4 ms·

I think it's important to keep in mind that Lena Forsen (and the other models of Playboy) made the decision to be photographed nude and to have those photos pub

by v64 8y ago

I think it's important to keep in mind that Lena Forsen (and the other models of Playboy) made the decision to be photographed nude and to have those photos published as a creative expression. To portray the exhibition as exploitative robs them of their agency and demeans their decision.

crankylinuxuser 8y ago
As long as a "gun" is held to our collective heads stating 'you will surrender your bodies to work or starve on the street', there is no such thing as making a voluntary decision like what you say. Look no further than the article: > “I didn’t really know what that was,” she told me. “But my husband, he thought it was kind of cool, and it was money, and I didn’t have a lot of money.” And what did she get? > After her centerfold photos were published, Lena, green card in hand, got a divorce and a new boyfriend. Even faced with lack of money for food and rent, still got a divorce out of it. Which in '71 , was still considered an abomination. Don't get me wrong. Men also trade their bodies for the same existential threat; being deprived of food and shelter. But instead of being valued for beauty, we're valued for our utility. And too, our bodies break and rot under harsher conditions. Only ones who automate and make others' lives meaningless get further than the rest - which I think adequately explains IT in a nutshell. Frankly, its only time until we're also due the same fate.
- v64 8y ago
  I disagree with the characterization that it's comparable to a gun to the head. In Lena's case, she was offered a way to make money, she considered the decision, took it, then used the money she made to start an independent life for herself. She declines Hugh Hefner's offer because that crosses a line for her. How does any of this suggest the desperation of starvation? At the end of the day, her perspective matters the most: > Lena doesn’t harbor any resentment toward Sawchuk and his imitators for how they appropriated her image; the only note of regret she expressed was that she wasn’t better compensated. In her view, the photograph is an immense accomplishment that just happened to take on a life of its own. “I’m really proud of that picture,” she said. She's proud of it. Don't deprive her of that.
  - eecc 8y ago
    Besides, in a world obsessed with copyright and take-downs would her image have circulated so much today? Would she have become so iconic to enter our collective unconscious? She’s like the Amen Break.
- legostormtroopr 8y ago
  > 'you will surrender your bodies to work or starve on the street' As opposed to all of the coal miners and bricklayers who work for fun.
  - Walf 8y ago
    If you'd read the entire comment, you'd have seen that those labourers were well and truly included.
yawaramin 8y ago
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19182950 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19182950
yawaramin 8y ago
The objection that people have is not to Lena Forsen having a modelling career, it's to the culture of non-inclusion created by NSFW images that make women uncomfortable.
tghw 8y ago
The issue isn't her agency in choosing to model or not. The issue is that casually having a Playboy around work is in and of itself exclusionary. It taints the history of graphics research because it is so clearly inappropriate, and only in a very broken work culture would it be remotely okay to have that sort of stuff just laying around.
- walterstucco 8y ago
  Is it? Is having vanity fair around exclusionary then?

by v64 8y ago

crankylinuxuser 8y ago

As long as a "gun" is held to our collective heads stating 'you will surrender your bodies to work or starve on the street', there is no such thing as making a voluntary decision like what you say. Look no further than the article: > “I didn’t really know what that was,” she told me. “But my husband, he thought it was kind of cool, and it was money, and I didn’t have a lot of money.” And what did she get? > After her centerfold photos were published, Lena, green card in hand, got a divorce and a new boyfriend. Even faced with lack of money for food and rent, still got a divorce out of it. Which in '71 , was still considered an abomination. Don't get me wrong. Men also trade their bodies for the same existential threat; being deprived of food and shelter. But instead of being valued for beauty, we're valued for our utility. And too, our bodies break and rot under harsher conditions. Only ones who automate and make others' lives meaningless get further than the rest - which I think adequately explains IT in a nutshell. Frankly, its only time until we're also due the same fate.

v64 8y ago
I disagree with the characterization that it's comparable to a gun to the head. In Lena's case, she was offered a way to make money, she considered the decision, took it, then used the money she made to start an independent life for herself. She declines Hugh Hefner's offer because that crosses a line for her. How does any of this suggest the desperation of starvation? At the end of the day, her perspective matters the most: > Lena doesn’t harbor any resentment toward Sawchuk and his imitators for how they appropriated her image; the only note of regret she expressed was that she wasn’t better compensated. In her view, the photograph is an immense accomplishment that just happened to take on a life of its own. “I’m really proud of that picture,” she said. She's proud of it. Don't deprive her of that.
- eecc 8y ago
  Besides, in a world obsessed with copyright and take-downs would her image have circulated so much today? Would she have become so iconic to enter our collective unconscious? She’s like the Amen Break.
legostormtroopr 8y ago
> 'you will surrender your bodies to work or starve on the street' As opposed to all of the coal miners and bricklayers who work for fun.
- Walf 8y ago
  If you'd read the entire comment, you'd have seen that those labourers were well and truly included.

yawaramin 8y ago

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19182950 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19182950

yawaramin 8y ago

The objection that people have is not to Lena Forsen having a modelling career, it's to the culture of non-inclusion created by NSFW images that make women uncomfortable.

tghw 8y ago

The issue isn't her agency in choosing to model or not. The issue is that casually having a Playboy around work is in and of itself exclusionary. It taints the history of graphics research because it is so clearly inappropriate, and only in a very broken work culture would it be remotely okay to have that sort of stuff just laying around.

walterstucco 8y ago
Is it? Is having vanity fair around exclusionary then?