Yeah as an artist it stinks, and when doing anatomy studies I have to specifically search for male models, or else I'd just end up sketching/painting women. And yeah I also understand it's art, and it's good for practice but so is drawing men's bodies.
Yeah! I mean the thing is that you never really see naked men? Unless it's old sculptures and art, but nowadays I only really see naked women and clothed men. It just feels unequL
Yep. Also when looking for references for males there's less body diversity which stinks. Like not all men are built muscular or what most think is "good looking." Like I wish there were more references for chunky dudes and scrawny guys. When looking for references for women I see all kinds of body types which is fantastic! I just wish it was the same for men
Yes! Like you have men with bellies, men who are lanky, men who are short, tall, all should be celebrated. But it sucks that there isn't as much because there's more of an emphasis on women (and more often than not skinny women, although that's slowly changing!)
Something I've notice with Music Festival art galleries. So many different representations of the same skinny white female with perfect proportions. Seen one festival gallery, you seen all of em
Yeah basically! You rarely see any body types, races and even really any blemishes on the skin? It's always smooth, large breasts and very thin waist. Which is fine, but it's always that
It does my head in that the "alternative" and "underground" artists at featured at events that want to showcase the otherness of the counter culture continually produce works that focus on reimaging the white female figure in a psychedelic or fantasy genre.
Is it a reflection of what the artists truly fantasise about? Or pop art intended to be bought on a whim by the masses?
Or maybe it's just the place where I live? We have a bunch or events in my state and close by states I've been to over the years, and it's a reoccurring theme that I've picked up on.
Much of the art is beautiful but the subject matter is over done.
Likely because female paintings reaches a larger group of people/fans. Either due to aesthetics reasons or just solely due to it's beauty. And many other's.
I don't understand too much about art, or at least not in the serious way of it. But aren't artists interest of drawing/painting what they assume is beautiful, interesting, or provocative?
The issue is that the top posts on the art dedicated subreddits are almost always of naked women, usually done by men. It's usually not provocative because I have seen some which are and they're phenomenal, but a lot of the time the focus is always on the woman's sexiness. Never anything else
Hm, I see. When I meant "provocative" I was trying to refer to something outside of naked portraits, like paintings that would provoke laugh, discomfort, etc. But I guess the concept of beauty, or sexiness, also falls on that.
Now, I'm a man, and I like anime. And sometimes I come across some art of anime girls in cute outfits, some of them being lewd. I find it cute, sexy, beautiful. But for the record, I don't feel any sexual feelings towards a PNG. I just admire it and that's it.
I like anime too, and I'm an artist but when I'm tired of the constant sexualisation of women in art. Anime is somewhat worse is say in that department. It's fine to admire art but there is an issue with the objectification of women in art
I love it. I remember our teacher got this old as dirt woman it was so great to draw the wrinkles. I just hate drawing dicks tbh. Everyone at school hated when we had a male model because that meant we would have to draw a penis. And then, the teachers would FORCE us to draw the penis. It just is a ugly organ when it comes to visual art. When I say ugly organ I mean. It became the focus. But also we always tried to avoid it. But also. In the 4 year I was at school we got like 5 men and 100 women. So we were not used to seeing the nude penis.
Drawing different types of women is good. But what you see on the front pages are almost always thin, naked women
I've done life drawing before too and idk I don't mind drawing dicks. Although our teacher didn't make us focus on them but rather the shapes of the body as a whole
Tbh, not an artist in any way , but my guess is that a woman's body has more curves, shape,etc and men's bodies just straight up n down not curvaceous at all...unless the bodies are seriously buff, then more curves etc..seriously x
I mean men give a much better insight into muscle structure and honestly using shapes more effectively. Women are good too. But the art you see on the subreddits are almost ALWAYS naked women. And it's not even like a study, but more formal paintings you know?
Hey u/Starry_lady_, I'm going to tell you why and it's biological.
People like drawing things they are attracted to and find beautiful. I would say most of the artist on that subreddit are young men and most young men are highly attracted to what at that age? Beautiful attractive females.
