Kristina Lloyd

Erotic Fiction Author

Man Candy Monday

So, after last week’s pitiful attempt to give you a man in a suit, this week I offer you a choice: with or without?

It’s a tough call, I know.

So once again, with or without? Suited or starkers?

Daddy or chips? (link is for non-UK readers who presumably won’t get the ref)


The series, With or Without, is by Richard Phibbs.

I have to say, these guys are a little too smooth and sculpted for my taste although the first guy could do me and I wouldn’t complain. (Looking at this post, I seem to have unconsciously ranked them in order of preference!) But as to the question, with or without… can I have both, please?

Wonderful news: Kitty Stryker has set up the Andro-Aperture Project, an exciting campaign to promote erotic imagery of men for women. In the postings and responses so far, one of the things that stood out for me is that the question is raised: why on earthwouldn’t straight women enjoy looking at men? Heterosexuality wouldn’t function if it were otherwise, if we didn’t fancy what we wanted to fuck. And yet so much cultural effort is put into denying the bleedin’ obvious, into refuting the simplest explanation. Check it out.

Advertisements

June 20, 2011 - Posted by | Kristina Lloyd | ,

18 Comments »

  1. Heh, Daddy or chips. nice 🙂

    I do think the answer is that you start with one and proceed to the other.

    These men are very clean.

    I feel a bit saturated with rippling god torso pictues and men who are so terribly proud of them at the moment. Too much tumblring? It’s all a bit samey – I tend to skip on by these days.

    Comment by Jo | June 20, 2011 | Reply

  2. Yes, it’s very fashion-shooty. I thought it would look nice on my Good Reads profile. And I do like the lighting on these pics.

    But agreed, they all need to drink some whisky, get into a fight then hit the tattoo parlour. And *then* they put the suits on.

    I’ll aim to give you a bit of rough next week, Jo. Maybe that should be my new man candy mission: fuckbrute-mandom pics, solo or M/f. Oooh, a project!

    Comment by kristinalloyd | June 20, 2011 | Reply

  3. I’d say the models look happiest with their kit off. But yes, the abs are too defined for me. It takes a lot of punishment to make your body look like that.

    My comment on the Andro-Aperture site:
    Hi I love to look at men so I welcome any way to do that.

    But, as I have said to filament, and Kristina Lloyd, I don’t understand why this is split into the ‘female’ gaze versus any other kind of gaze.

    I spend a lot of time looking at gay porn, and even more time talking about ‘metrosexuality’ with, among others, Mark Simpson, who coined the term Metrosexual back in 1994.

    http://www.marksimpson.com

    Mark’s latest book, Metrosexy, really puts paid to the myth that there is a male or female gaze. He is interested in how men these days are most interested in looking at themselves and each other, and being looked at by everyone.

    I have been blocked from commenting on Filament’s Live Journal site, as they don’t like hearing what I have to say. But if you are at all interested in ‘queer’ perspectives I think you should consider how this concept of the female gaze is reductive and heterosexist/heteronormative.

    Comment by Quiet Riot Girl | June 20, 2011 | Reply

  4. Elly, you appear to have conflated me with Filament! I don’t take the line that certain types of men are more appealing to women, that we necessarily want to see something different to what gay men want to see. When I talk about wanting our culture to acknowledge the female gaze, what I mean is: I want our culture to acknowledge women like to look – so eg. I don’t *have* to go to gay porn to get an eyeful, and so regular het porn gives me something to look at instead of her body and his disembodied cock. We all of us, men and women as individuals, like different stuff, no? You should maybe check out Erotica Cover Watch’s archives if you’re interested in my thoughts on this. But yes, many straight women watch gay porn – it’s a much safer bet if you want to feast your eyes on a sexy guy.

    Maybe part of the problem here is that ‘the female gaze’ has become a bit of a catch-all phrase; it means different things to different people.

    I’ll check out comments on AA later. I think it’s a great project though.

