I am amazed, firstly with your response and secondly with your response!!  Some people have indicated that this blog, and primarily the pictures I posted yesterday may border on soft porn.  NOOOO… I want to shout!!

I believe in beauty.  I believe especially in the absolute beauty of the female body, the way God created it.  Oscar Wilde once said that if “man” were meant to be naked, he would have come into the world that way….  For me, there is a HUGE difference between porn, erotica and simple nude art. 

Perhaps I should explain this in more detail…

Thanks to everyone who commented and visited yesterday, it is much appreciated!! I trust that you enjoyed the beauty of women just as much as I did!!  A question did arose within my mind and on the comments however with regard to the type of pictures that was published, is this acceptable to all?

Well…. to be honest… probably not.

Now although this blog is not a direct protest against the short-sightedness of attackers of those who admire beauty, reading and visiting it is a statement that you too love looking at beautiful women, and that you are not ashamed of it. While I’m not against sex, that is not what I’m trying to promote when I publish pictures of bare chested women. What we promote, amongst other things, is beauty, and those who love it. We also whould like to promote the idea that you are allowed to have as much fun as possible while experienceing life… It is permitted to look at anything and anybody in a public place, so if freedom of expression is a basic right, how much more so the right to think and to look?

It is quite possible that a too great fixation on one thing may be a bad thing for you. (Notice that admiring female beauty does not even have to be a sexual thing, for many it is primarily an aesthetic proposition.) But that is your personal problem to adjudicate and certainly nobody else’s business.

There is nothing dirty or unethical about enjoying the sight of a beautiful woman. Personally I find it either unperceptive or dishonest not to do so. It is even unfair. Most beautiful women use a lot of time and energy to appear their best, and it seems rather illogical to suggest that they do all this work so nobody shall look. It seems to me that to ignore it or to pretend one does not notice, is simply mean or silly.
Erotica of course has as its main purpose to sexually arouse the receiver.  Everything else is secondary to that. There may be political overtones (as in Marquis De Sade’s works), there may be aesthetic values or ambitions (as in Story of O), but sexual stimulation is the main object.  If the primary intention of the work is not sexual arousal, then it is not erotica, no matter what some may call it.

It appears that this is not always an easy thing to understand. Probably because sexuality is such a powerful force. This means that when people approach it, they tend to either shy away from it, or go towards it. It creates an artificial polarity between sexual and… well, not-sexual. But it does not have to be that way. Just because a nude person, especially girls, tend to be associated with sexual feelings for many people (those who have been artificially barred all their life from seeing any nude people), that does not mean that you have to give in and go either to one side and make porn, or to the other side and create art which lose sight of the attractive aspects of the model.

It is about the beauty of the model. Just as she is. Without having sex or trying to be sexy. Without loads of fancy lingerie or make-up and hair styling. Just herself, nude as she was created. Natural and beautiful.

 “What spirit is so empty and blind, that it cannot recognize the fact that the foot is more noble than the shoe, and skin more beautiful than the garment with which it is clothed?” – Michelangelo