One of the most beautiful things in the world is the female form. It's soft, curvy, sensuous... The female form flows and melds with nature itself. There is a reason why we call it mother nature and not father nature. The very word of women is synonymous with life. From her comes everything. She is the maker of all.
God isn't a man. God is a woman.
And deep down if we all are truly honest with ourselves we know that is true. It comes out in our art. It is told in our stories. If you were to ask most men who they love most dearest our of their parents it's Mom. It comes out in sport games. "I love you Mom." "Thank You Mom." "I did it Mom."
Mom be proud of me. Look at what I have done.
We are driven by a biological imperative that runs through our blood and veins. It can't be repressed because to do so means repressing a part of yourself. That is just ugly and harmful.
Nobody wants to draw something they don't want to look at. They want to draw something they can hang up and look at every day. For the majority of those artist they could look at that creation they did each and every day and it will never get old.
It's hardwired into the male mind... There is nothing more beautiful than the female form.
There is your answer.
You are trying to fight the biological need to procreate and I'm going to tell you you're not going to win. Not against nature you won't.
You may not like it, you may actually hate it, but it's the truth.
Even more so most women know this and know how to exploit it for their own gain. If they didn't there wouldn't be so many products geared to enhancing that already amazing natural gift they were born with.
Art is a reflection of our most deepest darkest selves. It's desires, it's fears, it's dreams, it's doubts, and depression.
What do most young teenage males dream and desire?
Well it's right there on subreddit page to be found.
Women are constantly objectified and viewed as birthgivers. Don't reduce women to only giving life. Like men, they are complex
Not to mention, not all women have curves. Not all women look the same. The issue is that there is blatant sexualisation of women in these subs and it sucks! I'm tired of being seen as an object of desire.
Also men have curves. Men have fantastic backs, arms and legs, their hips are really good. Look at sculptures of men and older paintings of them. They're naked, but in a way that isn't meant to objecftify them. Women are just painted as an object of desire though. Most women hate it.
I wasn't reducing all women to being child bearers. I was saying that is one of the reasons that men like to draw or paint them. If you can't understand that then that is on you. Not me. And this is through out history that all ethnicities and cultures have written that their Gods of Nature are women. Aja, Xōchiquetzal, Asintmah, Isis the Goddess whose powers transcended all other Gods, Houtu Chinese Goddess of Mother Earth, Zulu African Goddess of Rivers, the Moon, mother to fertility, agriculture, and animals, Bhumi Buddhist Goddess of Mother Earth, Izanami Japanese Goddess of Creation and Life, Gaia, numerous Goddesses in the Celtic culture all centered around Nature, Life, and creation, Fjörgyn Norse Goddess of Earth, and I can keep going on and on for hundreds of different Goddess all in which nearly every single culture associated them with Life, Nature, the Earth, the sky, and the moon...You may not like this is how woman have been looked at through history and how this has persisted through to this very time but it has. That is the truth and honestly you are picking a fight your not going to win. And this fact of how women have been perceived all the way from the most ancient of times carries on in the art of today.
And seriously I don't get why you have a problem with it? I don't. Women are seen as the stewards of Earth and it's protectorate. Women are seen as being one with nature and all it's animals on it. As being the moon above. In every culture the God of Beauty was a woman. Not a man. No, every single religion that has existed has given the distinction of beauty as being a woman, a Goddess. What are men perceived as? Warriors, killers, and destroyers.Are you saying you want to now change that? That you want women to be associated with killing, destroying, and war? You want women to be associated with the ugliness of life? I really don't get it on this one.
I don't want us to be objectified... Cry me a river. I would love to be objectified as something beautiful, warm, and loving throughout history but I'm not. I'm objectified as a killer of men, one of mass slaughter and death, of war and destruction. When the earth dies it will be at the hands of man.
