A judgment of Paris
Nov. 20th, 2009 12:55 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
Today I want to bring together, here on Click Opera, an entry in which you the readers do most of the work, and in which images take the place of text. I'm also interested in how predictable my aesthetics have become. So what I'm proposing is a judgment of Paris; a beauty contest which is also a sifting of values (visual, aesthetic, political, semantic, sexual).
I want to see images of females, girls, women you think are totally my type. They should be wearing clothes, that's important. People without clothes are stripped of cultural referents, and we want those. They should be people who style themselves rather than have professional stylists, and they should be ordinary people, not celebrities. Street style sites like Facehunter might be a good place to source the images, or Flickr feeds. They shouldn't be people I know in real life. Be nice to me in your comments (yes, I am very old, and a bit funny looking) and be nice to the women.
At midnight CET I'll select a winning image -- the person I find most appealing, according to my own personal aesthetic code. I hope I won't have to exclaim "You never knew me!" I think by now you probably do.
Update (midnight CET): What an exciting finish! With about twenty minutes to go before the non-sexist gong sounded, this very beautiful image arrived:

While it looked for a while as if this indie musician would win, the judges -- all right, judge -- decided that she must be excluded as, possibly, a "celebrity", and, possibly, styled (though these things aren't really provable, and we don't know who the woman is).
And so this woman was chosen instead:

The judges (all right, judge) particularly liked the elegant hooded white garment, the expression of intent concentration, and the evidence of creative endeavour (carving) in the picture. Thanks to all who submitted pictures.

At midnight CET I'll select a winning image -- the person I find most appealing, according to my own personal aesthetic code. I hope I won't have to exclaim "You never knew me!" I think by now you probably do.
Update (midnight CET): What an exciting finish! With about twenty minutes to go before the non-sexist gong sounded, this very beautiful image arrived:

While it looked for a while as if this indie musician would win, the judges -- all right, judge -- decided that she must be excluded as, possibly, a "celebrity", and, possibly, styled (though these things aren't really provable, and we don't know who the woman is).
And so this woman was chosen instead:

