»

[Stripey]

Originally Posted by MCJ

Who is to say these shots are trying to be arty though? Isn't just an aesthetic that appeals to a different consumer? A fetish? What constitutes the art herein?

You're right, it's just a niche which appeals to a certain market segment, but I totally get the feeling that these models genuinely believe that their hair dye, clothing, tattoo's, piercings and vagina make them attractive, reflect their pesronality and that they are being photographed because of some imagined intrinsic value rather than the fact that someone is going to make a heap of money off selling the photos.

[Jim Stax]

Originally Posted by Stripey

You're right, it's just a niche which appeals to a certain market segment, but I totally get the feeling that these models genuinely believe that their hair dye, clothing, tattoo's, piercings and vagina make them attractive, reflect their pesronality and that they are being photographed because of some imagined intrinsic value rather than the fact that someone is going to make a heap of money off selling the photos.

You just more angry at the world some weeks more than others?

I get what your saying though. Not awfully concerned about it/them though. No doubt some of them are quite clever about it and others/most are just darn stoopid.

It's just a new (part of) version of the continuing feminist argument. 'I'll show my own fanny if I want to coz i'm a woman and this is my choice and it empowers me', 'All right love nae worries. You don't mind if i head to the bog for five mins with your photies do you?'...

For porn and art see Jeff Koons photo shoot he did with his misses at the time chichilina

I'm on the fence with this one, on one hand I don't find the majority of stuff on SG sexy I find most of it to be slutty.

However I think that these photos are more "arty" than they would be if the person was just wearing practical clothing and no or little makeup

Most of the girls would get it if they weren't dressed like hookers

And as for the feminist aspect if they want to get their tits or hole out then let them, its obviously not degrading to them since it is their own choice

[u70jc]

It concerns me that some women just want to be rich and famous for the sake of it, I think this is the motive for these kind of shots.

I think these girls are doing these shots are a quick and easy route to being rich. It may be disguised as art in order to justify it, but I'm sure most women wouldn't be doing it if they didn't get some money. If she has brains and she is not at least trying to use them, that just makes her damn lazy. That's the worse aspect of it, in my opinion.

I've worked as a life model at art school before, so maybe I'm being hypocritical, I don't know. So yeah there are a fair share of folk in Aberdeen who have seen my bits, but I liked working there and it was to help fund my way through uni. Is that the same?

[Spoonie]

depends. in essence yes, in motivation, maybe not. the bottom line is you got your tits and ass out for money and so do they. the thing that annoys me with a lot of posts in threads like this is that people purport to know the motivations of those involved. they make their own choice for their own reasons. who is anyone else to judge those.

[Jeanette]

Originally Posted by u70jc

I've worked as a life model at art school before, so maybe I'm being hypocritical, I don't know. So yeah there are a fair share of folk in Aberdeen who have seen my bits, but I liked working there and it was to help fund my way through uni. Is that the same?

I think that's completely different. You're not posing in a provocative way in order to bring enjoyment to people. You were doing something that was improving the skills of the artists that were drawing/painting you. The artists aren't interested in your body so to speak, not in the way that those looking at the SG girls are. They're interested in the form of the human body and how they put that on paper, or in a photograph.

My friend has just finished Gray's and she's taken photographs of the human body which are entirely arty... Not flashy and brassy like SG or Page 3.

[daveofficer]

Originally Posted by JeanieStar

I think that's completely different. You're not posing in a provocative way in order to bring enjoyment to people. You were doing something that was improving the skills of the artists that were drawing/painting you. The artists aren't interested in your body so to speak, not in the way that those looking at the SG girls are. They're interested in the form of the human body and how they put that on paper, or in a photograph.

My friend has just finished Gray's and she's taken photographs of the human body which are entirely arty... Not flashy and brassy like SG or Page 3.

arty is such a non-phrase. it's either art or it's not. you can take pictures which look 'arty' but if they're a meaningless picture of a side boob then it's not art. art is about meaning not the look.

not saying your friend's pictures aren't art like, not seen em so i can't judge. just venting about psuedo-fineart photography in general.

[lovers_spit]

Originally Posted by daveofficer

not whores, models. exhibitionist ones perhaps but models nonetheless. if she had a cock in her hand while taking the cash then you can start debating the whole pornography/prostitution thing.

would it be any different if it was a guy in that pose?

As Phil said, we are the target audience, we have a right to bitch about them.

Well exhibitionism, whatever, they show themselves in what are meant to be mildly arousing poses for money. Still the same in my book.

No. I'd think the guy was a cunt as well. Beyond me why a boy would wear a corset anyway..

[Jeanette]

Originally Posted by daveofficer

arty is such a non-phrase. it's either art or it's not. you can take pictures which look 'arty' but if they're a meaningless picture of a side boob then it's not art. art is about meaning not the look.

not saying your friend's pictures aren't art like, not seen em so i can't judge. just venting about psuedo-fineart photography in general.

I get what you're saying, but for the simplicity of this debate, the pictures of the Suicide Girls are not arty! Thus not art...

However, my friends photos are art, because well that's what she got her 1st for!

Anyway, I know that wasn't a direct rant.

[Stripey]