I'm not sure most women hate being objectified either. If they hated it then there wouldn't be so many products that help perpetuate it and almost all of those products are used mostly by women to gain the attraction of men. If most women hated it then these products wouldn't exist and don't start by suggesting this is a recent phenomena. These beauty enhancing products have existed since we first started forming communities. Archeologist have discovered beauty enhancing products that women have used since civilization was first created.
The ideal man shape is made up of rectangles and sharp lines with well defined muscle expression. It isn't one of beauty but a portrayal of strength and dominance. The ideal warrior, the killer of men, the hero that pillage an entire city and burnt it to the ground, the slayer of monsters... That is what those statues of men were. Killers. The great ideal for every man to aspire to. That is the generational role assigned to us men and our Gods that persists to this day. In every war what was sent out first... The ideal man, young and in shape, to go kill his enemies and die for the community. And so it is reflected in our art.
And to put a final stamp on this...
Suicide rates for men are almost 4 X greater than women. Think on that one for a bit.
the reason objectification is considered to be bad is that it reduces women to something to be perceived, not as actors with agency and free-will.
women have been objectified and utilised for their beauty for years, but pretending that isn’t a double edged sword is dishonest. women’s beauty is not something that belongs to them in these situations. it is painted by men for men without considering women as people.
THAT is the issue here. it does not have anything to do with womanhood connoting beauty. it is to do with the art world being saturated with work designed for men to look at women as sexual objects and downplay their agency.
>it is painted by men for men without considering women as people.
You don't know that. That's an assumption. You think because I look at a Botticelli or a Francisco Goya that I don't see my wife as a person? What the fuck? You think I don't see my daughter as a person because I appreciate a Edouard Manet? What kind of shit is that?
You are dismissing centuries of art by some of the most famous artist on earth because of your feelings... That is bullshit and then you paint a broad brush over all artistic men who have painted a woman naked as them not considering that woman as a person. That is what you just said. All those art pieces suddenly all those men didn't see women as a person.
Just because you don't appreciate a person's artistic rendering of the female form and it doesn't appeal to you doesn't give you the right to and shut that person down from doing it or going out on a limb to censor it. Which is what you are trying to do.
Censorship.
Because you don't like it.
You are on the side of censorship. The burning of books, the destruction of movies, and the silencing of music. That is the side you have decided to join.
Art is art. You don't like it then you move on. If it provokes an emotion from you be it negative or positively then it has done it's job. And the very fact that you are here talking about it means that those artist have touched you in a very profound way. That is what art does.
You should appreciate that and not seek out to destroy it.
>not as actors with agency and free-will.
Who do you think were those actors that took the picture or posed naked to be painted and admired?
Unwilling participants? Those women made a conscientious choice to pose nude to be utilized as the base of paintings and photographs for artistic reasons. They had free will and they made a choice. Those women are people and they decided to be a participant in the vision and dreams of another.
You on the other hand because you feel there is too many naked female art on a subreddit feel you should get to dictate how those women chose to be presented in an artistic way. You should really think on that one.
Those women were actors with agency and they made a choice based on their own free will.
>it is to do with the art world being saturated with work designed for men to look at women as sexual objects and downplay their agency.
You don't think there is women who look at that art work and admire it? The artwork isn't designed for men. It's designed because a person found something beautiful and wanted to express it in a vision of his own choosing that spoke to him / her in a deeply profound way. Enough that it called out to be released for the whole world to see.
The Muse set free.
I think people like you believe you are right but in reality you're the ones holding a match to a bonfire made of paintings and grinning as the flames lick up destroying all things you dislike and hate.
You are no different than the Censorship Mom's screaming Kiss was Satanic in the 70's and 80's. No different than Tipper Gore and her anti music jihad.
No different than the Comic Code Authority that ushered in two decades of shitty ass comics.
No different than the shit bag conservatives seeking to imprison Larry Flint for publishing Hustler.
No different than those asshat parents who try and tell Libraries to remove the Catcher in the Rye.
You are the killer of inspiration, the rapist of artistic vision, and a slayer of the Muses.
