Anonymous asked: I see you responding to a lot of positive feedback about those pinups you made, and I was curious what sorts of negative feedback you got on them? I thought that a lot of feminists might be frustrated with it, as you've been very outspoken in the past about the objectification of women.
I haven’t really gotten anything negative like that, probably because erotic art isn’t inherently about objectification. Really, only bad or lazy erotic art sexualizes in that way. I talked about this with someone in an earlier ask, but I’ll quote my response here too:
…I think part of what might keep something like this from being creepy or sexualized (as opposed to just being sexy) is that there’s no voyeurism or reducing the figure to only body parts (ie: objectification).
Good pinups, or at least the ones that appeal to me, have the subject in charge of their own sexuality as a whole person, rather than being subjected to the viewer’s gaze, if that makes sense. I don’t know if there’s a hard line between “good” and “problematic” art like this, but there are likely some rules of thumb that are based around not dehumanizing characters…
…I think we tend to lump all sexual content together, when that’s sort of a terrible idea that we don’t really apply to anything else. It’s especially troubling because treating it all the same, or more specifically dismissing it all, ultimately has its roots in misogyny.
This is partly why there’s such a thing as sex-positive feminism. Essentially, with regards to erotic art, it comes down to whether you’re reducing a person to pieces or dehumanizing them in some other way.