The judges (all right, judge) particularly liked the elegant hooded white garment, the expression of intent concentration, and the evidence of creative endeavour (carving) in the picture. Thanks to all who submitted pictures.
(no subject)
Date: 2009-11-20 12:10 pm (UTC)Via Tim Rudder's blog.
(no subject)
Date: 2009-11-20 12:23 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2009-11-20 12:13 pm (UTC)something about her atmosphere...
picture taken from a flikr stream (but not mine)
(no subject)
Date: 2009-11-20 12:20 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2009-11-20 12:20 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2009-11-20 12:22 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2009-11-20 12:22 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2009-11-20 12:25 pm (UTC)(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From: (Anonymous) - Date: 2009-11-20 05:09 pm (UTC) - Expand(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:wow...wow.
From: (Anonymous) - Date: 2009-11-20 09:24 pm (UTC) - ExpandRe: wow...wow.
From:Re: wow...wow.
From: (Anonymous) - Date: 2009-11-20 10:00 pm (UTC) - ExpandRe: wow...wow.
From:Re: wow...wow.
From:(no subject)
From: (Anonymous) - Date: 2009-11-24 04:24 pm (UTC) - Expand(no subject)
From: (Anonymous) - Date: 2009-11-20 01:14 pm (UTC) - Expand(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From: (Anonymous) - Date: 2009-11-20 02:32 pm (UTC) - Expand(no subject)
From: (Anonymous) - Date: 2009-11-20 05:57 pm (UTC) - Expand(no subject)
From:rhetoric just
From: (Anonymous) - Date: 2009-11-21 01:22 am (UTC) - Expandlolz
From: (Anonymous) - Date: 2009-11-20 09:27 pm (UTC) - ExpandRe: lolz
From: (Anonymous) - Date: 2009-11-21 01:18 am (UTC) - ExpandRe: lolz
From: (Anonymous) - Date: 2009-11-21 05:55 am (UTC) - ExpandRe: lolz
From: (Anonymous) - Date: 2009-11-21 04:41 pm (UTC) - Expand(no subject)
From: (Anonymous) - Date: 2009-11-20 09:27 pm (UTC) - ExpandLolZ
From: (Anonymous) - Date: 2009-11-20 09:31 pm (UTC) - ExpandRe: LolZ
From: (Anonymous) - Date: 2009-11-20 09:43 pm (UTC) - ExpandRe: LolZ
From: (Anonymous) - Date: 2009-11-20 10:01 pm (UTC) - ExpandRe: LolZ
From: (Anonymous) - Date: 2009-11-20 10:14 pm (UTC) - Expand(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From: (Anonymous) - Date: 2009-11-21 07:44 am (UTC) - Expand(no subject)
From: (Anonymous) - Date: 2009-11-27 04:23 am (UTC) - Expand(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From: (Anonymous) - Date: 2009-11-20 06:48 pm (UTC) - Expand(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From: (Anonymous) - Date: 2009-11-20 09:37 pm (UTC) - Expand(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From: (Anonymous) - Date: 2009-11-21 07:48 am (UTC) - Expand(no subject)
From:(no subject)
Date: 2009-11-20 12:26 pm (UTC)found via gis for "ethnic pants"
(no subject)
Date: 2009-11-20 12:32 pm (UTC)Post reverence
From: (Anonymous) - Date: 2009-11-20 10:36 pm (UTC) - Expand(no subject)
Date: 2009-11-20 12:31 pm (UTC)Now, I'm reliably informed that sexual interest in young woman decades younger than oneself doesn't stop when men hit 50, au contraire. But I think 50 is a good age to get a bit dignified about it and keep it to yourself, your close friends and lovers, rather than spray it over the Internet.
(no subject)
Date: 2009-11-20 12:36 pm (UTC)(no subject)
From: (Anonymous) - Date: 2009-11-20 12:40 pm (UTC) - Expand(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
Date: 2009-11-20 12:36 pm (UTC)Miss Momus 2009
Date: 2009-11-20 12:46 pm (UTC)Re: Miss Momus 2009
Date: 2009-11-20 01:02 pm (UTC)Re: Miss Momus 2009
From: (Anonymous) - Date: 2009-11-20 01:14 pm (UTC) - ExpandRe: Miss Momus 2009
From:(no subject)
Date: 2009-11-20 12:52 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2009-11-20 12:53 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2009-11-20 01:01 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2009-11-20 01:05 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2009-11-20 01:06 pm (UTC)There are women who men can carry relationships with that aren't tiny Asian girls. I don't know how old you are and it doesn't bother me that you are attracted to whatever you like in pictures, but it does make a person wonder: When an older, intelligent, attractive, and successful man needs the supply of overwhelmingly younger and specifically trend-beautiful young women, are they trying to compensate for something? If you're afraid of growing older, wouldn't it be nice to have someone your age to share that with you? If you're afraid you're losing your youth, wouldn't someone much younger perpetuate that feeling?
Anyway, I hope I have been respectful in my comment and have not insulted you by encouraging you to look at your privilege or understand it differently. I continue to read your journal and listen to your music and respect you, and see this kind of search for women as objects as a reflection of your hurt. If you want to look at communities that can help you sort through all the -isms I brought up, I have a few on my profile page.
Thanks Momus,
Olivia.
(no subject)
Date: 2009-11-20 01:17 pm (UTC)Well, as you kindly acknowledge, I did not specify any age or weight range, or any ethnicity. I carefully used three words: female, girl, woman.
I know exactly where you're coming from -- don't worry, I have bathed in identity politics, snorkeled in it, drunk it to the brim. And, at the end of that process, I have come to the conclusion that there is a lot of sexism built into anti-sexism.
(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From: (Anonymous) - Date: 2009-11-20 01:56 pm (UTC) - Expand(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From: (Anonymous) - Date: 2009-11-20 02:48 pm (UTC) - Expand(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From: (Anonymous) - Date: 2009-11-20 03:48 pm (UTC) - Expand(no subject)