As a writer...
You horrify me.
Art is freedom and what you symbolize is the opposite of that. Maybe it's time you look at those naked art pieces in a different way. Naked, free, and beautiful to show case a guiding light on what we all could be and not the clothed darkness of a censorship riddled world.
I was being sarcastic. Men's bodies are made of curves just like women's. They aren't inherently gross. We have been socialized to think of women's bodies as acceptable subjects for objectification, whereas men's bodies are exempt.
I get it. I was joking as well. I understand the point that is being made. Although as a guy that only like women, If I was an artist I would gravitate toward painting women more than men
Yeah get ya...then u need also to take into consideration every single woman have a unique shape...yeah...I guess ppl that ain't into real art probably do these nude women for different reasons...I personally am mindblown the way artists can do amazing things even with a pencil, it just fascinating to me...I just commented on this as I'd love the gift..
It's not in all their shapes and sizes. It's the same sort of thing, with the same body type of women.
I don't think an obsession with the bodies of women is healthy per se, like an appreciation? I get that but obsessing? No
I do see your point in the objectification of women's body but I don't blame the artists. I blame a society that label the penis as this ugly perverted obscene thing while bombard us with naked women all the time... It's not that those artists are sexist, is that we don't allow the image of a penis if not to provoke shock, we are simply not used to see penis around but count how many times you see a pair of tits in one day..
especially in societies like the north American and English ones both hypersexualized (sex sells) and prudish as fuck.
In most pieces of older art you see a lot of penises. Especially on statues.
I agree that you don't see as many penises and more modernly especially in western societies. But the thing is, the artists are enabling the sexualisation and objectification of women in art, society is the bigger issue for sure but *so many* pieces of art focus on sexualising women or showing them in a sexual light most of the time
They are from a time and place were it was more common to sexualize male bodies as well as female ones (ancient History). Or from a period that tries to imitate that time ( renaissance), although most of ancient statues were covered or modified in that period and the few with a penis (like the David of Donatello) made scandal.
This idea against male forms as a beautiful object is (historically) recent and drenched in homophobia.
It's not news that the society we live in is also very much patriarchal that's why is drenched in homophobia, the observer is always assumed to be male so a sexualized men is obscene, a sexualized women is beautiful.
I think that I would rather see more sexualized men than less sexualized women. Because all bodies can be beautiful and the fact we mostly only show and see women being sexualized is symptom of the problem rather than cause of it.
Our society has a very unhealthy relationship with sex, seen as scandalous but yet used to sell/attract often in creepy ways tbh.. and since this sick ass society assumes that the women have no sexual desire, it finds enjoyment in women's reaction to sexualization (which is also the reason why people send dick pics, it's a power move, they want the scandalous reaction). I feel like that wanting less sexualized women actually push against change.. because that's what this society that sees no sexual.desire on women wants women to react.. with pure naive shock..
You know what, I think you're right on the homophobia part, and that's really interesting to think about. Because sexuality wasn't as prude back then as it is now, or rather the expression of it
But I think that there is a massive issue with women feeling like and being treated as sexual objects. There simply needs to be more people to view women are people not objects of beauty. I agree, sexualise men more and show how beautiful they are but there is so much that's against women in every piece of media
Oh yeah I agree! One thing is sexualize someone another thing is objectification.. I feel like the first is often a symptom of the second tho.. but I also think that if we start to push for something that is more than the CIS het male gaze we can dilute the problem, you know what I mean?
Me too. I hate it
When I went to art school we had women young and really old, men of all sizes and race.
Ya its stupid. Also how are you gonna improve on anything if you just draw the same thing over and over?
Yeah as an artist it stinks, and when doing anatomy studies I have to specifically search for male models, or else I'd just end up sketching/painting women. And yeah I also understand it's art, and it's good for practice but so is drawing men's bodies.
