As if the tarty Armani poster of Rafael Nadal offering his arse to the world wasn’t slutty enough. Along comes the sporno video.
The tennis ace is being shoved up against the (unplastered) wall and then thrown down and hammered on the builder’s bench. Twice.
By the camera. Which chops up his body into sexy, slippery bits and pieces. Tits and ass and abs. Total, rampant, ruthless objectification. Which Mr Nadal — like many young men today — appears to relish.
And that liquid he’s half-drowning in. Is it bodily fluids? Or is he being water boarded by our gaze?
Could this video in fact be any sluttier, without actual penetration? Then again, wouldn’t your actual, standard-issue penetration diminish the sluttiness by making it both ‘hard’ and banal? Instead of the grainy non-specific sluttiness that drips off everything in our mediated, metrosexy world.
Twitter
Facebook
oh, I missed this post so far, and I realize how much I missed just now…
the thing I like most is the breaking glass at the very beginning.
it makes it almost an invitation: free yourself, you dumb heterosexual, get out of the closet, jump into the water room. kind of Anita Ekberg sadly revisited in low budget porn style.
was this meant to be hi-class aspirational fashion?
I tried to find an example of Nadal in a more aggressive, dominant role to counteract all this blatant sluttified objectification, but the first thing that appeared before me was this (he looks so cute and girly):
Maybe you could try some water bondage it might re-vitalise you Mr S. Then you could start the campaign for http://www.Meninwaterbondage.com...
I wish it included men though.
The people in kink who are trying to get more representation of men submissives/masochists in porn/kink culture ignore the inevitable homo implications of them being acknowledged.
It’s a bit like the ‘feminist pornographers’ they just will not see the big dripping, bulging, homo elephant in the room!
Yet again, so much energy devoted to ignoring that big pink well-hung elephant in the room. I admire the energy people put into that game. But I’m far too lazy and dessicated to take part.
I bet though Mark you could watch more varied porn. But then when it comes to sex(uality) none of us seem to think variety is the spice of life, except for those admirable trysexuals!
This is one of the few actual porn sites I like and I still have some problems with it:
http://promo.waterbondage.com/g/4701:revshare/1947/v/30/h/
The problem I find with porn is it is so compartmentalised. Gay porn seems to be all about ‘dick in hole’ and kink porn seems to be all about women being objectified.
I still don’t understand completely why it is so hard to find M/m S and M non-penetrative pornography.
Maybe there is no demand and gay men are just vanilla these days!
So I have to watch Bond Movies and Armani ads to see men suffer sexual torture.
That waterbondage site is certainly… refreshing!
“Could this video in fact be any sluttier, without actual penetration? Then again, wouldn’t your actual, standard-issue penetration diminish the sluttiness by making it both ‘hard’ and banal?”
Depends on the penetration, Mark. There are as many flavours of homosex as there are homosexuals, and seeing it in all its glory can be rich and rewarding. You should watch more pornography. You’ve been neglecting your studies.
It’s really rather arty and high-minded of you to prefer a the allure of a sexy man to the allure of a sex act. Or do I read you wrong?
But let’s forget about Nadal, and think about Armani.
Luxury brands, in our middle class Puritan culture, have come to symbolise transgression, wickedness, and self indulgence, which is part of their allure.
If I may be so bold as to make the observation, much display of metrosexuality involves luxury goods: fashion, fragrance, high-end sporting equipment, cars, travel and the like. After all, there’s plenty of homosexuality at Ikea, but not much metrosexuality, is there?
I think I’ve urged you to do an analysis of metrosexuality and money before, haven’t I?
Honourable Husband: I’m not sure I could physically watch any more porn than I am already, but it’s always nice to be given permission to watch even more.
As for the non-specific sluttiness of the ad — it’s not that I prefer it or Nadal to a good fuck, it’s that the male sluttiness and desire to be desired that the ad is drenched in, although (s)pornographic, isn’t about sex in the end. I’m not sure it’s even about money and luxury either.
yes standard issue penetration would diminish the eroticism of the film.
But I like S and M porn anyway. Sometimes we all assume ‘porn’ is all about dicks in holes. I think a lot of advertising ‘creatives’ must be kinky and must watch some S and M! Either that or it is just the latent kink in us all.
Whichever is true it shows to me that the fact that overtly S and M porn gets marginalised in our culture and even criminalised, is hypocritical.
It’s a bit like how the culture is dripping with homoerotics but representation of overt homo sex is still seen as somehow risque and perverse.
if Nadal was a woman being objectified like this the feminists would be up in arms. As it is they will just turn away, pretending he is not yet another example of how objectification is not just a feminist issue.
http://toomuchtosayformyself.com/category/misogyny/page/2/
http://toomuchtosayformyself.files.wordpress.com/2011/01/vogue.jpg?w=345&h=259
I’m rather disappointed. Apparently, his ass is his best feature. The rest of him is not nearly so enticing.
Sorry, for my tastes he’s just not up to snuff.
ML: I’m not sure I fancy him either, Mary Lynn. But I know I don’t have much choice in the matter.
Southdub: Anytime. Do you do real wood floors or only laminates? (Mine has lots of splinters.)
Uroskin: Mummy is probably glad he didn’t make this vid in her front room. It would have ruined the carpet.
Incredibly boring to watch. Mark when can I lick your floor?
What will his Mummy make of this? He still lives at home.