marksimpson.com

17 Comments

• Quiet Riot Girl wrote:

  June 30, 2011 at 1:44 pm

  This made me laugh. Some­one else who pro­motes the ‘female gaze’ on men, who does a thing called ‘Man­candy Mon­day’ (Fagcandy)

  She put up a photo and a link to a site called ‘ban the razor’ cel­e­brat­ing hir­sute men.

  Turns out the photo is a Sporno shot of a soc­cer player, and ‘ban the razor’ is run by a man.

  I rest my/our case.

  http://kristinalloyd.wordpress.com/
• Quiet Riot Girl wrote:

  June 29, 2011 at 10:51 am

  …but sporno is one of the prob­lems in my view, as it rein­forces the dis­tinc­tion between offi­cial ‘porn’ (cocks on show) and ‘not porn’ (cocks not on show).

  I am not say­ing I want to see Roger Fed­erer with his cock out in a Rolex ad. But the fact I can’t is significant.
• Quiet Riot Girl wrote:

  June 29, 2011 at 9:58 am

  The erect cock still has so much repressed sym­bolic mean­ing in our cul­ture. It is just ridiculous.

  In the argu­ments about the ‘female gaze’ I am sure that is what we are fight­ing about.

  Het­ero women think the cock is all about them.
• Mark S wrote:

  June 28, 2011 at 10:36 pm

  PS I for­got to men­tion that my line in the cat­a­logue about the naked DDS rugby play­ers clutch­ing those rugby balls ‘like fat erec­tions’ was one of the ones judged too rude for the British public.
• Mark S wrote:

  June 28, 2011 at 10:32 pm

  QRG: Yes, you saw through my des­per­ately false mod­esty again. It seems that words, in spite of every­thing, do still mat­ter. And no one is more sur­prised than me. When I wrote about sporno for a cat­a­logue accom­pa­ny­ing an exhi­bi­tion about sport and fash­ion my text was accepted by the edi­tors — but when it came to the proof stage, higher-uppers got to see it and went ballistic.

  I pointed out that the pic­tures I’d cho­sen as illus­tra­tions — which no one objected to — were MUCH more explicit than my tex­tual innu­endo, but to no avail.

  And yes, the clutched rugby balls in these pic­tures are phal­lic pacifiers.

  Thanks for pimp­ing me and ‘Met­ro­sexy’ out to the female gaz­ers. I won­der how they will respond to my ‘gayze’.
• Quiet Riot Girl wrote:

  June 27, 2011 at 4:50 pm

  Scrap that the entente cor­diale has fallen apart.

  I hope Ms Stryker still reads Met­ro­sexy though!

  I have told her Metro­Daddy is very approachable…
• Quiet Riot Girl wrote:

  June 24, 2011 at 10:18 am

  SORRY every­one for spoil­ing this lovely sporno with my bor­ing words. But I am very pleased that this has happened:

  http://androaperture.wordpress.com/2011/06/24/whos-looking/

  The woman who runs the project I was ini­tially crit­i­cal of, look­ing for ways to cater for the ‘female gaze’ of women look­ing at men, has bought Met­ro­sexy. She is really tak­ing on board its chal­lenge to the con­cept of the ‘female’ and ‘male’ gaze.

  That is why I am so glad the book exists. I can say to peo­ple: ‘read this’. Not, ‘there is this bloke I know he likes pic­tures of men too you see yeah he’s gay but that’s not the point er…’

  It is a small thing. But I like the small things and I think it’s really positive.

  QRG
  x
• Quiet Riot Girl wrote:

  June 23, 2011 at 1:16 pm

  yes both pic­tures allude to the cock with­out show­ing it.

  But for me the allu­sion is the most fem­i­nine thing about both images. It makes me want to tell them both it’s ok. I believe you! I am sure your dick is MuHAS­SIVE girls.

  The sporno is avail­able to every­one. It is the fem­i­nists who are largely ignor­ing it because they think it is ‘gay’.
• Graham Perrett wrote:

  June 23, 2011 at 11:43 am

  Image 11 is rem­i­nis­cent of a cer­tain Mark Simp­son image.

  http://www.queerty.com/grandfather-of-metrosexuality-thinks-gay-marriage-isnt-all-its-cracked-up-to-be-20081202/

  I give up Mary Lynn, why does your pic­ture show up as Wile E. Coy­ote hold­ing up a sign that says “Genius”?

  Yes QRG there seems to be a gen­der split between the two sites at the moment. Can’t blame them though, Mark S has cer­tainly man­aged to take the cream of the top.…. oops sorry crop, out of all the sporno avail­able on the net.
• Quiet Riot Girl wrote:

  June 22, 2011 at 10:58 am

  More Nick Youngquest — the guy with his arms up show­ing his pits and his tat­too on your gallery:

  http://socialitelife.com/nude_nick_youngquest_in_tetu-04–2009/nick-youngquest-goes-nude-for-tetu-magazine-1

  This is a point of com­mon ground I have found with the ‘female gaze’ ladies. They love him too! I am build­ing bridges via the fine art of perving.
• Quiet Riot Girl wrote:

  June 21, 2011 at 9:44 am

  I would be envi­ous, if I didn’t realise it was pure poetry and not actual real life.

  Homos never change.
• Quiet Riot Girl wrote:

  June 21, 2011 at 9:43 am

  You all should check out Mark and Mark W wax­ing lyri­cal about the beauty of the ass on the FB page. As if words didn’t paint a thou­sand pictures…
• Mary Lynn wrote:

  June 21, 2011 at 2:38 am

  And why does my pic­ture show up as Wile E. Coy­ote hold­ing up a sign that says “Genius”?

  Hmmmm …
• Mary Lynn wrote:

  June 21, 2011 at 2:36 am

  Ah yes, a pic­ture is worth a thou­sand words!
• Quiet Riot Girl wrote:

  June 20, 2011 at 8:05 pm

  also… you know why he is clutch­ing that rugby foot­ball so tightly don’t you? It is all he has left of his phallus.

  I wish I didn’t know that.
• Quiet Riot Girl wrote:

  June 20, 2011 at 2:03 pm

  Because when it comes to it, words still mat­ter. If images were really the whole story, met­ro­sex­i­ness would be accepted as the dom­i­nant form of visual/visible masculinity.

  Peo­ple are able to resist those but­tocks and what they sig­nify, by writ­ing and speak­ing words that deny the impact of the images.

  e.g:
  http://androaperture.wordpress.com/
• Quiet Riot Girl wrote:

  June 20, 2011 at 12:56 pm

  It was your words that made me want Met­ro­sexy to show its pert but­tocks to the world though Mr S. If not, I would have worked as PR for Dieu de Stade instead (not that they needed any PR. They have all the buttocks).