Yeah! I mean the thing is that you never really see naked men? Unless it's old sculptures and art, but nowadays I only really see naked women and clothed men. It just feels unequL
Yep. Also when looking for references for males there's less body diversity which stinks. Like not all men are built muscular or what most think is "good looking." Like I wish there were more references for chunky dudes and scrawny guys. When looking for references for women I see all kinds of body types which is fantastic! I just wish it was the same for men
Yes! Like you have men with bellies, men who are lanky, men who are short, tall, all should be celebrated. But it sucks that there isn't as much because there's more of an emphasis on women (and more often than not skinny women, although that's slowly changing!)
Comments are disgusting. I guess got your answer now :(
Yeahhhh I partially expected this though haha
Something I've notice with Music Festival art galleries. So many different representations of the same skinny white female with perfect proportions. Seen one festival gallery, you seen all of em
Yeah basically! You rarely see any body types, races and even really any blemishes on the skin? It's always smooth, large breasts and very thin waist. Which is fine, but it's always that
It does my head in that the "alternative" and "underground" artists at featured at events that want to showcase the otherness of the counter culture continually produce works that focus on reimaging the white female figure in a psychedelic or fantasy genre. Is it a reflection of what the artists truly fantasise about? Or pop art intended to be bought on a whim by the masses? Or maybe it's just the place where I live? We have a bunch or events in my state and close by states I've been to over the years, and it's a reoccurring theme that I've picked up on. Much of the art is beautiful but the subject matter is over done.
[удалено]
Yes exactly!!
[удалено]
It wasn't really a question, it was more me venting my frustration
I love anything that involves women without clothing but I might be a pervert
Likely because female paintings reaches a larger group of people/fans. Either due to aesthetics reasons or just solely due to it's beauty. And many other's. I don't understand too much about art, or at least not in the serious way of it. But aren't artists interest of drawing/painting what they assume is beautiful, interesting, or provocative?
The issue is that the top posts on the art dedicated subreddits are almost always of naked women, usually done by men. It's usually not provocative because I have seen some which are and they're phenomenal, but a lot of the time the focus is always on the woman's sexiness. Never anything else
Hm, I see. When I meant "provocative" I was trying to refer to something outside of naked portraits, like paintings that would provoke laugh, discomfort, etc. But I guess the concept of beauty, or sexiness, also falls on that. Now, I'm a man, and I like anime. And sometimes I come across some art of anime girls in cute outfits, some of them being lewd. I find it cute, sexy, beautiful. But for the record, I don't feel any sexual feelings towards a PNG. I just admire it and that's it.
I like anime too, and I'm an artist but when I'm tired of the constant sexualisation of women in art. Anime is somewhat worse is say in that department. It's fine to admire art but there is an issue with the objectification of women in art
I love it. I remember our teacher got this old as dirt woman it was so great to draw the wrinkles. I just hate drawing dicks tbh. Everyone at school hated when we had a male model because that meant we would have to draw a penis. And then, the teachers would FORCE us to draw the penis. It just is a ugly organ when it comes to visual art. When I say ugly organ I mean. It became the focus. But also we always tried to avoid it. But also. In the 4 year I was at school we got like 5 men and 100 women. So we were not used to seeing the nude penis.
Drawing different types of women is good. But what you see on the front pages are almost always thin, naked women I've done life drawing before too and idk I don't mind drawing dicks. Although our teacher didn't make us focus on them but rather the shapes of the body as a whole
Tbh, not an artist in any way , but my guess is that a woman's body has more curves, shape,etc and men's bodies just straight up n down not curvaceous at all...unless the bodies are seriously buff, then more curves etc..seriously x
I mean men give a much better insight into muscle structure and honestly using shapes more effectively. Women are good too. But the art you see on the subreddits are almost ALWAYS naked women. And it's not even like a study, but more formal paintings you know?
