It was, you know, a joke. My first impulse was to say something about what a lovely pair of breasts they are, but opted for the sarcastic route instead.
I am a little mystified as to the underlying meaning here, assuming that there is any.
It’s the second Monday in a row I open TGW window in my office and deeply regret it. A couple more Mondays like this and everyone will think I am different… I do think they are great, it’s just one of those things you don’t necessary expect to see on a Monday morning or on TGW. Lane, I can’t wait to see what you have to say about this…
yeah, “scary” WTF. not really, just a fine looking pair of breasts. and a fine photo. it has a clinical quality its so nice. perfect lighting, perfect skin and so forth.
i think it’s really interesting because you really start to look at the details, the slight imperfections in the nipples.
but really aren’t those just nice breasts? they’re the perfect size and shape. she must be really proud of them.
i knew a woman as an undergraduate that worked at the med school letting med students practice breast exams on her. from her clothed physique it seemed like she had these kinds of breasts. i’ll bet she was really proud of them too and really liked using them in a productive way.
it just seemed like a really interesting photo. a chance to write the word breast and nipple over and over and over . . .
I guess what I really meant by my “scary” comment is that I have no idea how you arrived at the conclusion that it was appropriate to post this picture here, Lane, and I think it’s sort of creepy. Your stated logic (above, in your comment) doesn’t really acknowledge or address the concerns of “Anonymous”. I am afraid of seeming really uptight or that I’m suggesting censorship (which I’m not), and therefore will not go on.
However, I’m not convinced that “Sometimes a nice pair of tits is just a nice pair of tits” is, shall we say, “fully developed” reasoning. Perhaps a discussion of the line between the prurient and the “clinical” is in order. While certainly not overtly libidinous, this photo doesn’t appear to me entirely clinical either. I’m not saying I think it’s categorically inappropriate to post this photo on TGW, but that I’d hope for it to be undergirded by more intellectual support.
first off this post is not called The Monday Photo (tits)
as to “Anonymous” concerns that “everyone will everyone will think I’m different” . . . huh, interesting Anon. what do you mean by different? I have to admit I don’t have those concerns, having no co-workers myself. But I was also thinking of some members of TGW community that might be delighted to see a lovely pair of breasts here and be inclined to enjoy them.
I do apologize to Dave for not alerting him. He had to rush in and add the NSFW tag. (sorry dave)
But as to Rachel’s comment about this not being Europe. Yeah too bad. I’m all for speedos and topless beaches. America is SO FUCKIN” uptight it makes me sick!
sorry Tim. I got carried away with that ending, I didn’t mean to be bitchy.
it was just an improvisational goof to put this up. in retrospect it reminds me of something an art critic once told me. “the only thing the artworld cares about is sex and death” so last week was death, and i guess i followed some hunch to make this week about sex.
but in finding the pic, i ran across this. when you google “breasts” lots of images come up, and not on porn sites. those images where the breasts are covered by a lacy bra or nightgown are more expressly sexual than this one. that’s what struck me about this image. it seemed so “blank” by comparison, and interesting in that regard.
also, my undergraduate education involved many many many hours of being in a room with naked people. in a sense, like a med student, it changed my relationship to images of naked bodies, and I was offering that here.
those images where the breasts are covered by a lacy bra or nightgown are more expressly sexual than this one. that’s what struck me about this image. it seemed so “blank” by comparison, and interesting in that regard.
Lane, that was dry European humor. By “different” I meant a situation like the following:
I was bored interviewing a job candidate this morning. While listening to his mind-blowing qualifications (out of being polite, since I’d already made my decision), I took a peek at the Monday post. I have a huge computer screen, which could be perfectly seen from the candidate’s chair, so a pair of…ahh…significantly aggrandized art pieces popped out in his face. Perhaps not each employer exactly browses art, while conducting interviews… which is different… Anyway, that was fun while it lasted.
I’m the biggest supporter of the Monday posts, so keep posting.
(Sorry, about the Anonymous comment: some things are better left unspecified)
I glanced at this yesterday (yep, it’s a pair of boobs, all right. Moving on…) but had a thought later in the day that reflects S. Godfree’s sentiments. I was struck by the fact that the skin is white, not black or brown or olive. This is boring to me; my boobs are white, so black boobs or brown boobs or boobs of a different color would have been more interesting to me.
It is a lovely photo, and the comments are fun to read.
Sorry Anonymous that you got caught surfing the net while conducting a job interview! Now both you and the candidate have an interesting story to tell some time.
Now *this* is scarier than the roadkill pics.
“Probably” NSFW? What do you think this is, Europe?
Tim, why scarier than roadkill? Please elaborate.
Echoing Rachel: Why scary? I think they look quite lovely. If anything makes me slightly uncomfortable, it’s the fear that they may be under age.
You never know what Monday will bring around here.
It was, you know, a joke. My first impulse was to say something about what a lovely pair of breasts they are, but opted for the sarcastic route instead.
I am a little mystified as to the underlying meaning here, assuming that there is any.
I was just happy to see my twin infatuations of porn and TGW merging together — seemed like another step towards singularity.
