Crucified males

[PhilX]

Thanks PhilX. I think Last Temptation came close, went with naked crux but bailed on full exposure. I am playing with a couple of manips to address that lack, post them soon, but I have also found what appears to be an edited out pic of one of the thieves which is much more explicit that anything in my version of the film.

Here's a still which shows some of Willem Dafoe's tackle, a scene of all three crosses, and the exposed thief.

View attachment 46096View attachment 46097View attachment 46098

I look forward to seeing your manips Phlebas.

I wish Scorzese had put the thieves on similar crosses to Jesus's. That fantasy of twisted & impractical pieces of wood probably gave some sort of pictorial rhetoric but I find it rather irritating. Far better if we could have seen a bleak landscape of upright stipes as well as all three men together on the same sort of killing-machine. Why in art & movies was Christ treated differently or given a different cross? In Gibson's film He was the only one of the three to drag the whole cross there despite being half dead from a ridiculously overdone scourging. He should have born the patibulum like the others or else they should have been dragging crosses along the same - that would have made a better scenario I think.

 

[Eulalia]

Well I agree that male bodies can be very beautiful,​

as lovely as female ones,​

I certainly find some of them very erotic,​

so I don't feel the same about them as Messaline does,​

but there's no "right or wrong" about it, we're just different -​

and - yes Tree - I do notice the prick in N8D's pic, it completes the image.​

​

I do find attitudes in modern Western societies - and in other, very different societies -​

fascinating mainly for their sheer inconsistency and irrationality -​

e.g. if it's so important in Christian teaching that Jesus was in all respects a "real" (male) man,​

why does "decorum" prohibit showing he was one?​

​

Thanks again Dom for keeping up your great narative -​

what you say gives me one thought -​

I suspect why men tend to be uneasy about seeing genitals like their own​

is that it reminds them (subconsciously) of their own vulnerability.​

 

[dom59]

Is this discussion about male v. female genital exposure anything to do with what I wrote yesterday?

I am all in favour of equality, I'm sure a crowd came to see a crucifixion to see whoever was being executed man or woman, cruelly exposed with their genitals for all to see & to for those watching to make lewd shouts about. Insulting words can be as painful as scourges & nails!

I actually find a naked man as interesting & sometimes as beautiful as a naked woman. Then again many naked men AND women can be pretty disgusting! At an execution I doubt it mattered, beautiful or ugly a nude person is always of interest!

I just described yesterday my idea of a way to give a more real scenario of the Crucifixion in a religious movie. Obviously decorum would prohibit Jesus being shown full-frontally naked, but the idea of that can be created by clever film editing. Now movies like Spartacus, or a TV series like Rome where copulating & general nudity is acceptable have no excuse not to show full-frontal crucifixions.

It is true that there are also ugly women, but personally I prefer women's bodies.

​

In terms of the crucifixion of Jesus, we should actually show him naked on the cross, as he was in reality. But the puritanism of the religions bans it, for the sake of macho principles which I mentioned above. Too bad ...

 

[dom59]

Well I agree that male bodies can be very beautiful,​

as lovely as female ones,​

I certainly find some of them very erotic,​

so I don't feel the same about them as Messaline does,​

but there's no "right or wrong" about it, we're just different -​

and - yes Tree - I do notice the prick in N8D's pic, it completes the image.​

​

I do find attitudes in modern Western societies - and in other, very different societies -​

fascinating mainly for their sheer inconsistency and irrationality -​

e.g. if it's so important in Christian teaching that Jesus was in all respects a "real" (male) man,​

why does "decorum" prohibit showing he was one?​

​

Thanks again Dom for keeping up your great narative -​

what you say gives me one thought -​

I suspect why men tend to be uneasy about seeing genitals like their own​

is that it reminds them (subconsciously) of their own vulnerability.​

For me, the weaker sex, it is the man. Moreover, their genitals are more fragile, they not?

 

[ERIN the Brave]

For me, the weaker sex, it is the man. Moreover, their genitals are more fragile, they not?

I would agree!

 

[dom59]

First this is my left hand that will be nailed to the beam.
The nail penetrates my flesh in agonizing pain that radiates throughout my arm. I cannot help shouting.
Blood spurts from the wound and floods the palm of my hand.
My flesh and my bones are spread by the nail which will now be planted in the wood under the hammer in a deep sound.
Several blows drove the nail home even more firmly, fixing for good my hand on the wood of pain.

And then it's the turn of the right hand being pierced by the sharp tip.
The pain is terrible and spreads across my arm, like a discharge.
I hear the hammer hitting the nail which locks my hand with the wood of the beam.
My arms are open definitely crosswise, offered armpits, the body still more vulnerable.
​

 

[PhilX]

Getting very good Dom, those pictures looking down at you are exactly how a gloating guard would watch the procedure, anticipating the raising up & all the extra agony that next bit would cause.


We discussed a month ago the Moravians & Nicolaus Zinzendorf, didn't he claim that the Circumcision of Christ expunged all the shame of the naked human body that went back to the Expulsion from the Garden of Eden? Therefore showing any naked man or woman or even Christ himself full-frontal should have no shame attached. sadly the Church & the legal authorities throughout the world don't like nakedness.

Whether the Circumcision had any effect on removing shame, I am pretty sure Christ wouldn't have noticed it as they raised him up high for everyone to see.

 

[The Fallen Angel]

I"m asking me a question: why, for a man, do you use such precaution to hide his sexe, and why, for a woman, do you like to see her front, and more, opened legs?
It seems to be interesting to know that...

Perhaps size matters

 

[cruxlover]

Why not? but I'ld ask for me the same question...
In fact, I want to know: why not the same treatment for both ?

That goes double for many things and for much of our history.
Mind you the reason for not showing too much of men's weiners might just be - that it would excite catholic priests too much.
(I should be crucified for heresy, LOL)

 

[Fantasmo]

Mind you the reason for not showing too much of men's weiners might just be - that it would excite catholic priests too much.
(I should be crucified for heresy, LOL)

A bit more seriously, I think there are several contributing factors:
- Sexuality for long was exclusively male-driven (and even today many women still are struggling to "claim" their sexuality). So mainly naked women were depicted...

- Men don't want to compete (in size) with others, unless they are sure to win , so rather conceal...

- There seems to be a "distortion in space and time" when many men are "measuring" their dicks (ridiculously exaggerated sizes proclaimed), so better not show the reality

- The male sex is much more "exposed" than the female vagina, where you don't really see much (unless it's a spread close up).
Especially you don't see her state of arousal (easily), what is completely different with males.
If a man shows his cock, he also offers an insight into his mind...to some extent at least.
So, women, when asking "why are you not showing your cock", ask yourself if you'd like to show your spread pussy, with a label on your front indicating "I am horny like a mink"

 

[messaline]

Perhaps size matters

More and more of french sexologists say no! But I'm not specialist...

... (I should be crucified for heresy, LOL)

No, Burn him !

Eulalia said:

"Well I agree that male bodies can be very beautiful,​

as lovely as female ones,​

I certainly find some of them very erotic,...​

​

​

I agree with that; never I've said that a man isn't erotic , even for me , a lesbian...​

I tease when I say that!​

And my question was only a question: no mental reservation in it...​

 

[messaline]

Fantasmo said:"...So, women, when asking "why are you not showing your cock", ask yourself if you'd like to show your spread pussy, with a label on your front indicating "I am horny like a mink"

In first, I've not asked that but why it's not the same for both?
And in second, when a man is excited, we can see that, but when a woman is excited, no need "label": it's also observable...

 

[Fantasmo]

(on: "Size matters")

More and more of french sexologists say no! But I'm not specialist...

Well, actually I am not sure if that really is true or just a statement that is designed to comfort men that have not received as much from mother nature as others did.
Sure, the best tool is worth nothing if you don't use it right
Sure it's also true that more isn't always better, it can be "too much" for a tiny woman.. as it can be "too little" for a "not so tiny" vagina.
And rather a small tool used right than a large one used without skills...
But "used right", I would bet that size still is a contributing factor.

 

[Fantasmo]

When a man is excited, we can see that, but when a woman is excited, no need "label": it's also observable...

Observable... but not anywhere nearly as clear as a male erection!
Nipples are rigid if it's cold...
Labia can open... but that needn't necessarily mean excitement and varies largely.
What else?
All female signs are very subtle...

 

[messaline]

Clearly, I'll must try
But how find the right size, used right?....that's the problem

 

[messaline]

Observable... All female signs are very subtle...

Sure, but she also speaks....
Or at last, groans with pleasure...

 

[Fantasmo]

Sure, but she also speaks....
Or at last, groans with pleasure...

Oh, I was referring to pictures only... (the subject)
No voice, no groans, no humid finger... or whip

 

[PhilX]

Fantasmo makes a good point.

Men are pretty obvious, maybe that is the root of our coyness. I don't think any man is too bothered by being seen naked by other men, it happens all the time in the showers at sports changing rooms.

They are much more shy if women see them naked, the real shame though is if they are seen with an erection by either other men in the showers, or worse by far, a group of women. Our erections are extremely intimate & only to be shared with those we love.

 

[Eulalia]

Clearly, I'll must try
But how find the right size, used right?....that's the problem

they should supply a handbook with it! ​

 

[Fantasmo]

Our erections are extremely intimate & only to be shared with those we love.

Say "arousal" and it goes for both sexes.
I am talking (in PM) with ladies here. On fantasies!
They would not share those fantasies publicly because its intimate and not seen as public domain!