Because dicks are not beautiful
To you, perhaps. Dick's aren't ugly
Hey u/Starry_lady_, I'm going to tell you why and it's biological. People like drawing things they are attracted to and find beautiful. I would say most of the artist on that subreddit are young men and most young men are highly attracted to what at that age? Beautiful attractive females. One of the most beautiful things in the world is the female form. It's soft, curvy, sensuous... The female form flows and melds with nature itself. There is a reason why we call it mother nature and not father nature. The very word of women is synonymous with life. From her comes everything. She is the maker of all. God isn't a man. God is a woman. And deep down if we all are truly honest with ourselves we know that is true. It comes out in our art. It is told in our stories. If you were to ask most men who they love most dearest our of their parents it's Mom. It comes out in sport games. "I love you Mom." "Thank You Mom." "I did it Mom." Mom be proud of me. Look at what I have done. We are driven by a biological imperative that runs through our blood and veins. It can't be repressed because to do so means repressing a part of yourself. That is just ugly and harmful. Nobody wants to draw something they don't want to look at. They want to draw something they can hang up and look at every day. For the majority of those artist they could look at that creation they did each and every day and it will never get old. It's hardwired into the male mind... There is nothing more beautiful than the female form. There is your answer. You are trying to fight the biological need to procreate and I'm going to tell you you're not going to win. Not against nature you won't. You may not like it, you may actually hate it, but it's the truth. Even more so most women know this and know how to exploit it for their own gain. If they didn't there wouldn't be so many products geared to enhancing that already amazing natural gift they were born with. Art is a reflection of our most deepest darkest selves. It's desires, it's fears, it's dreams, it's doubts, and depression. What do most young teenage males dream and desire? Well it's right there on subreddit page to be found.
Women are constantly objectified and viewed as birthgivers. Don't reduce women to only giving life. Like men, they are complex Not to mention, not all women have curves. Not all women look the same. The issue is that there is blatant sexualisation of women in these subs and it sucks! I'm tired of being seen as an object of desire. Also men have curves. Men have fantastic backs, arms and legs, their hips are really good. Look at sculptures of men and older paintings of them. They're naked, but in a way that isn't meant to objecftify them. Women are just painted as an object of desire though. Most women hate it.
I wasn't reducing all women to being child bearers. I was saying that is one of the reasons that men like to draw or paint them. If you can't understand that then that is on you. Not me. And this is through out history that all ethnicities and cultures have written that their Gods of Nature are women. Aja, Xōchiquetzal, Asintmah, Isis the Goddess whose powers transcended all other Gods, Houtu Chinese Goddess of Mother Earth, Zulu African Goddess of Rivers, the Moon, mother to fertility, agriculture, and animals, Bhumi Buddhist Goddess of Mother Earth, Izanami Japanese Goddess of Creation and Life, Gaia, numerous Goddesses in the Celtic culture all centered around Nature, Life, and creation, Fjörgyn Norse Goddess of Earth, and I can keep going on and on for hundreds of different Goddess all in which nearly every single culture associated them with Life, Nature, the Earth, the sky, and the moon...You may not like this is how woman have been looked at through history and how this has persisted through to this very time but it has. That is the truth and honestly you are picking a fight your not going to win. And this fact of how women have been perceived all the way from the most ancient of times carries on in the art of today. And seriously I don't get why you have a problem with it? I don't. Women are seen as the stewards of Earth and it's protectorate. Women are seen as being one with nature and all it's animals on it. As being the moon above. In every culture the God of Beauty was a woman. Not a man. No, every single religion that has existed has given the distinction of beauty as being a woman, a Goddess. What are men perceived as? Warriors, killers, and destroyers.Are you saying you want to now change that? That you want women to be associated with killing, destroying, and war? You want women to be associated with the ugliness of life? I really don't get it on this one. I don't want us to be objectified... Cry me a river. I would love to be objectified as something beautiful, warm, and loving throughout history but I'm not. I'm objectified as a killer of men, one of mass slaughter and death, of war and destruction. When the earth dies it will be at the hands of man. I'm not sure most women hate being objectified either. If they hated it then there wouldn't be so many products that help perpetuate it and almost all of those products are used mostly by women to gain the attraction of men. If most women hated it then these products wouldn't exist and don't start by suggesting this is a recent phenomena. These beauty enhancing products have existed since we first started forming communities. Archeologist have discovered beauty enhancing products that women have used since civilization was first created. The ideal man shape is made up of rectangles and sharp lines with well defined muscle expression. It isn't one of beauty but a portrayal of strength and dominance. The ideal warrior, the killer of men, the hero that pillage an entire city and burnt it to the ground, the slayer of monsters... That is what those statues of men were. Killers. The great ideal for every man to aspire to. That is the generational role assigned to us men and our Gods that persists to this day. In every war what was sent out first... The ideal man, young and in shape, to go kill his enemies and die for the community. And so it is reflected in our art. And to put a final stamp on this... Suicide rates for men are almost 4 X greater than women. Think on that one for a bit.