From: (Anonymous) - Date: 2009-11-20 04:16 pm (UTC) - Expand(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From: (Anonymous) - Date: 2009-11-20 04:40 pm (UTC) - Expand(no subject)
From:lolz
From: (Anonymous) - Date: 2009-11-20 10:14 pm (UTC) - ExpandRe: lolz
From:Re: lolz
From: (Anonymous) - Date: 2009-11-21 05:58 am (UTC) - Expand(no subject)
From: (Anonymous) - Date: 2009-11-21 11:14 am (UTC) - Expand(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From: (Anonymous) - Date: 2009-11-20 10:10 pm (UTC) - Expand(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From: (Anonymous) - Date: 2009-11-20 01:22 pm (UTC) - Expand(no subject)
From:(no subject)
Date: 2009-11-20 01:08 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2009-11-20 01:19 pm (UTC)(no subject)
From: (Anonymous) - Date: 2009-11-20 01:46 pm (UTC) - Expand(no subject)
From:(no subject)
Date: 2009-11-20 01:11 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2009-11-20 01:18 pm (UTC)Well, see, this is a complete misapprehension! You will probably be astonished at midnight.
(no subject)
From: (Anonymous) - Date: 2009-11-20 01:33 pm (UTC) - Expand(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From: (Anonymous) - Date: 2009-11-20 02:28 pm (UTC) - Expand(no subject)
From: (Anonymous) - Date: 2009-11-20 02:32 pm (UTC) - Expand(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From: (Anonymous) - Date: 2009-11-20 02:57 pm (UTC) - Expand(no subject)
From:(no subject)
Date: 2009-11-20 01:36 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2009-11-20 01:38 pm (UTC)I'm going to keep participating just to spite all of you joyless shitheads.
I know you're over the pop star thing, nick, but you have to give her points for trouser innovation:
(no subject)
Date: 2009-11-20 01:40 pm (UTC)A lot of the faces I'm seeing on this thread look like Star Forever Karin Komoto, weirdly enough! (We'll be visiting her in Yokohama soon.)
(no subject)
From: (Anonymous) - Date: 2009-11-21 03:44 pm (UTC) - Expandharlequin
Date: 2009-11-20 01:55 pm (UTC)Re: harlequin
Date: 2009-11-20 07:14 pm (UTC)I kid you not, I just had the pic in mind because I just send it to an artist friend of mine.
Creepy :)
PS: now am gonna read yesterdays entry ha ha
(no subject)
Date: 2009-11-20 02:02 pm (UTC)....wait, sorry, that's my particular aesthetic continuum. Carry on.
(no subject)
Date: 2009-11-20 02:17 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2009-11-20 02:34 pm (UTC)(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
Date: 2009-11-20 02:36 pm (UTC)http://www.flickr.com/photos/davisayer/3562746637/in/photostream/
(no subject)
Date: 2009-11-20 02:40 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2009-11-20 02:42 pm (UTC)Sorry, I don't know how to embed an image. But do take a look.
While I suppose I understand where the ire in these responses is coming from, my initial reaction was enthusiasm for the fun of the thing, and oddly, my first thought had nothing to do with Japanese tweeners and everything to do with the photos you once posted of elderly Dutch women with fantastic headdresses. You didn't ask for masturbatory fodder; you asked for images of beauty, and you've been pretty clear over time that your ideas of beauty are far ranging, and not always related to sex. Personally, I dig it. And I was disappointed to click on the comments and find myself splashing through a river of bile instead of a sea of beauty. I'm a woman, and I love looking at female loveliness too.
(no subject)
Date: 2009-11-20 03:17 pm (UTC)instead, readers were asked to share "images of females, girls, women you think are totally my type" (my emphasis - are the elderly dutch women nick's "type", do you reckon?), as part of a competition. so that ultimately we have one woman as a "winner" (based on one man's aesthetic criteria - and there's the reader assumption that these are relatively narrow, based on previous posts and knowledge of his personal life, although doubtless the "winner" will be chosen in order to deflect/dispute this assumption) and the rest as "losers".
(no subject)
From: (Anonymous) - Date: 2009-11-20 03:52 pm (UTC) - Expand(no subject)
From: (Anonymous) - Date: 2009-11-24 04:29 pm (UTC) - Expand(no subject)
Date: 2009-11-20 03:17 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2009-11-20 03:23 pm (UTC)Hm. Well, it had a sort of 'thrift art' quality with a delicate gradient reminiscent of something from a Flash animation. It made me go 'ugh' and 'I want that on my wall' at the same time. Plus she looks a bit dirty and French.
I really love this image though:
(no subject)
Date: 2009-11-20 03:31 pm (UTC)I think the way you could have avoided a venomous uprising from the resident feminists is if you had asked for some stylish pictures of people that we like. It is not just the fact that you asked for pictures of women, it's the fact that they are for you that people are annoyed, I think.
Same way that I was peturbed when that female blogger made Joe her Number One Cute Boy or whatever it was. We don't like the thought of people being held up for some kind of consumption without their explicit will to be objectified like that.
Anyway, I personally am not that annoyed. I did just post my latest crush on my Tumblr (http://pulled-up.tumblr.com), after all. But it does make you look a bit old/letchy Nick! (Sorry!)
(no subject)
Date: 2009-11-20 03:42 pm (UTC)(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From: (Anonymous) - Date: 2009-11-20 05:16 pm (UTC) - Expand(no subject)
Date: 2009-11-20 03:51 pm (UTC)I guess this is better than going on 4chan and saying, "ITT, post ur pix of cute azn girls plx." Not as high a turnout, but this way you don't get 60% CP or tubgirl posts.
(no subject)
Date: 2009-11-20 10:17 pm (UTC)