Why are we self-censoring our own works? There are, I think, two reasons for it: Legal; fear of breaking ambiguous and poorly defined obscenity laws and ‘coding’ that is helping readers avoid or find works on specific topics.
My answer to the first is this site is not porn, at least my part of it, and based on what I have read, other authors as well and therefore the first reason doesn't apply. Let me take a few moments to support my contention. First as to the subject matter we write about. Let’s compare the subjects we deal with to well known images in museums worldwide. Here is a famous Gustave Courbet painting in the Musee D’Orsay in Paris, Birth of the World.
That’s it, the whole painting is just a pussy. The painting hangs out in the open, sorry for the pun, if you can believe it, where children walk past it all day every day. The day I was there, there were hundreds of the little brats running all over the museum. Oh, imagine how of those children are damaged every day in the D'Orsay. What? The kids are all just fine. But we Americans all know images of naked human bodies destroy the moral fiber of children… Why don’t those Europeans understand the damage being done to their children by a glimpse of a pussy?
And here is a painting by Tom Wesselmann. Tom is known for painting dicks and tits. They hang all over the world in galleries and museums. People even hang his paintings in their homes and they aren't being prosecuted, even if they have kids. Again, no outbreaks of anti-social behavior have been reported. And more importantly, the museums and galleries that hang and sell Wesslemann’s works do not self-censor themselves. They display this art in the open, not behind Adults Only warnings.
I could put up hundreds if not thousands of paintings and photos that hang in important galleries all over the world, including the U.S, where images of genitals is open to all, including children and no one is hurt and no one is arrested. Genitals, images and descriptions, are not illegal or damaging as long as the person is not ashamed of it. Museums and galleries are not defensive about their subject matter. They proudly and openly display their works. That is the difference. We are defensive and cower in fear. Hell with that. We should be publishing our stories just like any library in America, or Australia, or New Zealand, etc.
Oh, but the subject matter here, it is SEX.
This one is hard to narrow down to a few examples just because Western art has been invoking sex as long as it, I mean art, sex has been around way longer, has existed. Going all the way back to Classical Greek art the pottery was covered with images of naked men and some women. First, here is one man giving it to another in the ass and below is two guys giving it to a woman double penetration. This pottery was to be used at the dining table. It puts a new take on eating at the table! Oh my.
All of the ruckus over Jerry Sandusky would not have made sense to the Greeks. In Classical Greece it was accepted and even expected that a young boy would form a friendship with an older man. The older man would serve as a mentor and a level of love would naturally develop between the two. That love would be expressed quite naturally. In Greek pottery popular themes and images were used over and over. For example, here is one popular image used in two different pottery pieces, an older man with an erection fondling a boy called Man courting young boy. Courting, what a wonderful euphemism. Now remember, this is museum art so it is okay. We don't need to get squeamish over Art with a capital A.
The Romans loved Greek erotic pottery and they also painted sex on their dining room walls. At the Villa of the Mysteries in Pompeii were frescos of an initiation rite involving naked women being whipped. For breakfast? Well, to each his own. Let me also point out that no dignified Roman Matron would have had a house without an erect penis right near the door to ward off evil spirits. The Romans also used figures with an enlarged penis that had bells attached called tinntabulus to keep evil spirits away. If one penis was good then five must be better. Each little dick would have had a bell which tinkled in the wind.
And since, with the Romans and Greeks, we are speaking of ‘deviant’ deviant by what we say in public our standards are, not by what we actually do in private, sex let's not forget more modern deviants. Courbet's painting of two women making love, The Sleepers in the Petit Palace in Paris. I think we know what caused them to fall 'asleep.' The homoerotic nature of the painting simply screams out and yet not one child has ever been driven crazy by the painting. Not one has ever even complained.
Since we are looking at women playing with women let’s make sure we have something from the most famous museum in the world, the Louvre. In Gabrielle de Estee two upper class sisters are sharing a bath as one tweaks the other’s nipple. Looks like fun. And to make sure the viewer is fully entertained, since the women in the foreground are only naked from the waist up, in the background is a part of a painting showing a naked women from the waist down. Can’t have too much naked femininity can you?
Okay, we have had girl on girl, man on man, man on boy, and man on a woman sex how about another type of sex in our public museum tour. A very popular God for the Greeks was Hermaphroditus, the child of Hermes and Aphrodite, the male and female Deities of sex, whose other son was Eros, also known as Cupid. Hermaphroditus was a mix of the two, half man – half woman, a true transgender. Velasquez is supposed to have modled his Venus on the Sleeping Hermaphroditus in Rome, just the backide. There is a famous Hermaphroditus in the Louvre, right out in public as well, the most visited museum in the world, children too. No wonder those French think Jerry Lewis is a great comedian. Their brains have been rotted by all of the sex in their museums. But my favorite is this one, called the Lady Lever Hermaphroditus, part of the British Museum. Her body and face so feminine and the hand holding a lock of hair. What a beauty! Lovely breasts, but also a, a ...penis! This is all so confusing.
