Erotic art takes on a different tone as the absence of personality focuses one’s attention
Here we are already in February and I have yet to shoot a new frame with my camera. Yes, I’ve taken some snapshots with my phone, but I consider them more pedestrian, capturing a moment for memory or a concept for later development. In previous years, I’d be chomping at the bit to shoot but this year is different. First, I came into the new year with a four-week backlog of images. That hasn’t happened before and, to be honest, it was a relief as I didn’t have to try and create content at a time of the year when no one seems in the mood to shoot.
Just as important, though, without having new images to parse and process, I’ve had time to experiment, try new techniques and throw away what I didn’t like, keeping what I did, and then trying something different again. This week’s images are the result of that experimentation. When I was creating a header image for the front page of this website, I developed a composite process that I found interesting and immediately wanted to explore more. This is the kind of maybe-it-will-maybe-it-won’t experimentation that I’m reluctant to impose on a new set of images. Archived photos that were previously undeveloped are more appropriate.
However, working with archived images can present a problem as people who posed two or three years ago aren’t exactly expecting pictures of them to come popping up on the internet this morning. My resolution to that issue was to keep everything anonymous. Anonymous work doesn’t always play as well as we’d like but in this instance, it is perfect as the concept would be diminished by a full image with an individual personality.
What you see below are the ones that survived. I learned a lot about where this particular set of processes works and where it doesn’t. This needs to be a carefully selected group of photos where focus can be limited to a specific portion of the photograph, the not content of the entire image. Even with that focus, not everything worked. It’s also worth mentioning that this process takes about five times the effort of a normal photograph. A good day was finishing two images.
Be aware that I ramped up the eroticism on this set. That’s partly because it serves the concept well and partly because we’ve been a bit soft on that portion of the genre the past couple of years. My goal is to be less reticent in displaying what is real and genuinely beautiful in its own right. Still, this is NSFW and I would think twice before viewing them with children in the room.
As always, click on any of the thumbnails below to view the full set.
[tg_masonry_gallery gallery_id=”16659″ layout=”wide” columns=”3″]
Censorship Violates Human Dignity
You already know this is going to be NSFW.
Candace Ownes, the token GOP black female, wants pornography to be banned. Never mind that the Supreme Court has said it can’t be banned, only limited. Ms. Owens isn’t that bright and probably can’t even name the late Hustler publisher who damn near died fighting against censorship (Larry Flynt, for those of you under 50). Don’t worry, Cardi B. is calling her out.
Louisiana Governor Jeff Landry signed a bill potentially making it illegal for legitimate news outlets to cover instances of police brutality. The American Civil Liberties Union is already planning to file suit by the end of the week.
And in Texas, a judge finally dismissed charges against a so-called “journalist” who was allegedly “arrested, strip-searched, and jailed for filming police.” Why was he held? Because there’s no real publication behind him. He’s only a journalist on his own YouTube channel.
These are all examples of censorship. And no, they’re not even close to being at the top of the list. Consider these headlines:
The list of censorship in the media is neverending. Why? Because it’s titillating. Everyone clocks to see what’s going on, who wore what, who did what, who went where, and just how much can be seen. These so-called “news” outlets have us pretending to care about the lives of people just because their names show up in the media on occasion. Is it any of our business what they wear? No. Do we have any right to judge them for what they do? Only if it’s illegal and even then, we may want to take a step back first.
Religious fanatics have convinced us that we have to judge our fellow human in order to avoid being “sinfully influenced” by them. After all, if we see that someone else enjoys having a butt plug shoved up their ass, then you might want to give it a try as well.
And where are all these better-than-you media outlets coming from? Losers that can’t get jobs as real journalists at real news outlets. It’s rather easy, actually. I can toss up a web page or a YouTube profile, call myself a reporter, print my own press pass (because I know how), and walk around getting myself into trouble pretending to be something I’m not. If my website has the word “news” in it, then a lot of people think that I can hide behind the First Amendment and say anything about anyone that I damn well please.
Censorship has become such a large part of our lives, that many people have started referring to it simply as “editing.”
This time is past due for censorship of our lives to stop. And to make my point, please enjoy this totally 18+ NSFW 20-second video that definitely includes nudity and you shouldn’t watch if it’s illegal in your state. That’s on you.
And if you want to judge me for making a video like this, fuck you. I refuse to be censored by anyone other than myself (and I even have arguments with myself about that).
Share this:
Like this: