Lisa Andresen wrote:

I have no idea it could all be a thing for tv. But we have a problem at least in my generation with boys/men seeing women as pieces of meat. We have a problem with girls/ women not having enough self respect to say no. Sex is everywhere today and it means nothing to most these days it's just something we do.

I just went to PCB for Spring Break on a mission trip and the stuff you see down there would shock you! I saw girls on the beach drinking out of buckets with their hands begins their backs while the guys yelled "drink it like a dog get down and drink it like a dog take your top off and drink it like a dog". But they craved that attention so much they didn't even see how degrading it was.

or maybe they just thought they were having a good time , and as mature women they will just look back at it and laugh at such shenanigans

Justin wrote:
But in fighting a war with nudes, the nudes are probably going to lose. I mean, there's just a disadvantage there.

Yes, you are probably right, not having pockets for extra ammo would be a hindrance.

Damianne wrote:

Nope, pretty sure you just posted a novel of a rant and mods keep tabs on those threads because they never turn out well, and are consequently noticing that your lack of grammar is accompanied by a disregard for rules.

I'm curious, what rules has he disregarded in your opinion?

I'm somewhat confused too, as to why you commented in a thread where you claimed the original post offended you. Then sometime later you were offended by a reply to you. Maybe I'm thick but I don't understand you being offended by somebody thinking you got a raw deal being sacked from a job because you modeled nude.

Please don't be offended by this, I'm just trying to see where you are coming from.

Jules NYC wrote:
Is spreading your vag spread eagle with a lens seeing your uterus pornographic?

Just curious.

P.S. I read your entire post.
Comments like that are probably as annoying as the Adult section that is in the 'Talent' section of Craigslist to me.

Not if its shot in black and white and placed in the "fine art" folder :p

Revenge Photography wrote:

I'm curious, what rules has he disregarded in your opinion?

I'm somewhat confused too, as to why you commented in a thread where you claimed the original post offended you. Then sometime later you were offended by a reply to you. Maybe I'm thick but I don't understand you being offended by somebody thinking you got a raw deal being sacked from a job because you modeled nude.

Please don't be offended by this, I'm just trying to see where you are coming from.

It was in response to his complaining that his avatars kept getting removed for nudity, and assuming that it was the people in the thread reporting him.

Lisa Andresen wrote:
I don't do nudity because of my faith it has nothing to do with me not liking my body.

...

If I wasn't a Christian or married who knows maybe I would shoot nude. ety.

I don't pretend to know a whole lot about religion or the bible. But didn't God make Adam and Eve naked?

Didn't they only cover themselves up when the serpent convinced Eve to eat the forbidden fruit of the tree of knowledge making god unhappy with them.

Forgive me but to my heathen mind logic tells me clothing is the devils work. That nudity is gods work and the beauty of his creation on display. That is assuming the bible is true.

Lisa Andresen wrote:
We have a problem with girls/ women not having enough self respect to say no.

I don't suppose it has occurred to you that some women do enjoy sex and are very willing and quite active participants. I'm not saying this is always the case, but in my experience it has been.

Lisa Andresen wrote:
The fact that 16 and younger aged kids are texting nude photos back and forth is proof enough we are not sexually repressed.

Sorry to burst your bubble but nudity != sex.
You can be nude with no sexual connotations, you can also be fully clothed and saturated in sexual energy. As I believe somebody was attempting to point out to you earlier in the thread by direction you to one of your own images.

As far as the type of nude images that 16 year olds are exchanging, you may be right they may be images of an erotic nature. Perhaps you are right about that specific example. But since I have not seen or sought to see that type of traded image I can only speak in general terms.

Damianne wrote:
It was in response to his complaining that his avatars kept getting removed for nudity, and assuming that it was the people in the thread reporting him.

Thanks, that makes sense.

I hadn't seen any of his earlier avatars, I incorrectly assumed you were referring to the content of his posts.

Lisa Andresen wrote:
We have a problem with girls/ women not having enough self respect to say no.

It really is a problem. We live in a world where girls and women are taught that their only value is their sex, and they don't respect themselves enough, and men don't respect these girls and women enough, for sex to be about something two people do with each other, not something one person does to another. 

A woman choosing yes or no doesn't mean that she's does or doesn't respect herself.
A woman being pressured into having sex for any reason other than she thinks it's fun,  is a serious societal issue.
You shaming other women for having sex, by implying that they don't respect themselves, and that no woman who respects herself has sex, is pretty messed up too.

Lisa Andresen wrote:
The fact that 16 and younger aged kids are texting nude photos back and forth is proof enough we are not sexually repressed.

We don't teach healthy messages about sex, and we don't answer nearly enough questions, asked or not, about sex, so kids are doing sexual stuff without understanding what they are doing, or what the consequences might be.

Lisa Andresen wrote:

The fact that 16 and younger aged kids are texting nude photos back and forth is proof enough we are not sexually repressed.

Sex runs rampant in our society. I am not talking about matters of birth control or abortion or any of that. The morality concerning sex is very low and the welcoming of sex in all media is very high that's a bad combination if you ask me.

It is when they get prosecuted. We had sexting in my day, it was called Polaroids. Your conveniently glossing over the govt. had in this. When I was 18 yrs. old, and my GF was 17, if we were caught with those.....well, we'd have paid the piper at home. There wasn't a prosecutor alive that would even take that anywhere, let alone labeled each of us an offender.

Btw, if you think this is a "new" thing in society....all this sex you speak of....my grandmothers generation and before, was born in the 19th c. Trust me when I say the same shit was going on then.....they just stayed on the QT.

Lisa Andresen wrote:
The fact that 16 and younger aged kids are texting nude photos back and forth is proof enough we are not sexually repressed.

Sex runs rampant in our society. I am not talking about matters of birth control or abortion or any of that. The morality concerning sex is very low and the welcoming of sex in all media is very high that's a bad combination if you ask me.

The United States is not a sexually repressed society, but a sexually immature society. That's largely due to the puritanical background of many generations of immigrants that settled in the new world.

Regarding nudity, a sign of that immaturity is the automatism of equating unclothed human beings with sex and sexuality. Nude bodies are sexualized regardless of context, to the point where even parents are scared of seeing their own kids naked.

I currently reside in France, which is considerably more liberal and less juvenile when it comes to nudity and sex.

Is there lots of silly stuff going on here too? Are women still sexualized and objectified in the media? You bet.

But you can go naked to a public sauna and topless to a beach or see nude people on afternoon network TV without anyone raising a fuss. Because it's just nude, uncovered human bodies of all shapes and sizes, nothing more. People are used to it and comfortable around it.

More conservative and repressed societies are polarized on this issue, they tend to gravitate towards the extremes. That's why your own society can be both repressive and excessive towards sexuality at the same time. It's only a contradiction at first glance, but in reality constitutes two sides of the same coin.

That's why you can have the largest porn industry on the one hand, while at the same time having people in politics and power whose morals would fit in better in Saudia Arabia than into a modern Western society. That's why you can have drunken teenagers sleeping around on Spring Break while at the same time electing politicians to power who systematically and successfully attack women's rights that have long since been settled in any other Western nation (like abortion and birth control).

Those are the signs of a sexually juvenile culture that still has some growing up to do.

Revenge Photography wrote:

Not if its shot in black and white and placed in the "fine art" folder :p

Russian Katarina wrote:

The United States is not a sexually repressed society, but a sexually immature society. That's largely due to the puritanical background of many generations of immigrants that settled in the new world.

Regarding nudity, a sign of that immaturity is the automatism of equating unclothed human beings with sex and sexuality. Nude bodies are sexualized regardless of context, to the point where even parents are scared of seeing their own kids naked.

I currently reside in France, which is considerably more liberal and less juvenile when it comes to nudity and sex.

Is there lots of silly stuff going on here too? Are women still sexualized and objectified in the media? You bet.

But you can go naked to a public sauna and topless to a beach or see nude people on afternoon network TV without anyone raising a fuss. Because it's just nude, uncovered human bodies of all shapes and sizes, nothing more. People are used to it and comfortable around it.

More conservative and repressed societies are polarized on this issue, they tend to gravitate towards the extremes. That's why your own society can be both repressive and excessive towards sexuality at the same time. It's only a contradiction at first glance, but in reality constitutes two sides of the same coin.

That's why you can have the largest porn industry on the one hand, while at the same time having people in politics and power whose morals would fit in better in Saudia Arabia than into a modern Western society. That's why you can have drunken teenagers sleeping around on Spring Break while at the same time electing politicians to power who systematically and successfully attack women's rights that have long since been settled in any other Western nation (like abortion and birth control).

Those are the signs of a sexually juvenile culture that still has some growing up to do.

Viva France!

Heather LeStabbityDeath wrote:
We don't teach healthy messages about sex, and we don't answer nearly enough questions, asked or not, about sex, so kids are doing sexual stuff without understanding what they are doing, or what the consequences might be.

I agree from a young age both boys and girls are getting false information and mixed signals.

It's something we really need to work on. We have kids trying to deal with adult situations and it is causing a lot of hurt and pain.

Russian Katarina wrote:

The United States is not a sexually repressed society, but a sexually immature society. That's largely due to the puritanical background of many generations of immigrants that settled in the new world.

Regarding nudity, a sign of that immaturity is the automatism of equating unclothed human beings with sex and sexuality. Nude bodies are sexualized regardless of context, to the point where even parents are scared of seeing their own kids naked.

I currently reside in France, which is considerably more liberal and less juvenile when it comes to nudity and sex.

Is there lots of silly stuff going on here too? Are women still sexualized and objectified in the media? You bet.

But you can go naked to a public sauna and topless to a beach or see nude people on afternoon network TV without anyone raising a fuss. Because it's just nude, uncovered human bodies of all shapes and sizes, nothing more. People are used to it and comfortable around it.

More conservative and repressed societies are polarized on this issue, they tend to gravitate towards the extremes. That's why your own society can be both repressive and excessive towards sexuality at the same time. It's only a contradiction at first glance, but in reality constitutes two sides of the same coin.

That's why you can have the largest porn industry on the one hand, while at the same time having people in politics and power whose morals would fit in better in Saudia Arabia than into a modern Western society. That's why you can have drunken teenagers sleeping around on Spring Break while at the same time electing politicians to power who systematically and successfully attack women's rights that have long since been settled in any other Western nation (like abortion and birth control).

Those are the signs of a sexually juvenile culture that still has some growing up to do.

I agree we sexually immature. The age is getting younger and younger.

Lisa Andresen wrote:
I agree we sexually immature. The age is getting younger and younger.

as opposed to when? what age do you think folks were getting sexually active, in say, 1825?

GK photo wrote:

as opposed to when? what age do you think folks were getting sexually active, in say, 1825?

It was common to marry young girls to men in their 30ies back then. A woman who wasn't married by 20 was considered a spinster.

Russian Katarina wrote:

It was common to marry young girls to men in their 30ies back then. A woman who wasn't married by 20 was considered a spinster.

i know, i was waiting for lisa to chime in. i don't think the age of sexual awareness has changed all that much in the last 50,000 years or so. if at all. it's just the mores and culture that demonize it.

Lisa Andresen wrote:
I agree from a young age both boys and girls are getting false information and mixed signals.

It's something we really need to work on. We have kids trying to deal with adult situations and it is causing a lot of hurt and pain.

What kind of false information? What kind of mixed signals?

Heather LeStabbityDeath wrote:

It really is a problem. We live in a world where girls and women are taught that their only value is their sex, and they don't respect themselves enough, and men don't respect these girls and women enough, for sex to be about something two people do with each other, not something one person does to another. 

A woman choosing yes or no doesn't mean that she's does or doesn't respect herself.
A woman being pressured into having sex for any reason other than she thinks it's fun,  is a serious societal issue.
You shaming other women for having sex, by implying that they don't respect themselves, and that no woman who respects herself has sex, is pretty messed up too.

Here, here. And I think this mentality is absolutely disgusting. Women are also needed for meal preparation.

*runs*

Lisa Andresen wrote:
I agree from a young age both boys and girls are getting false information and mixed signals.

It's something we really need to work on. We have kids trying to deal with adult situations and it is causing a lot of hurt and pain.

Andialu wrote:
What kind of false information? What kind of mixed signals?

you know, santa claus, the easter bunny, tooth fairy. stuff of that ilk.

the history of "you show me yours, i'll show you mine" has probably not altered all that much since grotte du vallonnet.

GK photo wrote:
i know, i was waiting for lisa to chime in. i don't think the age of sexual awareness has changed all that much in the last 50,000 years or so. if at all. it's just the mores and culture that demonize it.

The average age when teenagers become sexually active (with each other) is about 15 today. As for masturbation, even fetuses already engage in it while being in the womb.

We're a horny species. Our sexual organs are far larger than those of any other mammal for a reason.

Religions that demonize human sexuality (like Christianity or Islam) don't alter our biology. They just make people feel miserable and ashamed of themselves and their perfectly natural urges.

Russian Katarina wrote:
The average age when teenagers become sexually active (with each other) is about 15 today. As for masturbation, even fetuses already engage in it while being in the womb.

We're a horny species. Our sexual organs are far larger than those of any other mammal for a reason.

Religions that demonize human sexuality (like Christianity or Islam) don't alter our biology. They just make people feel miserable and ashamed of themselves and their perfectly natural urges.

preach.

wasn't there a line in the bible about going forth and multiplying?

GK photo wrote:

as opposed to when? what age do you think folks were getting sexually active, in say, 1825?

Yes women were young when they got married then but they were more mentally mature. Life was simple and you had close knit communities. You had kids working hard from a very young age they knew how to run business and homes very young.  We live in a time were no one wants to grow up they want to have sex and act like adults but they don't want to deal with the consequences like adults. And the younger generation is lazy the internet and technology has created lazy immature youth. Women back then would not have had sex outside of marriage either. Today over half of children born are outside of marriage.

So the age may be the same but the environment that one was growing up in created a different level of maturity.

GK photo wrote:

preach.

wasn't there a line in the bible about going forth and multiplying?

My church does not practice this and the Bible doesn't teach it. If you are married they highly encourage sex feel free to have all the sex you want. Sex is a gift from God if it is within marriage. That is what my church teaches and that is what the Bible teaches.

Incubus Portrait Studio wrote:
Just had a few things to say and I wanted to create a small discussion about it. Unfortunately this kinda pertains to the VA and NC area.

I live and work in Richmond, VA and have been shooting fine art nudes since the early 80's.  In all that time, I have only had about four models tell me that they do not do nudes when I asked them to work for me.  All four were due to jealous or controlling husbands or boyfriends (one was due to the woman's controlling/jealous girlfriend). 

There was a pretty funny case.  A woman approached me at a gallery show and asked if she could model for me.  When her husband found out about it, he raised Hell at the idea, so she give up on the nude modeling plan.  I ran into her a year or so later at another gallery show and she asked if I were still interested in using her.  She had gotten divorced and still wanted to model.  She was a pleasure to work with until she remarried.  Another controlling hubby, and no more nude modeling.

In another instance, there was a woman who worked part time as an artist's model.  When she got divorced, she moved back in for a while with her mom.  Her mother said that while she lived under her roof, there would be no nude modeling.  After the woman got back on her feet, she resumed modeling.

Richmond may be the exception to the conservative image of Virginia.  Having Virginia Commonwealth University as an anchor for the arts helps.  There is also a thriving gallery and club scene; a large modern dance community; several burlesque and belly dance troupes and a small but active fetish community.  I have found models in all these groups.  If someone says that they don't do nudes, it is no biggie to me.  I don't waste time trying to convince them otherwise.

Lisa Andresen wrote:

Yes women were young when they got married then but they were more mentally mature. Life was simple and you had close knit communities. You had kids working hard from a very young age they knew how to run business and homes very young.  We live in a time were no one wants to grow up they want to have sex and act like adults but they don't want to deal with the consequences like adults. And the younger generation is lazy the internet and technology has created lazy immature youth. Women back then would not have had sex outside of marriage either. Today over half of children born are outside of marriage.

So the age may be the same but the environment that one was growing up in created a different level of maturity.

do you think the world was like a laura ingalls book until about 1968 or so? do you have any idea what the urban areas of the industrial revolution were like? and that's just one example.

you should read more. it'll greatly expand your views. nothing in history need contradict your beliefs. walking around thinking everything was like little house on the prairie is very naive though.

Incubus Portrait Studio wrote:
In your case its understandable to not shoot nude. but isnt that the actual issue, what is wrong with nudity? I'm sure you were doing your job perfectly and they notice you shoot nudes, and decided to get rid of you.

More often than not, when someone is fired over such things it's an "excuse" for other issues or a need to make choices for a staff reduction.

In general, when you are needed at the job you can do no wrong and when not needed you can do no right.

Russian Katarina wrote:
Those are the signs of a sexually juvenile culture that still has some growing up to do.

I have a lot of issues with US-style Liberalism, such as not seeming to advance "Good Liberal" issues IMHO like marijuana legalization and tolerance of nudity.

Incubus Portrait Studio wrote:
But that's not the main reason I'm writing this. The multiple "models" websites I stumble upon are always so judgmental. "I respect my body", "I don't need to share my body with everyone", " I care about myself why would I shoot that way?" "I don't do shots like those girls in hustler" " I'm not a skank, like that" this isn't a quite but apparently 90% of these particular "models" are going to run for office in the next few years also.

A big reason models feel the need to overstate that they don't shoot nudes is that some photographers are very pushy and agressive on the issue. However, this backfires as the most determined will ignore all this and those the model might make exception for will heed their words and likely avoid them alltogether.

GK photo wrote:
as opposed to when? what age do you think folks were getting sexually active, in say, 1825?

Lisa Andresen wrote:
Yes women were young when they got married then but they were more mentally mature. Life was simple and you had close knit communities. You had kids working hard from a very young age they knew how to run business and homes very young.  We live in a time were no one wants to grow up they want to have sex and act like adults but they don't want to deal with the consequences like adults. And the younger generation is lazy the internet and technology has created lazy immature youth. Women back then would not have had sex outside of marriage either. Today over half of children born are outside of marriage.

So the age may be the same but the environment that one was growing up in created a different level of maturity.

wut?

There's has been premarital sex since there has been marriage. Women were just more discrete about it out of fear of being shunned.

In England in the late 16th and early 17th centuries, 20% of all brides were pregnant at the time of the wedding

But by the mid-18th-c, however, premarital sex was much more common. Over 40% of married women were giving birth less than 8 1/2 months after marriage
source : http://web.campbell.edu/faculty/vanderg … onial.html

Envy wrote:
wut?

There's has been premarital sex since there has been marriage. Women were just more discrete about it out of fear of being shunned.

In England in the late 16th and early 17th centuries, 20% of all brides were pregnant at the time of the wedding

But by the mid-18th-c, however, premarital sex was much more common. Over 40% of married women were giving birth less than 8 1/2 months after marriage
source : http://web.campbell.edu/faculty/vanderg … onial.html

There was even more premarital sex before marriage.

Andialu wrote:

There was even more premarital sex before marriage.

Are you saying that our prehistoric hunter-gatherer ancestors had sex and procreated merrily even though they had no concept of marriage for several tens of thousands of years, until about ~5,000 BC?

It's a good thing the bible tells us that the world is just about 6,000 years old and mankind started out with a married couple.

Stop confusing the young minds with silly stuff like science and facts.

Russian Katarina wrote:
mankind started out with a married couple.

A married couple with the same DNA.



(is she waving at him or is that the first hand bra?)