I love all of the Leda and the Swan paintings that have been popular subjects in Western art. Titian and Rubens were the Playboy and Penthouse Magazine of his day and the Spanish nobility bought their naked women exactly because they were erotic! But Titian was Church approved so the owner didn't have to worry about the Inquisition. Heck, here was a woman having sex with a goose for God’s sake! So, I don’t want to hear well, our site is trying to sexually excite people. That other was ART, with a capital A, and was for higher purposes. The truth of course is the Spanish nobles, King included, bought the paintings because they were erotic and they still are erotic and in museums, bookstores, libraries, and the Internet open to all with no age restrictions. The King kept all of his erotic paintings in his private rooms and when the Queen visited, servents would cover them to spare her sensibilities. Oh, the hypocrisy.
The later Spanish royalty, as the Inquisition got going full steam, gave away many of the paintings as they knew what was represented. But these paintings are in museums and books available to all. Looking for Leda images I ran across this one by Titian. In the popular myth the swan gave it to Leda so Titian turns the tables. Aphrodite's son, Eros, is returning the 'favor' and giving it back to the swan much to the swan’s consternation. How many sexual ‘perversions’ are there is this one painting? Bestiality, pedophilia, voyeurism. And yet, any museum director in the world would sell their mother to get this Titian. But we 'code' all of these elements in our stories as if we are ashamed of the topics and mark this off as adults only. Funny how it only needs to be 'adults only' on the Internet and not in public museums or public libraries.
One of the Titian paintings that have always fascinated me is his Sacred and Profane Love. Now we modern Anglos with our ingrained prudery would assume the nude was profane and the dressed lady sacred. But art historians agree that it is just the opposite. The nude represents purity and lack of corruption brought about by wealth in civilization. Wouldn’t it be nice to get back to that purity of understanding that the naked human body is the most beautiful and perfect measure of our world? That sex is a natural and wholesome pursuit, not the sin the Church made of it.
We don’t have to go very far in art history to find another famous pornog - oops, famous pervert, sorry, famous painter, Caravaggio. He is noted for the sensuous young boys he loved to paint, um, yes, we'll leave it at paint. The homoerotic and pedophilic qualities of this painting have always been apparent to all. The luscious soft skin and under developed male genitals give this boy a feminine quality that must have appealed to all the perverts. You can find this image all over the Internet and library books with no age restrictions, because it is Art. No where does this pedophilic voyeuristic homoerotic painting violate community standards. I mean, except here on our website where we would carefully hide it behind the codes.
Youth has never been seen as a problem in the art world, Louise O'Murphey was 15 after all, see below. Here is a recent painting by Eric Fischl, Dog Days. It is a couple teens ready to do the dirty deed, with genitals out and ready for all to see. Like Tom Wessleman, Eric like erect cocks, I guess. The girl obviously is interested. How many taboos does this painting break and yet, there are no adults only warnings for it or the gallery which sold it or the library books it is in.
And speaking of young, here is a painting in the Detroit Institute of Art, Crosslights by William Kendall along with her sister, Narcissa. Once again, there is a lot of skin showing on these young girls, enough to make a pedo smile anyway. But there it is in Detroit and on the Internet and no one complains. Why not? Why isn't the FBI breaking down the doors of the Detroit Institute of Art and hauling away the curators? Curiousier and curiousier.
Speaking of feminine boys, the second most famous David, the one by Donatello, turns the founder of Israel into a little girl with a foppish feminine hat. The only thing masculine is the genitals that seem stuck on a girl's body with the pooching abdomen and pointy little nipples. 35 years or so later, Verocchio made another David obviously influenced by Donatello. Verocchio puts his girlsh David in a skirt and breastplate that seems to highlight his pubscent breasts and feminine abdomen. Again, all ages are admitted to the Bargello museum and you can find these in every book on the Italian art of the renaissance. No community standards were violated. Even the Christians aren't incensed that David has been turned into a girl. This art is okay.
