Werd. I guess I mean regularly. I am glad this poster was made. If for no other reason(which isn't true, I very much enjoy how this disturbs me to my bones), the fact that it spurned some lively banter.
You know, I tried having the "women as sex objects" once at Expresso Beans. Most were dooshbags and did not reply, or attempted to leave some sorry excuse for a quip, instead of actually responding to my question. The only artist I was able to get to take me seriously was Stainboy, one whose posters arguably objectify women constantly. He made his case against that, and I felt he did a good job doing so.
Why the hell can't guys take this question seriously? Even for "low brow" corners of the art world, this is an issue. Over the years, artists like Gentileschi, Chicago, Claudel, and countless other females fought against the aesthetic of objectification, even within and through imagery that could be construed as objectifying. Is this what females within the poster world do? Who knows. Maybe yes, maybe no, maybe people just post tits and ass because that's what sells rock posters. Still, I find it a legimate question considering the fact that A) there are women artists on the GP board that I highly respect and consider 'empowered,' Looba being an example of that, and B) some of them produce the 'classically objectifying(or at least perceived objectification)' posters that one would think these women would rally against.
Considering that I am a male poster collector/ameture artist amongst peers that seem to be mostly male(how many GP threads have pictures of semi-nude broads and sexist/objectifying comments?), I wonder what other males and females have to say about these sorts of matters, and what reasons there are for them to not be addressed.
Paul, you really are a dick. Do you know what tact is? I think not. Drink a bleach milkshake.