Candace Nirvana and Leila Swan.  They are two very different models.  Candace's work celebrates the beauty and subtle eroticism of the female form.  Leila's work has a much more explicit erotic touch.  It is what makes them unique in their industry.

Both Candace and Leila have much bigger names in the industry than I do and I felt honored by their modeling for me.  In both cases I payed them a fair fee which I was happy to do.  I knew I was working with professionals that would work hard with me to create the best we could together.  They both also had more to lose if I took lousy images of them.  As you can guess, I do have a few bad images of them.  The lighting and composition was poor, they were just about to sneeze and their eyes were half closed, or a range of other mishaps occurred in that moment.  I deleted them because it would hurt all of our reputations if I let them out.  Since they are better known and searched for more often, they have more to lose.  Along those lines, I always give the models I work with digital copies of our work for their own promotional needs.  Since I am a small fish, their name helps build my reputation.

If my last name was Weston and I came from that great lineage, I would probably have the recognized name.  I would need to make sure every image I put out in my name was as good or better than my previous work.  So much of my business and reputation relies on keeping the name, the brand, and the quality up.  I am sure many models would want to work for me due to these high standards and to help beef up their resumes and portfolios.  In those cases  I would allow them to use the images for self-promotion, but would need to keep a tight control on other uses of the image.  It is already too easy to steal others' work on the internet.

This balance of model and photographer name value needs to be considered to protect both parties.  Even though I am a artistic nude neophyte, I need to protect my reputation.  I hope the models I work with will respect that and also protect theirs as well.  That is why I would never sleep with a model or break comfort boundaries when working with them.  We may want to push the boundaries a little to see what edge we can create, but in a safe environment.  I admit that I can get aroused during a session, but I also get deeply engrossed in the moment, the light and the image.  It all has to balance out for the art.

Sadly though too many amateur photographers out there are GWCs, guys with cameras.  They are there to get "hot pics of smokin' babes."  I admit that I like the voyeuristic feel of being behind a camera, but my intent goes a bit further.  Too bad though so many gwc's are fucking it up for us decent amateur photographers, but I guess that is the nature of the beast.

While reading Dr. L and Alex's post I was trying to find another professional relationship to compare it to.  One I can think of is the relationship of the chef and the wait staff.  The chef is the artist creating the culinary marvels.  The challenge though is to create the marvels the customers want and that they feel they want to make.  The wait staff is the special liason between the customers and the chef.  The customers do not get to see the chef or talk to her since that is the job of the waiter.  The waiter though must be skilled in knowing the food, what to suggest for the varying palettes, pairing everything with the right wine, and ensuring the flow of the kitchen to the table is paced perfectly.  Both are crucial to making the dinner perfect through a deep symbiotic relationship.  The chef gets the notoriety and the waiter gets the tips.  Neither really expect to receive the others' rewards.    It is the nature of that beast.

I am not sure if the photographer is the waiter or the chef as with the model.  Maybe they are not completely analogous, but I like the example since it shows the true symbiotic relationship for success.  The rewards for both are very different, but that is nature of the beast.

I have not had the privilege to be requested by an art model to photograph their concept and then work with them directing the session.  I was asked by one model to photograph her nude while she held animal entrails.  She wanted to make a statement about pornography and being a piece of meat.  Sadly though she had a family tragedy that took her out of the area and we never got past the concept stage.

In that type of relationship between model and photographer, I would probably download my images to her computer, sign a contract, take my fee and hope she sends me some samples of our work.  In my mind she would own the copyright to those images.  Sadly though, this is a beast that has no nature because I doubt I will have that opportunity again.

In the end, all of these relationships have been defined by the nature of the beasts we work with.  Usually one of the participants, the photographer, model or agency, has the power and leverage.  While we may try to protect ourselves and our name, we can't control it all.  The best we can hope for is that all parties communicate their needs and desires up front and then respect each other after the moment is over.


PS - Tomorrow we are in for a special treat as a surprise guest to this blog answers the questionnaire.  I feel it is a major coup to introduce this fine person...