Happy Halloween!!!!

George Schnakenberg’s Banksy costume


Happy Halloween guys! I just thought I would share some inspirational art history inspired halloween costumes with all of you. Some them look simple to replicate too, so this might be a good last minute idea for you escapades tonight! I hope y’all have a great night and lots of candy! And thanks for reading my little blog!


“The Son of Man” René Magritte


“Oh, Jeff…I Love You, Too…But…,” Roy Lichtenstein


“Portrait de l’artiste,” Vincent van Gogh


“Portrait of Adele Bloch-Bauer I,” Gustav Klimt


“Girl With a Pearl Earring,” Johannes Vermeer


The Scream, Edvard Munch


“Beast Jesus”


Picasso, Warhol, AND Lichtenstein!


“Lobster Telephone” Salvador Dali


Frida Kahlo look-a-like!


Mona Lisa and GWAPE


Another Van Gogh.

and another Lichtenstein

and American Gothic!





Robert Rauschenberg: A Belated Birthday Post

“Painting relates to both art and life. Neither can be made. I try to act in that gap between the two. A pair of socks is no less suitable to make a painting with than wood, nails, turpentine, oil, and fabric.” — Robert Rauschenberg


Hello friends! I know, I know, I am slacking on the posting, but I have been busy with a local artist group, complex thing right here in my own community. I am amazed everyday by the collaborations going, so I get distracted, take on too much with this, that and the other, and I get too tired to type out anything. My apologies! So the place I am volunteering/working at is called Lowe Mill, and it is fantastic place of art and music, and even food, enrichment. There are hundreds of artists working out of what used to be a actual mill. And I have been asked to research and correct the history of the place and I could not be more thrilled by this opportunity.

Here’s the link to their website for those curious: http://www.lowemill.net

and here’s one to their FaceBook page: https://www.facebook.com/pages/Lowe-Mill-ARTS-Entertainment/221839969152

Truly, what is happening here with these artist collaborations is amazing and exciting! I will probably start posting about what the artists and myself are up to every once and a while just for fun.

Ok so now, onto Robert Rauschenberg! My intention was to do a brief biography-summary-thing in honor of his birthday, which was last week on the 22nd, and I so missed it. Rauschenberg proved difficult to sum up— the man was prolific to say the least. So now this is a belated Birthday post.

I love Rauschenberg. He is one of those modern artists that gets me all excited and I get angry thinking about how his body of work is often pigeon-holed into one category, taken for granted, and constantly described in terms reductive of Marcel Duchamp. We could argue all day back and forth about whether Duchamp really had a great influence on Rauschenberg or not, but regardless Rauschenberg unquestionably took his art beyond Dada’s ideologies. (Plus “Rauschenberg” is so much more fun to say than “Duchamp”.) There is  quit a breadth of diversity to his work, and he influenced several art movements as well as initiating projects outside of art.  He was very versatile in his choices for both creation and expressing himself using oils, sculpting with “junk” and other debris he found inspiring, making prints for frescos and other artistic pursuits, dabbling in photography, and working in theater as a designer, choreographer, and performer. Rauschenberg even participated in scientific collaborations. And despite challenges and changes he faced throughout his life, Rauschenberg never stopped making art. Basically, Rauschenberg is the definition of a Renaissance man regarding the arts.

The artist was born as Milton Ernest Rauschenberg in Port Arthur, Texas. Rauschenberg studied at the Kansas City Art Institute and the Académie Julian in Paris, France, where he met the painter Susan Weil. In 1942 Rauschenberg put art making aside and served in the U.S. Navy Reserve until 1945. Later, this experience inspired his break through series the “Shelter Drawings”. Two years following his service, during 1947, he attended the Academie Julian in Paris. From there, during 1948 to 1950, he attended the Black Mountain College in North Carolina. There, he studied painting under Josef Albers, a founder of the Bauhaus. Albers’ preliminary courses relied on strict discipline that did not allow for any “uninfluenced experimentation”. Rauschenberg later decided he would do exactly the reverse of Albers’ instructions. Eventually, John Cage would have an abiding influence on Rauschenberg’s work, and Hazel Larsen Archer’ photographs would inspire Rauschenberg to emphasize personal vision over technique. Finally, in 1952 Rauschenberg studied with Vaclav Vytlacil and Morris Kantor at the Art Students League of New York, where he met fellow artists Knox Martin and Cy Twombly.

Art historians categorize Rauschenberg’s approach as “Neo Dadaist,” a label he shares with the painter Jasper Johns. His art is often compared to Duchamp’s earlier Dada works, like “the Fountain”. But I feel that the qualities cited as reminiscent to Duchamp’s are only coincidental. Rauschenberg always said that he wanted to work “in the gap between art and life” suggesting that from the beginning he questioned conventional distinctions between art objects and everyday objects. At the same time, Rauschenberg was moving beyond questioning what is art and who can make, and began to redefine the role of the observer in creating art’s meaning also.