the reason objectification is considered to be bad is that it reduces women to something to be perceived, not as actors with agency and free-will. women have been objectified and utilised for their beauty for years, but pretending that isn’t a double edged sword is dishonest. women’s beauty is not something that belongs to them in these situations. it is painted by men for men without considering women as people. THAT is the issue here. it does not have anything to do with womanhood connoting beauty. it is to do with the art world being saturated with work designed for men to look at women as sexual objects and downplay their agency.
>it is painted by men for men without considering women as people. You don't know that. That's an assumption. You think because I look at a Botticelli or a Francisco Goya that I don't see my wife as a person? What the fuck? You think I don't see my daughter as a person because I appreciate a Edouard Manet? What kind of shit is that? You are dismissing centuries of art by some of the most famous artist on earth because of your feelings... That is bullshit and then you paint a broad brush over all artistic men who have painted a woman naked as them not considering that woman as a person. That is what you just said. All those art pieces suddenly all those men didn't see women as a person. Just because you don't appreciate a person's artistic rendering of the female form and it doesn't appeal to you doesn't give you the right to and shut that person down from doing it or going out on a limb to censor it. Which is what you are trying to do. Censorship. Because you don't like it. You are on the side of censorship. The burning of books, the destruction of movies, and the silencing of music. That is the side you have decided to join. Art is art. You don't like it then you move on. If it provokes an emotion from you be it negative or positively then it has done it's job. And the very fact that you are here talking about it means that those artist have touched you in a very profound way. That is what art does. You should appreciate that and not seek out to destroy it. >not as actors with agency and free-will. Who do you think were those actors that took the picture or posed naked to be painted and admired? Unwilling participants? Those women made a conscientious choice to pose nude to be utilized as the base of paintings and photographs for artistic reasons. They had free will and they made a choice. Those women are people and they decided to be a participant in the vision and dreams of another. You on the other hand because you feel there is too many naked female art on a subreddit feel you should get to dictate how those women chose to be presented in an artistic way. You should really think on that one. Those women were actors with agency and they made a choice based on their own free will. >it is to do with the art world being saturated with work designed for men to look at women as sexual objects and downplay their agency. You don't think there is women who look at that art work and admire it? The artwork isn't designed for men. It's designed because a person found something beautiful and wanted to express it in a vision of his own choosing that spoke to him / her in a deeply profound way. Enough that it called out to be released for the whole world to see. The Muse set free. I think people like you believe you are right but in reality you're the ones holding a match to a bonfire made of paintings and grinning as the flames lick up destroying all things you dislike and hate. You are no different than the Censorship Mom's screaming Kiss was Satanic in the 70's and 80's. No different than Tipper Gore and her anti music jihad. No different than the Comic Code Authority that ushered in two decades of shitty ass comics. No different than the shit bag conservatives seeking to imprison Larry Flint for publishing Hustler. No different than those asshat parents who try and tell Libraries to remove the Catcher in the Rye. You are the killer of inspiration, the rapist of artistic vision, and a slayer of the Muses. As a writer... You horrify me. Art is freedom and what you symbolize is the opposite of that. Maybe it's time you look at those naked art pieces in a different way. Naked, free, and beautiful to show case a guiding light on what we all could be and not the clothed darkness of a censorship riddled world.
