Wanted !!!!!!

[LordTheNightKnight]

Erotic doesnt have a million meanings; just one.

Also I feel OFF has explained it vey well.

 

OFF doesnt like smoking but he has acknowledged that many of us do find it erotic. I never met a woman who smoked that didnt partly do it for erotic impact anyway, which may surprise some of you as its not pc to admit that.

 

Women can wear fur as an erotic tool. If the picture is suggestive of that it is erotic. Or if the fur has been designed to be sexy then its erotic. Or if the woman is particularly sexy or the pose is suggestive or other "tools" pf the seductive art are used...whips, suspenders etc then its erotic.

 

A warbonnet is not designed to be sexy...its iconism is not sexual....but because it is part fur and feather and associated with the hunter warrior then it goes with fur. What makes it erotic or not is HOW it is worn.

LTNK....check out the website of the cherokee model we were looking at a week or two ago. A warbonnet is about power; fur is about sexual power

both can be used om an erotic manner and together. It may not turn you on but to try to say it isnt erotic is nuts. I dont get off on tatoos at all....but I know thya can have a powerful eroticism for others. So an attractive girl where the photographer makes a feature of the tatoo would be erotic(though not personally to me). You need to seperate your notions of erotic from the subjective and acknowledge an objective criteria of assessment. Please.

 

Correction: erotic has many interpretations, as in not everyone is going to find the same things erotic. That's why I mentioned the cultural ideas, as they at least provide a guideline, whereas personal taste is diffcult, if not impossible, to agree on.

 

BTW, you still don't seem to understand why I don't find the warbonnet sexy, thus showing you don't quite grasp that (or why) people have their own tastes and interpretation of those tastes.

I don't think of fur as a symbo of power (you might, that only proves you find it that way). I think of it as a symbol of elegance. Many of you here prefer those big '80s-style foxes, but some of us prefer something else. It's probably why mink and rabbit are prefered to fox in Japan. Of course fox can be elegant, but it's difficult to do it with the Fendi-esque bulky coat that is praised here.

[Guest]

I made a statement in another thread that is somewhat applicable here:

 

"The subtilties and intricacies of this set of questions and observations is so intricate and was discussed at such extreme length over a year ago back at Melody I decided not to delve into the subject further in this forum other than an occasional brief remark or comment.

 

Not that I am avoiding the subject but I discovered quickly there is simply not enough space. The thread back then went for weeks and went from top to bottom and side to side of the issue with, to my feeling, no real or totally satisfactory answer(s) or conclusions. It's as complex as life itself.

 

That is why I had chosen to write stories about it. I'm still writing and haven't begun to exhaust the possibilities.

 

Worker has engaged in this quest as well though we haven't discussed our writing quite from this angle before I'm sure he will agree with this perspective."

 

Erotic is in the same realm of definition tail chasing reminiscent of the last days on Melody discussing the definition of Porn for this new site.

 

The general simple concensus was "If it quacks like a Duck ..." Also "Reasonable people can agree to disagree but we still need a definition." I go with the Duck every time.

 

OFF

[Guest]

there was a full set of pictures on the ntc web about 4 years ago I think but i didnt get the set as some were a little out of focus.

[Guest]

LTKN

 

Yet again you accuse me of something you are guilty of.

 

I know that not everybody finds things the same .....whether in a fetishistic or taste/style view.

I was making exactly that point.

However what I am saying is IF you can rationalise it then that must be respected. there is no possible way that polyester trousers can be defended as erotic or stylish whatever culture you are from. they are quantifiably in bad taste, and conception and practicality.

 

Yes in Japan elegance, chic attention to fine detail etc these things are related to the culture and I would imagine therefore both style and fetishism in all aspects of Art, fashion and design.

 

Likewise as you pointed out, in a western urban society where women could achieve power the furs they could suddenly buy themselves reflected that and so a powerful woman in a business suit or fur becomes both stylish and erotic.

 

What I am asking is some damn respect for my cultural integtity. I am a Celt. We are hunting people. We adorn ourselves with animals to symbolise power. We take the tail or mask of a fox and mount it out of respect for the animal that has been hunted. We wear rabbit foot as keyring as a luck/breeding "fetish".We keep hair from our horses as a powerful reminder of their companionship, especially when thay are gone.