In 1951 Rauschenberg created his monochromatic “White Paintings”. The purpose of this series was to reduce painting to its most essential nature allowing for the possibility of pure experience. The “White Paintings” were shown at Eleanor Ward’s Stable Gallery in New York during October 1953. They appear at first to be essentially blank, white canvas. However, one commentator said that “…rather than thinking of them as destructive reductions, it might be more productive to see them, as John Cage did, as hypersensitive screens – what Cage suggestively described as ‘airports of the lights, shadows and particles.’ In front of them, the smallest adjustments in lighting and atmosphere might be registered on their surface. Rauschenberg himself said that they were affected by ambient conditions, “so you could almost tell how many people are in the room”. The “Black Paintings of 1951 like the “White Paintings” were executed on multiple panels and were single colour works. Here Rauschenberg incorporated pieces of newspaper into the painting working the paper into the paint so that sometimes newspaper could be seen and in other places could not.

From the fall of 1952 to the spring of 1953 Rauschenberg traveled through Europe and North Africa with Cy Twombly where, in Morocco, he created collages and boxes out of trash. He took them back to Italy and exhibited them at galleries in Rome and Florence. A lot of them sold; those that did not he threw into the river Arno. From his stay, 38 collages survived. By 1953-1954 Rauschenberg had completely abandoned his White Painting and Black Painting series, and established his Red Painting series. These paintings were created with diverse kinds of paint applications of red paint, and with the addition of materials such as wood, nails, newsprint and other materials to the canvas created complex painting surfaces, and were forerunners of Rauschenberg’s well-known Combine series.  For the Red Paintings, the artist used trash and objects interesting to him picked from the New York City streets. He claimed he:

“wanted something other than what I could make myself and I wanted to use the surprise and the collectiveness and the generosity of finding surprises. And if it wasn’t a surprise at first, by the time I got through with it, it was. So the object itself was changed by its context and therefore it became a new thing.” —Rauschenberg

Another example of Rauschenberg’s unique way of reestablishing worn definitions of art and its purpose is the Erased de Kooning Drawing famously cited from 1953. Rauschenberg obtained a drawing from de Kooning for the express purpose of erasing it as an artistic statement. The resulting work asks the viewer to reconsider the process of art, question attitudes regarding the permanency or “scared” qualities of art, and other conventions related to understanding of art tanned for granted at the time.


“White Paintings series”

Rauschenberg’s commitment to explore the gap between art and life is also evident in his “Combines,” which bridged the gap between Pop art and Abstract Expressionism. He created these pieces from 1954 to 1962. “Combines” are pieces of sculpture created from pieces of “junk” and, later, silk over lays. He preferred this type of artwork to drawing, which he had pretty much rejected by this point. The “combining” method of art form is Rauschenberg’s own invention and soon became what he is most known for as an artist. “Combines” differ from earlier collage-like pieces for including clothing, urban debris, and taxidermic animals. These works served to completely delineate and breakdown the boundaries between art and sculpture so that both are present in a single work of art. Rauschenberg made his first Combine in 1953, where a camera bellows and its mount protrude from the canvas. Another early “Combine” titled  Bed (1955) was created by dripping red paint across a quilt. The quilt was later stretched and displayed as a work of art. Some critics from The Daily Telegraph considered the work to be a symbol for violence and rape. Rauschenberg submitted the collaborative combine, Short Circuit (1955), for an annual exhibition at Stable Gallery in 1955. He invited friends to produce small pieces that could be smuggled into the exhibition in his cabinet-shaped construction. A painting by his former wife, artist Susan Weil, appears behind the right door, and a flag composition by Jasper Johns once sat behind the left door. (It went missing in 1965 and was replaced at Rauschenberg’s invitation with a facsimile by the artist Sturtevant.) The work also includes a Judy Garland autograph, an image of Abraham Lincoln, and a postcard of grazing cows, among other items. This piece really pushes the role of the artist in making art by being so dependent on a community of contributors.


Critics originally viewed the “Combines” for their formal aspects of art, shape, color, texture, composition and arrangement of these. The traditional method for critiquing art is limited and served only to impede the larger aspirations of Rauschenberg’s work. His art challenged and transcended conventions, and so cannot be fairly judged by them. Thankfully the 1960’s view has changed over time so that more recently critics and art historians see the “Combines” as carrying coded messages difficult to decipher because there is no apparent order to the presentation of the objects. His cross-medium creations explored the blurry boundaries between art and the everyday world, challenging modernist art critic Clement Greenberg‘s  doctrine on medium specificity. Rauschenberg’s impetus to combine both painting materials and everyday objects continued throughout his artistic life.

Rauschenberg is also a notable forerunner of American Pop Art. In 1962, Rauschenberg evolved the concept of combining from found objects to found images and began to  transfer popular imagery onto his canvas using the silkscreen process. Previously used only in commercial applications, Rauschenberg revolutionized silkscreen printing and was able to address issues relating to commodity, multiple reproducibility of images, and the consequent flattening that the experience implies. His work had a tremendous influence on Andy Warhol. In 1963, Warhol made Let Us Now Praise Famous Men, a homage to Rauschenberg in which Warhol used silk screening to transfer multiple images of a photographic self-portrait by Rauschenberg and pictures Rauschenberg had taken of his family onto a canvas.



