This is really lovely

[Amethyst24]

www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/10/14/jodi-bieber_n_5949036.html

"In South Africa, as in most of the world, sexual and violent crimes are most often committed by men.

"There are far too many individual instances of gendered aggression, and yet the association that often arises between masculinity and violence, what author Dr. Jackson Katz refers to as constructing "violent masculinity as a cultural norm," only contributes to the problem. This dangerous affiliation normalizes violence while overlooking the many, many men who do not fit this dark stereotype. The men who are the fathers, teachers, husbands, and inspirations to so many.

"For the past three years, South Africa-based photographer Jodi Bieber has been fighting the connection between masculinity and aggression, finding and photographing men who do not fit the mold. The resulting series, titled "Quiet," presents a view of masculinity stripped of all its machismo and brute force. What's left is the soft vulnerability that lives equally in all human beings, regardless of gender."

(I might be objectifying a few of them just a little bit.)

I don't really get it. It's a load of pics of blokes in their grundies looking a bit fed up.

Maybe for a lot of men the facial expression that denotes "vulnerable" also denotes "fed up"?

Am I taking it too literally ?

Erm...okaaaay..some blokes in their undies......looking a bit....in need of...some cheer in their lives.....nice lighting and photo composition granted, mostly...

is there a learning point I'm missing?

Whatever monies Dr Katz got for this exercise I could spend massively better, with my i-phone though....

One of them describes himself as "a fighter" and "angry." Um. Ok.

I don't think it's much cop. It's just photos of blokes who claim not to be arseholes, right?

Okay, fair enough. I agree it doesn't solve inequality to look at some tasteful pics of nice men, but I think as art it's lovely, and I applaud the spirit in which the project hads been carried out.

Hads? Has.

There's nothing wrong with it I can see. Just a bit nothing much of anything.

Um, I really don't get it. How does it show them as fighting social norms?

maybe I'm not as arty as I think!

I got it.

Thanks for posting Amethyst.

No one interested Amethyst Shoulda written about sexist blackbird married names instead.

So... pictures of men not being aggressive. Well, that's nice I suppose. But they're not exactly selling 'not aggressive' as anything positive are they? It just looks like a rather bored 'not really doing anything'.

As if the options are either being aggressive or sitting around passively looking low-grade unhappy with their lives.

They may be fathers, husbands, teachers, inspirations - so why not take shots of them positively being those things if you want to portray an alternative?

that's what i was thinking amuminscotland

there are lots of stereotypical images of women and men doing gender stereotyped activities. why not mix that up?

i sort of see where the artist was going with this, but it feels like just substituting men where you would usually get moody shots of underwear-clad women, which does highlight certain things but not in the way the artist intends

I would have preferred the men doing something

The washing up. The ironing. Playing wiv a ikkle babee.

I dunno, summat.

The stereotype of men is that they are lazy and let women do all the work. So show what they do.

folding the washing and feeding the baby while the woman reads the paper on a sunday morning

I think I liked it for few reasons.

1. Anything that has a starting point of "Male violence is a problem" is a Good Thing.

1. I think men being portrayed in a vulnerable, non-macho way is a Good Thing.

1. I liked the images themselves.

It's not going to destroy the patriarchy or anything like that, but I thought it was a well-meaning, well-executed project.

Well, perhaps I, and others, are being a bit harsh, and no of course the set isn;t an attack on the patriarchy...but I'm still, after a 2nd viewing, unsure what the point is. Men potter around like this all of the time, bit 'vulnerable', not being svelte adonises..
and it could be tasteless to say...but individually..they could be privately really unpleasant.
As quite an advocate as men as role models, in a difficult social terrain, I'm not seeing how these images help at all. Sorry.

It's explained well enough in the Huff (about these men in the buff. Not looking tough). Sorry.

Impossible not to notice, even without stats, that violence is male trait. Easy to think of all men as violent. And, rules of patriarchy, men are pressured to look tough - don't mess. Lots of images of men looking mean. Not so many of men looking nice. Or vulnerable.

The artist wants to show vulnerability. Success in these photos is debatable, but that's not the point.

Women suffer at hands of the tough-guy act men are told they have to perform. Interesting idea to tell men they can don't have to be like that.

Gin Re overall message, interested to know why you picked out fighter and angry from a list that also included another 11 words. Like shy. Used to summarise whole thing. Curious. Also, are you think violent aggression with those words? If a woman said she was angry and a fighter would those words mean the same to you?

For me that proves the artists point about people's stereotypes of men.

Panthingies, obviously anecdotes aren't evidence, but I posted the link after my sister linked to it on Facebook. She knows two of the men personally and was really proud to see them featured there.

You're quite right, men do potter around like that all the time, in their safe spaces, where women and children see them. I think to be exposed like that to a wider gaze is maybe a thing. It would be interesting to see images of women styled similarly, but I think it would be hard not to perceive those as somehow erotic.

There are pictures of women in their underwear and less everywhere......

Yes, but those are sexualised.