This gets a pass because it is art. Great art isn’t erotic. Really? Okay how about this from the Louvre. This Boucher painting is of a 15 year-old Irish girl, Louise O’Murphey. A nice Irish girl. It was sent to the King of France by Boucher to invoke the lust of the king so that he would have sex with the girl and take her as his mistress. Pandering Child Porn is what this is! Oh, by the way the girl was already Boucher’s mistress at the time. This was basically a job application for a promotion, from painter to king! And for those of historical curiosity, yes, she got the job at 16 and got rich from the King's gifts and retired to a good life. Once again, you can find this child porn in every library or bookstore. I have even seen this on the cover of books about Boucher. Why isn't every bookstore and library under attack by the child protection advocates? Good question. I guess these folks don't believe children go to libraries or bookstores. Or is it just monumental hypocrisy?
And speaking of harlots to the King, here is a famous actress, Nell Gwyn, who was mistress to Charles II, King of England, proudly displaying what made her attractive to the King. This and other paintings of Nell Gywn certainly weren't done nude or with her breasts showing in her protraits because of her acting, they were because of the erotic. Nell took up acting and promotion of her acting at 14. There are several portraits of Nell displaying her obvious charms, none so far that have aroused public outcry, and certainly didn't do so even in Restoration England, coming so soon after the Puritan intervention which people quickly tired of. The forced piety not really suiting most folks who only want to pretend to be good while they enjoy wenching and beer. Here's to Nell, the first to use the casting couch to fame and riches.
One of my favorite perverts, I mean, world famous painters is the Polish painter, Balthus, known for his erotic pictures of young girls. It takes little imagination to know what the little girl is dreaming about, the kitty lapping at the milk is symbolic enough.
Balthus had a predilection for pubescent girls as here, Girl with Guitar. On our website we would worry if this wasn’t specially marked off and hidden. But since this is Art, notice the capital A, it is in libraries, bookstores, and the Internet with no restrictions at all.
I love this painting by Balthus, The Violin Lesson. I don’t think violin is exactly what is being taught here but there are enough different things going on that the coding on this site would go on for a paragraph and everyone would be afraid to even look. By the way, do we have a code for hair pulling? If not, why not? It is obviously sexual in some way. Larry Rivers, American Painter, did a copy of this painting sold through Christie's New York which he called, 'The Clitar Lesson,' so the intent of the original and Larry's American copy are really clear. And no one gets arrested either.
And it isn’t just paintings. Photos too. Here is a photo, Pubescent Girl, by Hy Hirsch in the San Francisco Museum of Modern Art. The title itself tells you the photographers intent. It isn't titled, Study in tones of gray. He is photgraphing a girl turning into a woman, naked, on purpose. Museums and public libraries, including their Internet, are okay to show this stuff but we have to hide behind Adults Only warnings.
Modern paintings have gotten even more explicit in showing what older paintings only hinted at. And still, these are not locked away and age restricted. This painting is by American John Currin and is in the Gallery Gagosian in New York, right out in public, not hidden behind codes or warnings. Or look at the Europabronze. Doesn't she make you want to lie between her legs? My point again and again, is that our works on this site are no more obscene than works commonly displayed in museums, libraries, and galleries in every country in every state, in every city. We don’t need to apologize or self-censor our works. We should quit painting a Scarlet A on our works.
About the only thing we haven’t covered so far in the paintings of the art world is that you can find in museums and art books in any public library is scatological, so here’s Hans Bellmer to finish the job. Bellmer is a famous German Surrealist and the image is of a pubescent girl, her pussy is on display with a cock coming out of it as if she is being penetrated backwards and above her is a woman shitting on a man’s face. Yep, this is high art by a renown artist. In the art world nothing is sacred and it isn’t censored. So why are we censoring our own work?
What I hope I have convinced you of is that there is nothing on this site that cannot be found in some gallery or museum or art book in any public library in every city in this country and any major city of the world outside the theocracies of Islam and it is open to all, young and old. All of this is easily available on the Internet to all ages. None of this is hidden behind nanny software. Please, someone tell me how we are violating community standards and need to be hidden away.
This brings me to the last thing I’d like to discuss, age. As I’ve already touched on above, and you can see for yourself in many of those paintings, Western Art has always used young men and women as subjects in sexual situations. Let’s look at what is actually illegal right now. The Courts have made it plain that fictional representations of ‘underage’ sex are absolutely protected. Attempts by the last Congress to prosecute adult actors pretending to be children engaged in sex was thrown out. By the way, Congress knew it would be and already had a replacement bill ready. That whole law was a Potemkin village sham.
Current law is you cannot use children, defined as under 18, in actual acts of sex which are filmed or photographed. I don’t know of a single such film or photo on this site. Therefore, there is nothing on this site that is illegal. Let's not spend time on the utter hypocrisy of such laws when 70% of young adults under 18 are currently having sex.
