Posing The Female Body

digi-brain · Feb 24, 2004

I agree with Steve, we should all support a GW Bush sponsored constitutional ban on the posing of the female form [because some lack self confidence and would like to impose their inadequacies on everyone else].
DB

Steve Bryant said:
Normally I don't really care if a thread is off topic as long as it
is a reasonable topic to be discussed in this forum. However, your
question is better asked in another venue. It has strong sexist
connotations and implies that the female body is only designed for
viewing pleasure.

I'm not the morality police, but this kind of topic should be
discussed elsewhere. "Discretion is the better part of valor!"

--
Steve Bryant

Juli Valley · Feb 24, 2004

None are explicit. http://www.photocrack.com/pages/download/ModelPose15.html

Julio · Feb 24, 2004

Jeff Peterman said:
And don't forget to research "Posing the female dog." That can be a
*****.
--
Jeff Peterman
Any insults, implied anger, bad grammar and bad spelling, are
entirely unintentional. Sorry.

--
'There must be some knowledge amidst all this damn information!'

Karl C · Feb 24, 2004

Steve Bryant wrote:
It has strong sexist

Steve Bryant said:
connotations and implies that the female body is only designed for
viewing pleasure.

Geeeeeee....sus. Are you a member of the Bush Bush Clan who sees spooks, terrorists, weapons of mass destruction and moral corruption everywhere ?

Btw, the 'female body' is not only designed for viewing pleasure but in some cases, nature did its very best to make it very suitable for that.

Ask any of the 55 million readers of the bathing suit special in Sports Illustrated (starring a compatriote of mine, Jessica Van Der Steen) ...

Karl
http://www.pbase.com/karlc

Bill Anderson · Feb 24, 2004

Juli Valley said:
None are explicit.
http://www.photocrack.com/pages/download/ModelPose15.html

Mark B. · Feb 24, 2004

Steve Bryant said:
Normally I don't really care if a thread is off topic as long as it
is a reasonable topic to be discussed in this forum. However, your
question is better asked in another venue. It has strong sexist
connotations and implies that the female body is only designed for
viewing pleasure.

I'm not the morality police, but this kind of topic should be
discussed elsewhere. "Discretion is the better part of valor!"

--
Steve Bryant

Posing is not part of photography? Since when? Just because not everyone is interested in posing doesn't mean it's off topic. That's like saying a question about underwater housings would be off topic.

Mark

Austin_316 · Feb 24, 2004

I guess its easier for some to show ignorance. This is a very helpful guide even fot clothed women. A good pose accents a woman. Not everyone realizes that. Some never will. The first is called photographer. There are plenty of discriptons for the later.

--
Michael,
If you can't run with the BIG DOGS,... Stay on the porch!

Juli Valley said:
Juli Valley said:

Juli Valley said:

Juli Valley said:

Juli Valley said:

Juli Valley said:

Juli Valley said:

Juli Valley said:

†

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Fuji S2Pro w/Sigma [email protected], Sigma [email protected]/APO, Sigma [email protected], Sigma [email protected], Sigma [email protected]/f4-ASP, Fuji 4900, Olympus E-10 & D-600L. Nikon 995 Repaired soon.

biff levi · Feb 24, 2004

Steve Bryant said:
I'm not the morality police,

could have fooled me.

Steve Bryant said:
but this kind of topic should be
discussed elsewhere. "Discretion is the better part of valor!"

so. since your name is steve, i take it you're not a woman. yet you should decide for everybody else what the woman body WAS and WAS NOT made for? just like the people who decide what can lawefully go in inside a woman's body are 95% male? and the people who decide whether gay people can get married are 99% straight?

you need to go police somewhere else.

biff levi · Feb 24, 2004

lonnit said:
the book Fantasy Nudes! Yup, it's all girls, all the time, busty
and bare, but I bought it for the artistic value. Does that make me
gay and exploitive? LOL!

Lonnit

--

biff levi · Feb 24, 2004

drip said:
If you are only interested in photography the art.

who says all bodies aer equally artistic? all lakes and beaches and mountains certainly aren't equal.

Steve Bryant · Feb 24, 2004

It won't be the last time that I will have been wrong about something. I appologize!

--
Steve Bryant

Kalden · Feb 24, 2004

You took some abuse but your response was direct, honest, and without malice.

Well Done!

Dave

Steve Bryant said:
It won't be the last time that I will have been wrong about
something. I appologize!

--
Steve Bryant

Hobbyists · Feb 24, 2004

Though I would argue that he took more than 'some' abuse. Steve you made a mistake and acknowledge the mistake.

Kalden said:
Well Done!

Dave

Steve Bryant said:

It won't be the last time that I will have been wrong about
something. I appologize!

--
Steve Bryant

Click to expand...

--
A Hobbyists, striving to be a professional!

Julio · Feb 24, 2004

Steve Bryant said:
It won't be the last time that I will have been wrong about
something. I appologize!

As a fellow 54 year old (I saw that in another of your posts) I know how hard it is to apologize now that we know everything

Very well done.

Karl C · Feb 25, 2004

rb49 said:
I see Bryant's point... so I'm off to the Uffizi with my axe and
gasoline... ya know, that darn Botticelli and his Primivera
allegory... too much flesh, too much thigh...

And then comes the real 'jihad' -- I'm goint to 'do' those Da
Vincis and Rembrandts...

Sexist garbage all!

... I know some Rubens' paintings hanging only a few miles from here - full of flesh, full of voluptuous naked Eva's, put on earth to seduce only ....
How could anyone ever call this art ???

Karl
http://www.pbase.com/karlc

Jeff Peterman · Feb 25, 2004

Steve Bryant said:
It won't be the last time that I will have been wrong about
something. I appologize!

--
Steve Bryant

--
Jeff Peterman

Any insults, implied anger, bad grammar and bad spelling, are entirely unintentional. Sorry.

NormanAllen · Feb 25, 2004

I'm curious myself. I only saw Julie's line art (thanks Julie). Anyone else?

bioboy · Feb 25, 2004

The female form has many functions as does the male form. I agree that there is beauty to behold. But "designed for viewing pleasure" ??? I don't think so unless you mean that there is a biological reason for attraction between opposite sexes. And "designed" implies a plan or a proir determined end point. Evolution has neither.

Karl C said:
Btw, the 'female body' is not only designed for viewing pleasure
but in some cases, nature did its very best to make it very
suitable for that.

ummagumma · Feb 25, 2004

Uhm, not have your morning coffee yet? How the hell is this off topic...

Steve Bryant said:
Normally I don't really care if a thread is off topic as long as it
is a reasonable topic to be discussed in this forum. However, your
question is better asked in another venue. It has strong sexist
connotations and implies that the female body is only designed for
viewing pleasure.

I'm not the morality police, but this kind of topic should be
discussed elsewhere. "Discretion is the better part of valor!"

--
Steve Bryant

--
http://boards.elitefitness.com/forum/avatar.php?userid=17190&dateline=1073481242

Julio · Feb 25, 2004

bioboy said:
And "designed" implies a plan or a proir determined end point.
Evolution has neither.

We were bio-engineered by a long-gone Master civilization that seeded our galaxy... don't you watch TV?

--
'There must be some knowledge amidst all this damn information!'

Posing The Female Body

Member

Forum Pro

Senior Member

Forum Enthusiast

Forum Enthusiast

Mark B.

Guest

Senior Member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Forum Enthusiast

Well-known member

Leading Member

Senior Member

Forum Enthusiast

Forum Pro

Senior Member

Member

Leading Member

Senior Member

Keyboard shortcuts