It’s the second Monday in a row I open TGW window in my office and deeply regret it. A couple more Mondays like this and everyone will think I am different… I do think they are great, it’s just one of those things you don’t necessary expect to see on a Monday morning or on TGW. Lane, I can’t wait to see what you have to say about this…
Speaking of images of breasts, have any of you New Yorkers seen the “Tangled Alphabets” exhibit that’s up now at MoMA? A fascinating show, and one worthwhile bit in particular is León Ferrari’s “Unión Libre” which you can look at here: http://www.moma.org/interactives/exhibitions/2009/tangledalphabets/home.html under “Selected Works” — I posted a thumbnail of it here: http://readin.com/blog/?id=1902
yeah, “scary” WTF. not really, just a fine looking pair of breasts. and a fine photo. it has a clinical quality its so nice. perfect lighting, perfect skin and so forth.
i think it’s really interesting because you really start to look at the details, the slight imperfections in the nipples.
but really aren’t those just nice breasts? they’re the perfect size and shape. she must be really proud of them.
i knew a woman as an undergraduate that worked at the med school letting med students practice breast exams on her. from her clothed physique it seemed like she had these kinds of breasts. i’ll bet she was really proud of them too and really liked using them in a productive way.
it just seemed like a really interesting photo. a chance to write the word breast and nipple over and over and over . . .
“in a productive way”, if you see what I mean, nudge nudge…
Breasts have always reminded me of eyes–even before that “The Had Eyes On Their Breasts” sketch on SNL.
The window to the soul…
Ha ha!
I guess what I really meant by my “scary” comment is that I have no idea how you arrived at the conclusion that it was appropriate to post this picture here, Lane, and I think it’s sort of creepy. Your stated logic (above, in your comment) doesn’t really acknowledge or address the concerns of “Anonymous”. I am afraid of seeming really uptight or that I’m suggesting censorship (which I’m not), and therefore will not go on.
However, I’m not convinced that “Sometimes a nice pair of tits is just a nice pair of tits” is, shall we say, “fully developed” reasoning. Perhaps a discussion of the line between the prurient and the “clinical” is in order. While certainly not overtly libidinous, this photo doesn’t appear to me entirely clinical either. I’m not saying I think it’s categorically inappropriate to post this photo on TGW, but that I’d hope for it to be undergirded by more intellectual support.
first off this post is not called The Monday Photo (tits)
as to “Anonymous” concerns that “everyone will everyone will think I’m different” . . . huh, interesting Anon. what do you mean by different? I have to admit I don’t have those concerns, having no co-workers myself. But I was also thinking of some members of TGW community that might be delighted to see a lovely pair of breasts here and be inclined to enjoy them.
I do apologize to Dave for not alerting him. He had to rush in and add the NSFW tag. (sorry dave)
But as to Rachel’s comment about this not being Europe. Yeah too bad. I’m all for speedos and topless beaches. America is SO FUCKIN” uptight it makes me sick!
How’s that for intellectual support?
sorry Tim. I got carried away with that ending, I didn’t mean to be bitchy.
it was just an improvisational goof to put this up. in retrospect it reminds me of something an art critic once told me. “the only thing the artworld cares about is sex and death” so last week was death, and i guess i followed some hunch to make this week about sex.
but in finding the pic, i ran across this. when you google “breasts” lots of images come up, and not on porn sites. those images where the breasts are covered by a lacy bra or nightgown are more expressly sexual than this one. that’s what struck me about this image. it seemed so “blank” by comparison, and interesting in that regard.
also, my undergraduate education involved many many many hours of being in a room with naked people. in a sense, like a med student, it changed my relationship to images of naked bodies, and I was offering that here.
How’s that for intellectual support?
America is SO FUCKIN” uptight it makes me sick!
D+
those images where the breasts are covered by a lacy bra or nightgown are more expressly sexual than this one. that’s what struck me about this image. it seemed so “blank” by comparison, and interesting in that regard.
A
:-)
I actually find this image a little creepy in that it looks super airbrushed or maybe even computer generated.
But Lane, I really like how you’ve challenged us with the last couple of photo posts.
Lane, that was dry European humor. By “different” I meant a situation like the following:
I was bored interviewing a job candidate this morning. While listening to his mind-blowing qualifications (out of being polite, since I’d already made my decision), I took a peek at the Monday post. I have a huge computer screen, which could be perfectly seen from the candidate’s chair, so a pair of…ahh…significantly aggrandized art pieces popped out in his face. Perhaps not each employer exactly browses art, while conducting interviews… which is different… Anyway, that was fun while it lasted.
I’m the biggest supporter of the Monday posts, so keep posting.
(Sorry, about the Anonymous comment: some things are better left unspecified)
I glanced at this yesterday (yep, it’s a pair of boobs, all right. Moving on…) but had a thought later in the day that reflects S. Godfree’s sentiments. I was struck by the fact that the skin is white, not black or brown or olive. This is boring to me; my boobs are white, so black boobs or brown boobs or boobs of a different color would have been more interesting to me.
It is a lovely photo, and the comments are fun to read.
Sorry Anonymous that you got caught surfing the net while conducting a job interview! Now both you and the candidate have an interesting story to tell some time.