My most valuable possession is a dolphin skull which I found myself. It has great power for me...but I can also justify that with the fact that every cell of it has a DNA pattern for the whole animal and it registers electro magnetic energy on a counter. The amount of organic material in a warbonnet make it intrinsically immenesely powerful. As such icons of nature have such power to us, they are "fetishes" as we place a great deal of emphasis on them. So it is not surprising that such symbols of power of nature and hunter culture can have immense sexual charge too if they are intended to do that: a warbonnet draws all lines to the eyes. The eyes in EVERY animal are used as a language of intimidation and threat....hence power. Aswell as that they are intrinsically beautiful, and therefore perhaps surprosingly (as they are intended to be worn by men) they look awesome on women who respect their power. Women love them on men too in the correct context. I went out with a girl at cllege that had that picture from Soldier Blue of the Cheyenne with the warbonnet and flag on her wall.

 

So I can emapathise EXACTLY with all native peoples who share a similar culture. Fur feather etc are all about the "fetishism" of natures power, sexual or "religious" when used in Art design or adornment.

 

In Russia too furs will have such symbolic meaning. The best fur symbolises the success of the males hunting prowess , to provide the best for his woman,even in urban Russia. Its about power there too, in a different way.

 

So we must try to understand that erotic is different things to different people, but still has the same meaning as a word. I respect the japanese culture iconography and style...but cannot relate to it personally....though naturally can appreciate it. It appears that you however cannot respect anyone elses.

 

besides which all warbonnets have fur so it is relevant whether you like it or not.

 

And comparing a warbonnet with the Village people is like me saying I dont like geisha style because it reminds me of those awful 1970s naff pictures on canvas or I dont like Japanese bridges because they remind me of repro Monet naff pictures. If you have no knowledge of something it is nearly ALWAYs a mistake to try to compare it with something in your own cultural experience.

 

 

So there are going to be all kinds of interpretations of fetisgism and erotica here, but they have to have that intrinsically/culturally for it to be valid.

 

Oh and by the way, my grilf carries a whip and wears boots and jods every day...she isnt a sadist, and those items are only interpreted as fetishistic by those who misinterpret it. to us they are just tools of the trade and we all find it highly amusing that other people think that.

[LordTheNightKnight]

LTKN

 

1.Yet again you accuse me of something you are guilty of.

 

2.I know that not everybody finds things the same .....whether in a fetishistic or taste/style view.

 

1. You're stating that your opinions are absolute. I'm pointing out that they are not. That is not hypocracy, since I'm making it clear that my views are MY views.

 

2. Then why didn't you cleary state that was merely how you felt about it? It's not hairsplitting when the meaning becomes completely different.

 

Seriously, I know how you could feel this way, but I've found the importance of subtlety of language, even on a message board. If you state something nice about one side, people will assume you are attacking the other side unless you clearly state otherwise.

And if people think a movie/book/video game/song/etc. is bad, many of them assume their opinion is the absolute right one. That is why it's important to make it clear you know your opinion is simply yours.

 

I know it sounds like nitpicking, but you should be aware that even the smartest people will misunderstand a misspoken phrase.

 

On that note I should have made it clear that a fur coat and a warbonnet just reminds me of the Village People, not that it should remind everyone. Yet if you can't understand why I would see it that way, that's your problem.

 

And I'm perfectly aware about the meaing of wearing parts of animals, but that just shows me you still don't get what I'm talking about.

 

I don't think of fur as parts of an animal or as gaining a piece of its power (the spirit that inhabited the body is gone, and the body is now being rendered into something else). Therefore, I don't see fur as a symbol of power. Of course you do, but YOU'RE the one thinking my not sharing that somehow isn't showinr respect for your culture.

 

I did not AT ANY POINT say it was stupid to think of fur that way. I ONLY stated that not everyone found fur sexy for that reason, and YOU assumed I was putting your views down.

 

BTW, your girlfriend (I'm assuming that what what you typed in shorthand) is not a counter to the point about whips in pictures, because we were ONLY talking about whips in pictures. In a picture, the whip is used as a symbol for it, WHEN THERE IS NO OTHER CONTEXT, because it is widely recognized as such. Your girlfriend carrying a whip IN REAL LIFE has nothing to do with this.