There is also a vaguely defined and almost unenforceable obscenity law. That uses community standards as the benchmark. As shown above by art and below by literature, virtually everything on this site falls within ‘community standards.’ All you would have to do is go down to the local library, check out a few art books and a couple modern novels, Lolita, Delta of Venus, any Henry Miller book and throw them on the table.
Let’s look at what is in community standards in reference to the age question. Recently Lolita was voted one of the top 5 novels in English written in the last 100 years. This book is the standard bearer of writing about underage sex and it is in every library and book store in the country. All this hogwash about coding of ages and worrying about someone might read something, is just ludicrous. Public libraries don't seem to care if some old biddy gets her knickers twisted because she read something she didn’t like. They don’t seem to care if Aunt Biddy gets her knickers in a twist over Lolita. Damn it! Anything of real value is going to offend somebody. The only writing that doesn’t offend anyone is going to be so childish as to be worthless. See Jane run.
But we use naughty words here. That could get us in trouble. Funny, I was reading Henry Miller’s book Tropic of Capricorn as I thought about this argument. I found these quotes in his book: "When I look down into this fucked-out cunt of a whore I feel the whole world beneath me, a world tottering and crumbling; a world used up and polished like a leper's skull.” - "Suddenly I see a dark, hairy crack in front of me set in a bright, polished billiard ball; the legs are holding me like a pair of scissors.” - “Put me on the fucking block and fuck!” - "Fuck for fuck's sake" - "What do you think life is, a wet dream?"
And that was just as I was reading; it isn’t an exhaustive list by any means. Or read Delta of Venus. Anaïs Nin wrote it as an erotic read. That was her intention, and she got paid by the orgasm, and that book can be found in any bookstore or library. Speaking of which, I went into our library’s online catalog and in addition to Delta of Venus the library listed several best of erotica volumes available for checkout to anyone with a library card just like a bookstore will sell to anyone. Let’s quit pretending sex isn’t in all sorts of books, movies, plays, magazines, etc. available to anyone who wants to read about it. I did a search on my local public library and put in the keyword erotic. It came up with 1138 books and an additional 75 ebooks. Surprisingly, there was no Adults Only warning on the library. Hell, we ought to include the public libraries in our website!
Sex is written about, sung about, laughed about in all sorts of ways in all sorts of literature so that it is ridiculous to pretend it isn’t available widely to any and all ages, occupations, regions, etc. We need to quit pretending that Nanny software really does anything except self-censor sometimes important writing, our writing. Internet blocking software is useless because is written for the ignorant extremists out there who want to pretend that the same things we write about are not also available through the Internet from the local libraries, schools, and bookstores, which it is. Like teens won’t search the library or a bookstore but will browse our website and 'accidentially' read about sex.
The point here is that sex is written about in all sorts of ways and it is available to all ages in the bookstores and libraries of every town. We have allowed ourselves to be cowed by American hypocrisy when it comes to sex. Sex is okay as long as it is in a museum or public library. But on our Internet, it is wrong and needs to be censored. Come again?
Okay, what about those people who are offended? Good! I love to hear about folks who are offended. Maybe it will break through their rigid out-of-date hypocritical prejudices and make them THINK! What a concept.
I read the Bill of Rights and there is no right to not be offended. Not anywhere! In fact, all important speech will offend some group or another. You could measure how fresh and important your speech is by the number of knuckle-dragging mouth-breathers you offend. If you are offended by what I am saying, close your mouth and quit walking on your knuckles and engage your brain. It will be a strain at first, but with practice, you might join the rest of us in the 21st Century where we can wave at Justice Scalia who, when he dies, the 18th Century will die with him.
All this political correctness and 'I'm Offended' crap is just an attempt to undermine the protection of the First Amendment by the creation of a spurious new right, the right not to be offended, which has never existed and have that right replace the freedom of speech upon which our liberty rests. As Jefferson said, "I am mortified to be told that, in the United States of America, the sale of a book can become a subject of inquiry, and of criminal inquiry too."
This is a plea to all to quit self censoring our works. Quit worrying that we might offend Aunt Biddy. Quit forcing coding to scare readers away. I always thought the only value of coding is to help readers find works to read, not to scare them away. Why do we as authors want to scare potential readers away? That makes no sense at all. The public libraries don't mark their sites as adults only and they have the same materials. If the purpose of coding is screen out readers, do away with it! I want readers! No more Scarlet A on this site!
Did you like the story? Let me know what you thought. I answer all feedback. Please make sure your address is correct and you are set up to accept email from me:
Or you can e-mail me directly
Return to the Serious Thoughts homepage
Copyright Rod O'Steele © 2012, 2013, 2014