single men ~ birds do it , bees do it, even educated fleas do it ...
Monday, February 21, 2011 at 04:14PM 
Reading and eating ~ Bullfrog Brewery - Williamsport, PA • click to embiggen
Cell phone and eating ~ Bullfrog Brewery - Williamsport, PA • click to embiggen
Bartender bartending ~ Bullfrog Brewery - Williamsport, PA • click to embiggen
Salt/pepper grinder ~ Bullfrog Brewery - Williamsport, PA • click to embiggenIt's finally time for me to respond to Larry's comment re: my ideas about place and reconciling them with my professed doubts about my ability to make pictures for a single men series, i.e. pictures that compliment my single women series.
This response was instigated by Larry's comment ...
... My understanding of your discussion on "place" meant that one was intimately at home in that environment and I would think, the occupants of that environment. That would mean to me that the sexuality of the occupant was of no particular interest, but rather the interest is in expression, gesture, light or color of the subject matter .... [I]t should not matter to your language of seeing and place if you are in your "place" ... How does this inability fit into your sense of "place"? There seems to be a gap here.
my response: In my various ruminations re: place, I was primarily referring to place as a geo/typo-graphic location. On hindsight, perhaps I didn't make that perfectly clear.
However, that is not to disparage Larry's idea of understanding place to include understanding the people who inhabit / frequent a place. IMO, it's possible for the two (IMO) distinctly different understandings to coincide and be influenced by one another and that linkage be made manifest in a picture. Although, that said, I don't believe that pairing is intrinsically linked to understanding place.
Certainly many good pictures of place or of a place have been and can be made without the presence of people being visually or overtly manifest. Conversely, many good pictures of people have been and can be made without place or the place they occupy / frequent being an integral cohort of the understanding of those people.
All of that said and more to Larry's comment, I stated in yesterday's entry that, "I can not help but look at women without some element of sex/sexuality as part of the equation but I do not look at men with the same outlook." That statement, in addition to the fact that I do not believe that the idea of place is intrinsically linked to how one sees people, helps explain why I believe there is no gap between my ideas re: place and my professed doubt re: my ability to make pictures for a single men series that compliments my single women series.
My single women pictures absolutely evidence my looking at and seeing women as sexual beings. Or, perhaps more accurately stated, they are evidence of women whom I find to be sexually attractive, or, in Larry's words, the sexuality of the occupant is of some particular interest to me and the pictures I am making ... CAVEAT: that is not to say that I only look at or see women or any specific woman in a wholly sexual manner. In fact, far from it. Many of the women to whom I am, at first glance, visually attracted often turn out to be (if we, in fact, get to know one another, however briefly that may be) in possession of many other qualities and personal characteristics I also find to be quite attractive and appealing ... consider the wife as exhibit # 1.
It is worth noting at this stage in the proceedings that my pictures of single women - and those single men pictures I would wish to compliment them - could perhaps be accurately subtitled as pheromone-ic pictures. That is, pictures with pheromones as an integral instigating ingredient. And, if that nomenclature fits - and I believe it does - I think it is accurate to state that my pheromone sensing apparatus is totally tuned to detecting female secreted pheromones, including, but not limited to sex pheromones.
All of that said, what I am looking for in a picture maker who might make single men pictures as a compliment to my single women pictures, is a female whose pheromone receptors are tuned to male secreted pheromones, including but not limited to sex pheromones.
However, pheromones / sexuality aside, what I am seeking is a female picture maker who is, like me, a voyeur - that is to say (from the French word), one who sees / one who views or inspects. I am looking for a female picture maker who recognizes and wants to explore (pictorially) her natural inclination to view and inspect single men, just as I am exploring (pictorially) my natural inclination to view and inspect single women.
IMO, re: single women / single men picturing, inasmuch as my picturing objectives are concerned, is very dependent upon both the gender and sexuality of the picture maker and, to a certain extent, that of the pictured.
FYI, the pictures accompanying this entry are the results of first single men picture making activity. I would be very interested in opinions and comments regarding these pictures (and, for that matter, the entire single women/men series), especially as they relate to my single women pictures. As mentioned previously, the wife thinks that the single men pictures, with the possible exception of the Bartender bartending picture, are not the equivalent of / complimentary to the single women pictures.
And, BTW, there have yet to be any interest expressed from any women in picturing single men. Maybe there just aren't any women out there within the sound of my voice with the balls to give it a try.
gravitas et nugalis
Featured Comment: scotth (Scott Hussey) wrote: "Mark, I am curious how you think your pictures of men compare to your pictures of women ... [I] don't see a comparison at all ... [I]t seems like you are the one that could be challenging yourself here."
my response: my single men pictures, relative to my single women pictures, just don't feel right to me. That might be because I know that I am having to try to make pictures instead of just letting them flow from a natural inclination / curiosity. Consequently, I am not surprised that you don't a comparison between the two series.
If I were to continue making pictures for a single men series, I would indeed be challenging myself. However, answering that bell is not what I am after. What I want most from a companion series is to view how a woman sees men. After all, the single women pictures are about, in part, how a man sees women.
BTW: minion, you should get to work and stop screwing around with single men. :)
On the other hand, everyone should have some fun, so if you've got a few pictures to share, you should send them along ASAP. And, while your at it, give me a call on my cell phone - I lost my cell in NYC and I need to rebuild my contacts file on my new phone.
Reader Comments (5)
Kate has an interesting study of her future husband in her "why am I marrying him" series
http://www.katehutchinson.com/
"Maybe there just aren't any women out there within the sound of my voice with the balls to give it a try."
o.k. that did it.
balls i got :D
and inclination
and definitely tuned receptors..
(and a stash of random pics already, i'm sure, though not sorted as such so will need to dig a bit-a few came to mind instantly)
you can decide whether they compliment or not.
(but I do hope you're not in a hurry ;) )
and btw, the bartender and the skullcap reader are hot.
Mark, I am curious how you think your pictures of men compare to your pictures of women.
I am not sexually attracted to men, but I don't see a comparison at all. The bartender picture is close, but still, I can't see his eyes, which I think is important in your pictures of women.
It seems like you are the one that could be challenging yourself here.
I'd be curious to see how Gravitas sees himself... perhaps a self-portrait series along with men/women is needed?