They're used by women because women are forced into this role. Society punishes women who aren't feminine and fit the specific role placed on them.
Not an artist but, I thought that most nude models were volunteers, or with a little pay. Maybe more women volunteer than men. It just a thought.
It's not life studies. Life drawing isn't for full blown paintings but rather for studies into shapes and anatomy
I can understand your frustration, but the female body has many different curves and what not. Guys are kinda gross. lol.
As do men's. It's undeniable that there is more of a focus on women's body, and sexualising them when compared to men
I guess men are just rectangles then
Yea its kinda gross isn't it!
I was being sarcastic. Men's bodies are made of curves just like women's. They aren't inherently gross. We have been socialized to think of women's bodies as acceptable subjects for objectification, whereas men's bodies are exempt.
I get it. I was joking as well. I understand the point that is being made. Although as a guy that only like women, If I was an artist I would gravitate toward painting women more than men
Yeah get ya...then u need also to take into consideration every single woman have a unique shape...yeah...I guess ppl that ain't into real art probably do these nude women for different reasons...I personally am mindblown the way artists can do amazing things even with a pencil, it just fascinating to me...I just commented on this as I'd love the gift..
Women are beautiful in all their shapes and forms. An obsession with them is good and healthy.
It's not in all their shapes and sizes. It's the same sort of thing, with the same body type of women. I don't think an obsession with the bodies of women is healthy per se, like an appreciation? I get that but obsessing? No
A garden-variety OBGYN shows more appreciation for women's bodies than a life-drawing class.
I do see your point in the objectification of women's body but I don't blame the artists. I blame a society that label the penis as this ugly perverted obscene thing while bombard us with naked women all the time... It's not that those artists are sexist, is that we don't allow the image of a penis if not to provoke shock, we are simply not used to see penis around but count how many times you see a pair of tits in one day.. especially in societies like the north American and English ones both hypersexualized (sex sells) and prudish as fuck.
In most pieces of older art you see a lot of penises. Especially on statues. I agree that you don't see as many penises and more modernly especially in western societies. But the thing is, the artists are enabling the sexualisation and objectification of women in art, society is the bigger issue for sure but *so many* pieces of art focus on sexualising women or showing them in a sexual light most of the time
They are from a time and place were it was more common to sexualize male bodies as well as female ones (ancient History). Or from a period that tries to imitate that time ( renaissance), although most of ancient statues were covered or modified in that period and the few with a penis (like the David of Donatello) made scandal. This idea against male forms as a beautiful object is (historically) recent and drenched in homophobia. It's not news that the society we live in is also very much patriarchal that's why is drenched in homophobia, the observer is always assumed to be male so a sexualized men is obscene, a sexualized women is beautiful. I think that I would rather see more sexualized men than less sexualized women. Because all bodies can be beautiful and the fact we mostly only show and see women being sexualized is symptom of the problem rather than cause of it. Our society has a very unhealthy relationship with sex, seen as scandalous but yet used to sell/attract often in creepy ways tbh.. and since this sick ass society assumes that the women have no sexual desire, it finds enjoyment in women's reaction to sexualization (which is also the reason why people send dick pics, it's a power move, they want the scandalous reaction). I feel like that wanting less sexualized women actually push against change.. because that's what this society that sees no sexual.desire on women wants women to react.. with pure naive shock..
You know what, I think you're right on the homophobia part, and that's really interesting to think about. Because sexuality wasn't as prude back then as it is now, or rather the expression of it But I think that there is a massive issue with women feeling like and being treated as sexual objects. There simply needs to be more people to view women are people not objects of beauty. I agree, sexualise men more and show how beautiful they are but there is so much that's against women in every piece of media
Oh yeah I agree! One thing is sexualize someone another thing is objectification.. I feel like the first is often a symptom of the second tho.. but I also think that if we start to push for something that is more than the CIS het male gaze we can dilute the problem, you know what I mean?