Now you may say that perpetuates a steroe type, but again, why didn't you make that clear? Your post implies the stereotype proves the symbolism wrong, when that is not the point of symbolism at all. Farmers carry scythes, but in a picture with no farming, we still understand it to be the weapon of the Grim Reaper. Yet farmers aren't going to say that they use scythes, but they aren't the incarnation of death.

And it isn't even a gender stereotype, as most few people of either gender carry a whip in public.

[Guest]

That would be a good reply if it were not fot the fact that you were the one who attcked my viewpoint and not vice versa.

 

And I believe you are entitled to do that, but when I prove objectively aswell as subjectively this view can be supported, then you should accept that....or counter it with a supported opinion. I do not expect you to find it sexy yourself, but it is objectively erotic.

I do not find glasses sexy, but I can see that as they draw attention to the eyes then some people are bound to find them erotic. They are designed these days with that in mind.

 

so it is NOT a matter of opinion. It does come down to a real criteria of assessment and I have provided one(aesthetic, cultural iconography,design purpose, and how these can be related to the erotic etc) I do not attack your position of liking furs for elegance as I know that can and is quantifiably erotic too.

 

If you see a warbonnet and fur and think of the village people thats not defensible at all. Its like me seeing anime and not seeing it as an artform but relating it to a particularly bad cartoon. If I do not know enough about something I shouldnt put others down. Just because I do not think glasses arent sexy doesnt mean that others quite rightly do. I bet there are fetish sites about glasses and they can indeed be erotic...just because they remind me personally of spinsters doesnt mean I have any right to condemn them as not erotic.

Erotica is a matter of opinion, however not everyones opinion is of the same worth within particular areas. If people do not find fur erotic thats one thing....but objectively, let alone subjectively to some, of course it is.

Respect of cultures is what it comes down to here.

 

My girlf would use a whip for fun in an erotic gesture sometimes...it doesnt mean she is into sadism. At all. Anyone who understands horses knows that they are not beaten with the whip in a harsh way...so if she slaps me on the bum with it when I am bent over mucking out its just playfully erotic...not sadistic pleasure. Even most BDSM is playful not real.You appear to see something and categorise it without thinking more deeply, then say "oh well its all a matter of opinion and you should respect mine". Not if it is uninformed; or subjective based on limited experience/mind association. Absolutely not. Sorry.

 

And if amyone wants to judge for themselves there is a picture of one of my models Claire in silver fox and a warbonnet in the gallery posted last night. What I am saying is it may not turn you on (though the coat and she should) but it clearly gives her a powerful and seductive look whih you can appreciate may turn some people on for an objective reason.

 

To bring it back to topic...I didnt know that warbonnets tured me on until I saw Claire model it.

[Guest]

I have also brought up Cherokee model Ashley Kashaklawee's site for you to look at. Warbonnets all have fur in them by the way.

[LordTheNightKnight]

Message edited by White. L/K you know that we do not allow messages like that in here!

 

The celtic and other such cultures did NOT find the wearing of animal parts to be erotic. It was for SPIRITUAL purposes. Even if there was sex involved, it was to draw spiritual power for the act, NOT because they were turned on by it.

 

And I'm part celtic, so don't you DARE say I am putting them down. YOU'RE the one using their beliefs to lie that your view is the definitive one.

 

Erotic is something that causes sexual arousal. That can NEVER be objective, since not everyone will turned on by the exact same thing, even those standards you claim.

 

And again, I'M reminded of the village people by that picture, JUST ME. I'm NOT AT ALL saying that ANYONE ELSE has to think that way.

 

I think of fur as sexy because of its elegance. That is MY view, and you are a liar to say yours is any better because of some false claim that something erotic has objective cirteria.

 

Message edited by White

I don't find that picture sexy, and there's not a damn thing you can do to either make me turned on by it, or to make me think I should.

 

YOU are entitled to like it and find it powerful and seductive. You are NOT AT ALL entitled to force people to accept that view as the correct one.

 

Edit by White. Again folks, if you ask that a particular photo goes into a particular album we will try to do that. We will not allow another member to tell us to remove it. But that other member can ask that it be in another album of their choosing as well.

W

[White Fox]

This has gone far enough. It is way out of control. Thread LOCKED!

W

[FrBrGr]

Thank you, WF!