AIBU to be shocked at Lucian Freud painting his teenage daughter naked with her legs open?

[NotSuchASmugMarriedNow1]

Well, am I? Am I horribly surburban to have felt utter disgust with one look at that painting?

I assumed the poster who said that about women consuming the majority of violent pornography was making a sarcastic comeback to a previous poster who responded to a post saying ‘Another instance of men showing us how vile they are’ with ‘Women are just as bad’...?

Of course it is, it normalises violent sex, why would you want to do that to yourself?

That book looks really interesting @Patroclas. It was interesting that Dodsworth had to overcome her “Good girl socialisation and self censorship”. It would appear Boyt’s upbringing didn’t instil those things.

I don’t think Rose Boyt was ‘brought up by’ Lucian Freud at all — she and her mother and siblings never lived with him, as I understand it, and she characterises herself as rebellious, left home at fifteen, and says she only started to get to know her father then, because her flat was near his studio.

I didn’t say Freud brought her up, I said her upbringing. It seems pretty likely that someone in.a relationship with Freud and bearing his children would be moving in bohemian circles where little “good girl socialisation” would be the norm.

There is no way women are the highest consumers of violent pornography

That is completely untrue

The Pornhub user data survey (first study of it's kind) says otherwise. They analysed literally millions of users viewing habits using Google analytics which is generally pretty accurate over large data sets.

The Pornhub user data survey (first study of it's kind) says otherwise. They analysed literally millions of users viewing habits using Google analytics which is generally pretty accurate over large data sets.

You can make data say whatever you want if that's what you want it to say.

Not suggesting you did, Also. Was replying to all the shrieking on the thread about how disgusting it was that Rose Boyt been brought up to think this was ‘normal’ by LF, when he had virtually nothing to do with their upbringing (other than, apparently, an obsession with good manners) . And absolutely, I imagine bourgeois notions of ‘normal’ and ‘good girl’ socialisation didn’t figure much in the Boyt family.

You can make data say whatever you want if that's what you want it to say.

Whilst I wholeheartedly agree with this, the study uses Google Analytics which is regarded as being pretty accurate over large data sets. It's actually been tested against data where sex has been confirmed and was found to be very accurate.

It links things like your Gmail account, YouTube activity/subscriptions, browsing habits etc to profile you.

I know that many people don't follow traditional gender interests, but most people IME use their real name for email accounts (not usernames) when signing up so they can retrieve their account in the event of a problem, for instance.

If somebody is called Sarah, subscribes to women's fashion channels on YouTube and conducts searches like 'best mascara products' etc they're probably a woman.

I didn't initially want to believe it myself but I try not to let my presuppositions guide me as I feel this is where a blinkered/inaccurate view of reality can form.

I did think twice about posting that study tbh as I knew it would annoy some posters but what's the point if we're only going to accept data which confirms what we want to believe.

Sorry @Parthenop, I misunderstood you.

If somebody is called Sarah, subscribes to women's fashion channels on YouTube and conducts searches like 'best mascara products' etc they're probably a woman.

not these days.

there is no way on this earth that women are searching for violent porn more than men are.

Why do so many people automatically think 'sex, incest! disgusting!' when they see something like this?
They really can't see that there are other reasons or point to the naked body.
I would rather try to understand what's going on than condemn something because being uncomfortable is my first reaction.

not these days.

Trans people are a tiny minority of the population if that's what you mean. I think it's fair to say that sites like Pistonheads and football forums will generally be frequented primarily by men and vice versa.

there is no way on this earth that women are searching for violent porn more than men are.

I don't wish to have an argument about this or derail the thread, but just stating something isn't so because you don't want to believe it doesn't make it any less true. If you can present data to show that men are the primary viewers then I'm happy to discuss. There have been other studies which have shown that 50% of women like rough sex and that many fantasise about being raped (obv not the same as actual rape admittedly) so I'm not surprised.

The data's out there but just gets ignored on here.

A recent analysis of 20 studies over the last 30 years indicates that between 31% and 57% of women have rapefantasies, and these fantasies are frequent or preferred in 9% to 17% of women.

www.google.com/amp/s/www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/psyched/200805/why-do-women-have-erotic-rape-fantasies%3famp

No problem, Also.

I’m a bit bemused by how high feelings are running. None of LF’s nudes come anywhere close to the top twenty disturbing things I’ve seen in an art gallery.