    Comment by kristinalloyd | June 20, 2011 | Reply

    • Thank you thank you! I KNEW I had forgotten one awesome awesome project, and Erotica Cover Watch was it. 😀

      And yes, the female gaze isn’t as easily defined as the male gaze, I would say. But I think one big part of it is what you said- “women like to look – so eg. I don’t *have* to go to gay porn to get an eyeful, and so regular het porn gives me something to look at instead of her body and his disembodied cock”. Yes. This.

      Comment by Kitty Stryker | June 20, 2011 | Reply

      • ‘the female gaze isn’t as easily defined as the male gaze’ ORLY? 😀 I just don’t buy that.

        Comment by Quiet Riot Girl | June 20, 2011 | Reply

      • Thanks Kitty! I was going to pop along to remind you of ECW. I’m really proud of what we achieved with that blog and it’s great to see more people kicking ass about the erasure of straight female desire and, concomitantly, of the desirability of men in het culture. Bring on the yum!

        Comment by kristinalloyd | June 21, 2011 | Reply

  5. Thanks Kristina.

    Yes it is the term ‘female gaze’ that made me conflate you with filament, and also some of your pieces on Erotica Cover Watch, which I have read. I have noticed incidentally a lot more erotica covers featuring men’s bodies recently which is a good thing!

    I reject the term ‘female gaze’ outright. The only aspect of it I really support is the de-stigmatising of women’s enjoyment of looking at men, (but I think men are stigmatised and pathologised for enjoying porn too, it is just assumed that they do) and the encouragement of more women photographers.

    Comment by Quiet Riot Girl | June 20, 2011 | Reply

  6. I’m going to set you a further challenge, Kristina – no Derek Pierce next week!

    Comment by Jo | June 20, 2011 | Reply

  7. Oh no – Derrick P is my go-to mandom! That’s a proper challenge. I’ll have to sweat and toil over this one. It’s going to be hell. Poor me.

    Comment by kristinalloyd | June 20, 2011 | Reply

  8. I like them all. I have advised my daughter (who simply wishes to marry a monogamous man who wants children) to look for a guy who at least owns a suit but is preferably IN that suit when she meets him. Am I encouraging her to shoot for the moon?

    When a man in a suit ‘shoots his cuffs’ it turns me ON!

    I’m too literal to get much out of gay porn. They don’t want me so, I guess, I don’t want them.

    I like my erotica written, not photographed. There are of course many exceptions to this, some of which appear on my website every Monday as I seek, mainly in vain, to lure a few people to my site who will actually comment on my post.

    By the way, is that second guy Eddie Murphy? Holy who’da thunk it Bubba?

    Comment by Madeline Moore | June 20, 2011 | Reply

  9. Madeline Moore a lot of the guys in ‘gay porn’ are not gay. They are just ‘gay for pay’. It does not define who you are , what you do infront of a camera.

    Comment by Quiet Riot Girl | June 20, 2011 | Reply

  10. I don’t know what this heterosexual culture is that you talk about. As far as I am concerned we all live in the same culture.

    I don’t go to ‘heterosexual’ places or read heterosexual blogs or look at heterosexual images.

    And culture these days, is metrosexual. NOT heterosexual.

    Comment by Quiet Riot Girl | June 21, 2011 | Reply

  11. I’m fairly sure that culture has layers. Like an onion.

    Comment by Jo | June 21, 2011 | Reply

  12. Hi all I had a chat with Kitty and we agreed not to fall out over the gaze! And Kitty agreed to read Metrosexy by Mark Simpson. He has some great Mancandy on his facebook page at the moment:
    http://www.marksimpson.com/blog/2011/06/20/sporno-gallery/

    Comment by Quiet Riot Girl | June 21, 2011 | Reply

    • Awesome, thank you! It does seem silly to get bogged down in the small print when we’re broadly after the same thing: better world, more cock.

      Fab Mancandy too. That Nick Youngquest pic was our 3rd most popular ever on ECW. I will never tire of seeing it! Makes me want to kneel.

      Comment by kristinalloyd | June 21, 2011 | Reply

      • aMEN 😉

        Also, please see post on my admiration for ECW and what you guys did. Esp as I now intern at one of the publishers discussed. 🙂

        Comment by Kitty Stryker | June 25, 2011 | Reply


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: