#1 October 8th, 2005 08:08 PM

JasonW

Member

Close-ups?

I was wondering why so many contributors choose to shoot close-ups of their crotch? If I was shooting myself, I don't know that this would occur to me as an obvious thing to do. I guess there may be many different reasons, so I'd be interested to hear from the contributors...

voyeur2

Member

Re: Close-ups?

I was wondering why so many contributors choose to shoot close-ups of their crotch? If I was shooting myself, I don't know that this would occur to me as an obvious thing to do. I guess there may be many different reasons, so I'd be interested to hear from the contributors...

Its fairly obvious Jason. 
Its mirrors and photography for self examination.  Most women never get a really good look at themselves, the 'equipment' being so far 'down under' to make a bad pun. 

Besides - its just about the only bit they don't flash about when in the mood on any given day on the street or in a pub.

---

Have I ever lied to you before?

Belgareth

Member

Re: Close-ups?

Its fairly obvious Jason. 
Its mirrors and photography for self examination.  Most women never get a really good look at themselves, the 'equipment' being so far 'down under' to make a bad pun. 

Besides - its just about the only bit they don't flash about when in the mood on any given day on the street or in a pub.

I could answer J's question in the same way that a number of the contributors comment on why they shot themselves - because they can!

Let's face it, the girls choose how they want to be seen and what they want to be seen. If they choose to give us a life-size view of their genitals, that's fine by me. If they choose to be more coy (and there are a fair few who do), then that is equally fine.

If SCSIgirl's photographic experiences are anything like my own, he will probably tell you that live models are just as varied in the way they behave.

To all intents and purposes, this is a contributor's site and is, to some extent, controlled by their whims because it wouldn't exist without them. While we members are a fairly passive component outside of this forum.

---

[color="Red"]require "help.pl";[/color]

wantingscott

Member

Re: Close-ups?

i can only surmise from a sponsor's pont of view:
since the artist's vagina is beautiful nature, in parallel in nature to the petals of a flower, and unique, aren't labia just beautiful? i think so.

the artist is sharing her secret garden with you, letting you in to her most intimate place, telling you in a photo the thousand words with the shorthand of an image how it feels to be her.

i can only imagine. a cock could never be so beautiful.

Scott

---

_________________________________________________
that's the way it goes. but don't forget, it goes the other way too.

capiango

Member

Re: Close-ups?

I would just like to add that since this is a 'self' project and we know that everyones limbs are only so long that if one is going to take a picture of that region without mirrors or such that in most cases its going to be fairly close up

TheThoughtSmith

Member

Re: Close-ups?

Personally, I believe I can frequently spot three or four 'categories' of self portrait on ISM. 

Like all attempts to generalize, these are deeply flawed -- but they serve as a surface context to help understand things, IMO.

There are some women who clearly understand not only that they are attractive, but what makes them attractive and what angles, images, and views will arouse the anonymous person watching.  In these I see more complete shots of the whole body, more of the long curves of the back and arms, and often attempts at more distance with mirrors or such.  These are the most confident pictures.  This "category" is one of the more solid ones - I'm fairly sure of this on those I think of this way.

There are some women who are confident in themselves and either unafraid or bravely ignoring any fear of their own bodies, but are less sure of exactly what makes them attractive.  They're  taking pictures of themselves in a way that tries to match what they've seen on other sites.  These tend to be the most stark -- sometimes almost medical shots as if they're displaying their parts distinct from themselves on a shelf in a shop. 

In among these are some that are done by very confident women who simply like those shots, so it can be difficult to (as if its necessary at all) always decided which it is.

There are the less confident artists, too.  Some who clearly feel obligated to shoot more of some parts than they're comfortable putting on display.  In these you see obviously cropped pictures where they tried something more daring then didn't like what the image showed.  In these pictures, the really close up shots sometimes are included exactly because they distance the picture from the person.