I don't wish to have an argument about this or derail the thread, but just stating something isn't so because you don't want to believe it doesn't make it any less true. If you can present data to show that men are the primary viewers then I'm happy to discuss. There have been other studies which have shown that 50% of women like rough sex and that many fantasise about being raped (obv not the same as actual rape admittedly) so I'm not surprised.

When I was doing Psychology the onus was on the researcher to show that other factors aren't influencing the data set.

For example, I am sure many many men watch porn on the family computer, so there is every possibility that the account would have in the past looked for 'women's things'. There are all sorts of reasons why this could be gamed by google analytics, especially when porn hub might want to persuade women that porn is something they should watch as 'everyone else does so why not'?

It is in the porn industry's best interests to make porn a household agenda item. Well done them. Fuck the women being anally raped or choking on cock, literally. I'm sure other women all get such a buzz on wanking to this. Not.

I think there’s a new found puritanism. I was brought up to be pretty relaxed about nudity and was young in the 60s, nudity wasn’t ever sexualised in my mind. That seems not to be the case now.

@Alsohuman

I'd agree to this. There was one in AIBU a few weeks back with a woman whose 9yo daughter had been told to wear a crop top underneath her PE kit so that she wouldn't show her chest during PE. I find that quite sad. Why are human bodies so sexualised nowadays?

*agree with, not agree to

What an interesting thread...

My husband and teen daughter are both artists. Both have done life drawing. I’ve posed for life drawing, but never naked for my own child. Neither of them would pose naked or legs open for each other. It crosses accepted societal boundaries, and possibly legal ones, for adult human male family members to see children or very young adults in vulnerable positions. I’m not sure they should be given excemptions from our typical accepted standards of appropriate behaviour, solely on the grounds they’re an artist. A photographer would likely not be able to take photos like this of his 17 year old daughter, as the daughter was at the time this painting started.

Being hesitant to just accept the word of a minor or just barely adult young woman that it was fully her choice and that that choice was healthy and appropriate, does not equate to sexualising all nudity. It’s taking a careful and considered approach to child safeguarding, which covers grooming, and is not just limited to sexual grooming. It is, in my opinion, highly likely it was coercion of some kind. Mostly to make herself vulnerable to him, even if he wasn’t doing it for sexual gratification he was certainly the one holding the power and my concern is that she was indeed groomed and his intentions were not within most people’s boundaries. Does it make it illegal? Likely not. But morally speaking it’s clearly worthy of robust debate and any contributions dismissing the debate as childish, prudish, hypocritical etc are in the minority of public opinion on the matter. Doesn’t make your opinions less valid and it’s important opposing opinions are heard and expressed. While initially disturbed of those arguing in Freuds favour, as I am of the strong opinion this work overstepped what is appropriate, it is interesting to hear why you think this way. I am very careful though, because many artists are excused of what is legally child abuse, simply because they’re artists/musicians/actors. You need a better platform than ‘ it’s art’ to make a case for this piece being acceptable.

Limensoda, that's very well said.

Back in the day (when I actually liked my body!) I did life modelling, it was an easy way to supplement a student grant. At no time did I equate taking my clothes off to be painted with taking them off to have sex.

As I said, I accept what Boyt says about this painting, she was there and it was her decision. Social mores were different 40 years ago, I completely disagree with judging the past by today’s standards and am pretty disturbed by the amount of historical revisionism that goes on now.

It is just a painting. She was only acting as a live model.
Really cannot get that worked up over it.
Some massive overreactions going on here.

Back in the day (when I actually liked my body!) I did life modelling

I find this interesting but a little troubling. The value judgement you're expressing here seems to me to be within the narrative of 'nude bodies are sexual'.

I've always had mixed feeling about my physical appearance and my body. I found when life modelling that looking at how everyone drew my body made me think differently and overall more positively about it. Everyone saw me differently, which made me realise in a very concrete way that my previous self-scrutiny and self-judgement was totally subjective and not particularly authoritative or meaningful.

Anyway, sorry for the slight derail.

I can't believe people actually think this is normal and ok.

How does a girl or woman get to the point she is comfortable and willing to lie with her legs wide open for her father to paint?? I'm sorry I think it's utterly revolting.

No problem with nude painting as such, but the pose is just weird to me.

Gross.