Monday, June 22, 2009

Man mmmm Monday

I don't often participate in Man Monday, because

1. I am lazy
2. Not always aware of the day of the week and
3. Aversion to the word 'candy'. Yes, am petty. Actually there are quite a few other reasons - copyright, distinct lack of willing models, and ambivalence about merely flipping a convention being enough to thwart the imbalance. And I like hot chicks, too.

But anyway, no-one can deny that men are beautiful and sexxxxxy and that we like looking at them.

So here is a man picture.

I found it in the street this weekend, among a snowdrift of abandoned photographs. Sorry his nipples are also obscured by a torn other photo. It had rained and he was stuck to something.

I feel quite resentful even sharing this secret wonder-find anyway, can you tell? But that's how much I love you. You can look until Wednesday when I will put him away again, I think.

(I'm also not quite sure of the ethics of sharing a photo of an anonymous stranger, so I've blacked out his eyes. If that's you in the photo and you want it taken down, call me. I'm sure we can thrash something out, maybe over a glass of wine somewhere nice.)


kristina lloyd said...

Wow, lovely pic and thanks for the link but heck, 'flipping convention ... to thwart the imbalance'. I'm baffled by your logic!

First off, over on Erotica Cover Watch we've never claimed we want to reverse or flip the status quo by replacing all those images of sexy woman with a similar, disproportionately high number of sexy-guy images. All we're asking for is equality, for fair shares - ideally in the world but hey, there's only two of us so we're focusing on book covers.

Secondly, wuh? When the imbalance is lack of hot men available for women to look at, what else do you do but increase the number of hot men available for women to look at in order to rectify said lack? It sounds like you're saying you're ambivalent about trying to solve the problem by trying to solve the problem. Any alternative solution you might suggest is surely on a par with someone realising there's no milk in the fridge then going out to buy rice.

Come on, Nikki, fight the BICEPS fight! You can still find women hot if that's your thing. And ultimately, you'll get more cock.

Danielle de Santiago said...

cool..i m not a fan of the actual pic but a huge fan of the story how you got that pic...i ,love this kind of stories..:-)


Nikki Magennis said...

Hi K,

Ha, yes, my logic is mostly baffled!
Okay, let me try and explain more clearly -
Broadly I support ECW although there are some points that I'm not completely sure about.

I have the impression that ECW is anti the use of female images as sex objects. (FWIW I agree that the ubiquitous women-as-signifier-of-sex is sexist, not to mention kind of cheesy.) Yet ECW promotes male images as sex objects.

Those two viewpoints seem to me to be at odds. Female objectification = bad, male objectification = good.

So generally I'd prefer to put emphasis on either using completely different images for erotica novels than the dodgy soft-porn we sometimes get, or on having couples perhaps on covers. Just so it's proper equality.

I understand that you're trying to correct the imbalance by adding more men to the scales. Yes. (I like this experiment.) I just tend a bit to be logically simplistic when it comes to things like 'balance'.

Does that make more sense? I am trying to be coherent!

Nikki Magennis said...

- and thanks, Danielle! It's a relief you don't like the man. More for me! ; )

Nikki Magennis said...

Also - "realising there's no milk in the fridge then going out to buy rice."

- wouldn't be the first time ...

Danielle de Santiago said...


nikki i didnt say i dont like the man..i just wasnt a fan of the pic..:-P

talking about hot chicks..when will you invent the wo-man monday?


kristina lloyd said...

More men includes couples, Nikki. We've made that point plenty on ECW.

And I don't think we've ever, ever said we're against objectification per se or we don't wish to see women as sex objects. That wouldn't make sense either in the realm of erotica, or in terms of our argument. We want more eroticised men which, of course, means fewer eroticised women to make space for them. I'd like to see covers with an even spread of couples, of solo women and solo men (and they don't *have* to look like naff soft porn from the 80s); and yeah, apples or roses or abstract something or others are fine too. But to get to a more diverse and equal state, we need to keep making the point that women find men sexy.

One of the difficulties in doing ECW is having your politics translated into a very binary summary. Wanting more sexy men (and therefore fewer sexy women) doesn't mean we're rejecting *all* representations of sexy women or that we're anti-women (we're pro-women cos we *are* women!). It's similarly frustrating when feminists are accused of being anti-men. We're het feminists who find men hot and we'd very much like more gawping ops, please! Some guy once got so confused by all this, he denounced us as lesbians. Bless.

We just want equality.

Nikki Magennis said...

Danielle - Hm, I shall see what I can find among the found images. To be honest, I'm not great at regular series of things, being rather more occassional, really

; )

Dear Kristina - Yes, that's all grand and I agree with it! Absolutely.

There have been several posts on ECW that are decrying images that I find sexy. Yes, they may be symptomatic of a power imbalance, but the images in themselves are not wrong, I don't think. The 'Mammoth' cover, for example. I don't think there's anything wrong with a headless woman, per se.

(Although now that I've typed it, that sentence does sound rather gruesome. And then I get a flashback to that German cover for 'Sex in Public', which really is beyond the pale.)

I suppose perhaps it's that I would rather the emphasis was on upping the quotient of beautiful men, rather than criticism of images of women. I can appreciate that might be difficult to achieve as it's trying to promote something that doesn't really exist.

Anyway, I am sorry if my original post came across as ungracious. I didn't word it very well. I know you've both taken a lot of flak at ECW and I didn't mean to add to it. I just have a couple of comments/reservations on the fine points of the argument, is all.

I *do* want to support the biceps thing, and I look forward to the day when the whole idea that 'women aren't visual' will be exposed for the thoroughly snort-worthy nonsense that it is.

Best of luck!

Nikki Magennis said...




Danielle de Santiago said...

@ kristina

i think there is nothing wrong with objectification ..but sure..there should be as much men out on covers and in ads as women...sometimes i feel like there are more women pics on covers ect because its easier to make a woman look sexy lush and promising..its much more work to make a man look sexy in a natural and "unwanted" way ...but anyways..there should be an equal amount of men be available then of can i say it..i m a emancipated man..we are sexy and beautiful creatures too..:-)

@ nikki..i can tell you are that way..dont stress yourself with the image thing..:-) your blog is fine even without any pics of hot women or men...

ps: everytime i type in the word verification i wonder if that are real unrubl a word???

Janine Ashbless said...

Well, I think the Sex in Public cover is rather nice. (It has to be classy, right? - she's wearing pearls! lol) As opposed to the Mammoth one which was plain ugly. There's no accounting for taste, is there?

And my Eyecandy Mondays feature women about one quarter of the time, which is approximately my own preference. Sorry about the "candy" bit, Nikki!

Nikki Magennis said...

Eh, don't apologise, Janine, it stems from my grandmother having histrionics, I think! Or something about the shape it makes in my mouth.

anyway, heh, I can drive!

Danielle, thanks! And I believe I am now qualified to drive in Germany, too. Autofuckinbahn here I come!

Danielle de Santiago said...

wow you "survived" your driving licence test properly?? ( i read it about it over at kristinas)..congrats..come over and take me for a ride..i m not allowed to drive myself..:-(