There's some -- I think these are rare, and almost always on returning artists -- who try a specific perspective in a shoot.  Sometimes its "Here's what I am to me, not you" and othertimes its "Here's what you'd see if I right there with you".   Both of these are really interesting and take a special gift to pull off.

In any case, the biggest factors seem to be the confidence to be unswerved by what we all see as the flaws in our own bodies, and an empathic understanding of what makes the female form attractive.  I've wondered, when looking at a stunning shot taken by someone who clearly gets that, if that artist isn't also a bit of a fan of the female body to enough of an extent to at least enjoy stealing the same glance.

Of course, this could just be bullshit.

SCSIgirl

Member

Re: Close-ups?

Ever wondered why the C word is considered so offensive when in fact a vagina is a thing of beauty?
(Well, I don't expect any ones interested, but anyway)

>>>>  snipped for brevity  <<<<<<<<

So I say, for the cause of peace and love, let's see more vagina's

OK here I go getting technical again:  If you remember the children's rhyme "words can never hurt me".  A word is simply that:  a form of communication.  It takes context to make it threatening, vulgar, offensive, etc.

"Cunt" is a nautical term referring to the line of a perfectly folded sail.  This draws some interesting conclusions.  i.e. to have a cunt one must have a perfect fold.  Any protrusions by the inner parts would disqualify it as a cunt.

So if the word passes down as vulgar,  it has to be in it's surrounding context; not in the word itself.  As a counter example:  "Confucious say: 'Virginity is like balloon:  one prick and all gone!!'"  Is that offensive?  Was the "P" word used to offend or as a humourous pun?

{Personally,  I love flowers.  They are more interesting visually and they provide more to play with during dinner.}

---

"Apple of my Eye", "bated breath", "brave new world", "caught red-handed" - all coined by Shakespeare.

gala

Member

Re: Close-ups?

The history and etymology of the word 'cunt' is a bit more complex than that. There are a load of websites and books devoted to it, and etymologists haven't yet come to a conclusion about it's proper origins. I looked around a bit and couldn't find anything relating to a sail.

The word 'cunt' however was not always used as a derogatory term. It only acquired this connotation in the late 19th to 20th century, where it was before a neutral term for 'vagina'.

Here's a website:
http://www.matthewhunt.com/cunt/

and a good book on the subject is "Cunt: A Declaration of Independence" by Inga Muscio.

-breanna

voyeur2

Member

Re: Close-ups?

The history and etymology of the word 'cunt' is a bit more complex than that. There are a load of websites and books devoted to it, and etymologists haven't yet come to a conclusion about it's proper origins. I looked around a bit and couldn't find anything relating to a sail.

The word 'cunt' however was not always used as a derogatory term. It only acquired this connotation in the late 19th to 20th century, where it was before a neutral term for 'vagina'.

Here's a website:
http://www.matthewhunt.com/cunt/

and a good book on the subject is "Cunt: A Declaration of Independence" by Inga Muscio.

-breanna

I have heard of the sailing term "cunt splice" where one rope passes through another and is free to slide. - I think.

---

Have I ever lied to you before?

Belgareth

Member

Re: Close-ups?

I think cocks can be quite attractive, as long as they haven't got any prince Albert piercings or weird foreskin surgery. What do you think. Does anyone here share my view?

Both male and female genitalia can, at one end of the scale, be very attractive but like most body parts they also be prone to the quirks of nature.

From the male perspective I have seen some beautiful male appendages, which could rival the most beautiful of female counterparts but attractive genitalia seem to occur less frequently in the male than in the female.

From the female perspective, and I can only work with the opinions I have available, there seems to be opposing viewpoints. Some females truly derive pleasure from visual and physical exploration of the penis. Others cannot stand the sight of one, whether flacid or erect, regardless of the fact that they enjoy the act of intercourse. I suppose that there is a large group of females who just couldn't care less, one way or the other, but I wouldn't expect them to voice an opinion.

---

[color="Red"]require "help.pl";[/color]

TheThoughtSmith

Member

Re: Close-ups?

I rather think the use of "Cunt" related to a folded sail is more an adoption of the existing reference than the origin.  Two other nautical uses of the word I'm aware of are the "cunt splice" which is simillar to what we more politely call the "double fisherman" knot in the fire service and the term "to come uncunted" used to describe machinery that breaks (usually breaks is a mild term, flying apart is more accurate) -- as in "turning that many rpm's the whole thing's likely to come uncunted".  In fact, the term cunt is almost certainly a farming term, and related to the breeding of cattle, horses, and sheep.  (probably cattle and sheep as its not usually an issue for horses).  The derogatory nature of the term becomes fairly obvious then, as it puts women in the same class as cattle and sheep, who's parts are to be discussed as a matter of business and having little or no special value (leaving aside those who seem to value sheep cunts).

Head

Administrator

Re: Close-ups?

It's interesting that the word 'cunt' is probably the most taboo word in the english language.  I heard a woman on the radio once argue that the reason most of the 'worst' words were after female body parts was mysogyny, but she conveniently overlooked 'dickhead', 'prick', 'arsehole' and so on.  I would think the reason 'cunt' and 'fuck' are two most offensive words are that they have no other benign meanings, but also because of their hard sounds.  Calling someone a 'muff' in anger would be like trying to beat them up with a pipecleaner. 

What are the most offensive words in other languages, can anyone tell us?

SCSIgirl

Member

Re: Close-ups?

It's interesting that the word 'cunt' is probably the most taboo word in the english language.  I heard a woman on the radio once argue that the reason most of the 'worst' words were after female body parts was mysogyny, but she conveniently overlooked 'dickhead', 'prick', 'arsehole' and so on.  I would think the reason 'cunt' and 'fuck' are two most offensive words are that they have no other benign meanings, but also because of their hard sounds.  Calling someone a 'muff' in anger would be like trying to beat them up with a pipecleaner. 

What are the most offensive words in other languages, can anyone tell us?

Slang is weird in how it evolves.  The Dictionary Of American Slang list hundreds of definitions for "Shit".  The highest of any single word.  I wonder how many languages use it in the same context or use it's English version like "OK".

The Germans supposedly have 17 different slangs for "Shit",  ranging from "Scheiss" to "Guellen" (Idon't know how to put the umlaut over the U).  And since Guellen is supposed to be the worst of it,  why isn't it used more than Scheiss?

It may be the simple explicitive sound of it.  A short, one syllable curse as you say.  In Russian the word is Govno  (sp?){pronounced Gouv-No)  which is 2 syllables and very smooth sounding.  It is my understanding (from friends who have travelled there) that "Shit" is becoming more prevelant there because of it's harder sound.  You can say it with a harder tone.

---

"Apple of my Eye", "bated breath", "brave new world", "caught red-handed" - all coined by Shakespeare.

tana

Member

Re: Close-ups?

I was wondering why so many contributors choose to shoot close-ups of their crotch? If I was shooting myself, I don't know that this would occur to me as an obvious thing to do. I guess there may be many different reasons, so I'd be interested to hear from the contributors...

I think Belgareth's right when he says 'because they can'. Participating in ISM made me spend time I wouldn't normally spend looking at my body, the closeups are just an extension of that. Having said that looking at my pics up on the site I think I'd take more closeups of other non-rude bits of my body if I was to do another shoot.

blissed

Member

Re: Close-ups?

I think your "rude bits" aren't rude. Their very nice. I like the slow reveal in bare_evader and the shots at the end are just lovely.

gala

Member

Re: Close-ups?

It's interesting, in the Croatian language there are a number of curses, but none of them are really considered more 'harsh' than another. A rather standard curse is "go in your mother's pussy (or three of your mother's pussies, as little sense as that makes)". Like Russian, 'govno' also means shite, as does 'sranje', but none of the curses (as imaginative as they get) really take the top spot. There's nothing in the language that will make people sort of seethe or gasp the way the word 'cunt' does in English. Which is sort of a shame on one hand, but makes swearing all the more accessible (and enjoyable).

Ajde u tri pizdu materinu.

Heeh.

JasonW

Member

Re: Close-ups?

I think Belgareth's right when he says 'because they can'. Participating in ISM made me spend time I wouldn't normally spend looking at my body, the closeups are just an extension of that. Having said that looking at my pics up on the site I think I'd take more closeups of other non-rude bits of my body if I was to do another shoot.

Thanks for your reply, Tana. I was hoping a few more contributors might have responded, but the thread seems to have gone in another direction! I was interested mainly because it seems to be such a theme - having recently subscribed, I wasn't expecting that so many of the full folios would feature so many of this type of shot.

Belgareth

Member

Re: Close-ups?

Thanks for your reply, Tana. I was hoping a few more contributors might have responded, but the thread seems to have gone in another direction! I was interested mainly because it seems to be such a theme - having recently subscribed, I wasn't expecting that so many of the full folios would feature so many of this type of shot.

As an aside Jason, you'll find that most of the threads in here tend to wander off topic. Just keep pushing the buttons and you will usually get answers from the appropriate quarter :-)

---

[color="Red"]require "help.pl";[/color]

liandra_dahl

Member

Re: Close-ups?

I don't often take pictures of my 'crotch' but I was probably most curious about that part when I first became a contributor. Belgareth is right, with out mirrors we don't see much of it, so this site is a great chance to get a look. If you've got the balls to put it out there (excuse the pun)

vadek28

Member

Re: Close-ups?

I don't often take pictures of my 'crotch' but I was probably most curious about that part when I first became a contributor. Belgareth is right, with out mirrors we don't see much of it, so this site is a great chance to get a look. If you've got the balls to put it out there (excuse the pun)

I think it's certainly worth snatching a photo for the portfolio. 

mlwade

Member

Re: Close-ups?

I think it's certainly worth snatching a photo for the portfolio. 

I like close-ups.  They are a nice part of the variety that one gets a this site.

voyeur2

Member

Re: Close-ups?

I don't often take pictures of my 'crotch' but I was probably most curious about that part when I first became a contributor. Belgareth is right, with out mirrors we don't see much of it, so this site is a great chance to get a look. If you've got the balls to put it out there (excuse the pun)

Awww come on, Liandra, Bel was quoting me about mirrors and the impossibility of seeing "down under'.  It was my comment.  Fame!  I want fame! (as well as the odd close up)

---

Have I ever lied to you before?

Belgareth

Member

Re: Close-ups?

Awww come on, Liandra, Bel was quoting me about mirrors and the impossibility of seeing "down under'.  It was my comment.  Fame!  I want fame! (as well as the odd close up)

I don't remember mentioning mirrors at all, apart from in a different thread from eons ago, when I told Zille that she looked better in forward than in reverse!

I only quoted the contributors when I said "because they can" - anyway why have fame when you can have infamy like me ;-)

---

[color="Red"]require "help.pl";[/color]

liandra_dahl

Member

Re: Close-ups?

Awww come on, Liandra, Bel was quoting me about mirrors and the impossibility of seeing "down under'.  It was my comment.  Fame!  I want fame! (as well as the odd close up)

Oops, sorry about that Voyeur.

AngularMomentum

Member

Re: Close-ups?

You're right that "cunt" wasn't always offensive. In 12th-century London, there was a street named Gropecunte Lane, where the ladies of the night would ply their trade. During subsequent centuries, as the word became less acceptable, it became "Grope Lane" and then "Grape Lane".

A similar process happened to the word "cock", incidentally. The word "rooster" is a Victorian invention to avoid using such an indecently colorful word.