Rauschenberg also had a few projects outside of the art sphere.  In 1966, Billy Klüver and Rauschenberg officially launched Experiments in Art and Technology (E.A.T.) a non-profit organization that promotes collaborations between artists and engineers. In 1969, NASA invited Rauschenberg to witness the launch of Apollo 11 and the artist created his Stoned Moon Series of lithographs in response to this landmark event. The lithographs involved combining diagrams and other images from NASA’s archives with photographs from various media outlets, as well as with his own work.

Rauschenberg eventually began to work out of his his home and studio in Captiva, Florida, around 1970. His first project on Captiva Island was a 16.5-meter-long silkscreen print called Currents (1970), made with newspapers from the first two months of the year, followed by Cardboards (1970–71) and Early Egyptians (1973–74), the latter of which is a series of wall reliefs and sculptures constructed from used boxes. He also printed on textiles using his solvent-transfer technique to make the Hoarfrosts (1974–76) and Spreads (1975–82), and in the Jammers (1975–76), created a series of colorful silk wall and floor works. For the most part, the Jammers comprise stitched fabrics in pure, solid colors, affixed to rattan poles or hung directly and loosely on the wall; whereas in works such as Sprout (1975) and Caliper(1976), the unadorned poles are the principal formal element, propped against the wall. Urban Bourbons (1988–95) focused on different methods of transferring images onto a variety of reflective metals, such as steel and aluminum. Additionally, throughout the 1990’s, Rauschenberg continued to utilize new materials while still working with rudimentary techniques, such as wet fresco, as in the Arcadian Retreat (1996) series, and the transfer of images by hand, as in the Anagrams (1995–2000). As part of his engagement with the latest technological innovations, he began making digital Iris prints and using biodegradable vegetable dyes in his transfer processes, underscoring his commitment to caring for the environment. In 2003 he began to work exclusively out of his home studio. He worked until his dying day, on May 12, 2008.

So hopefully we can now all understand the wonder that is Rauschenberg and appreciate the singularity of his contribution to the art world. Happy Birthday (belated as it is) Rauschenberg! You are missed!

A Call to Examine the Ills of Selfies on Men

*I started this as a freelance assignment. I wanted to share a version of it here for you guys. Enjoy!*

A lot of contemporary selfie literature is just fodder for feminist arguments and claim that the selfie phenomenon is simply the latest form of the “male gaze”.  Such arguments accuse selfies of further de-humanizing women into sex objects. Ben Ager describes the trend as “the male gaze gone viral,” and women’s studies professor and anti-porn activist Gail Dines argues that selfies are vehicles for the normalizing of porn culture in our society.  Writer Andrew Kleen thinks this should be of great concern when it comes to girls and women, “unless women don’t care about being transformed into commercial pornography.” All the while insight gathered from selfie studies like these are used to measure the effects on women while claiming men are to blame.

While I do not question conclusions that accuse selfies of pressuring women, I do think that to approach the subject of selfies as though women are the only victims is flawed. In fact I am convinced that selfies are just as bad for men as they are for women. While reading these articles I noticed that the arguments are constructed from one direction and with one purpose in mind: to demonize the contemporary male gaze fueling a porn culture. Andrew Keen, Gail Dines, and Ben Ager have written about how vulnerable women are to feeling pressured to over edit selfies for a socially constructed expectation of perfection. Dines especially has interpreted studies with such a focused agenda— accusing selfies of teaching young women that to be positively received their pictures must meet a man’s expectations— that they overlook the harm selfies could pose to men.

Selfies are not new and have been around since the advent of the camera; even before the social media apps of today made it so easy to snap and share every moment of your day. I was able to find photographs of “selfies” taken by the “mirror” method— posing in front of a mirror and capturing the reflection— as far back as  in the early 1900s. The Grand Duchess Anastasia Nikolaevna of Russia took one of the first teenage selfies using a mirror and a Kodak Brownie camera to send to a friend in 1914, but even less famous people of Edwardian society have left us with photos of their reflections. This shows us just how much people almost instinctively obsess over how to preserve a present moment to document their lives. And these photos show that since the beginning of our media culture both men and women were active “selfie” takers.

472px-Unidentified_woman_taking_her_own_photograph_using_a_mirror_and_a_box_camera,_roughly_1900 546px-Grand_Duchess_Anastasia_Nikolaevna_self_photographic_portrait 1938 1948

So men take selfies just like women and edit them before sharing. In fact the main appeal of selfie sharing is that anyone with a camera on his or her phone is able to participate, not just women with low self-esteem. Sites like Instagram have premade filters that let users quickly edit lighting, quality, and saturation without having to tediously work photo-editing programs. This instant ability to edit a self-portrait to an acceptable perfection gives users a sense of control over their image, and this extends to believing they can control how they are socially perceived.  And while celebrities take selfies too, Pamela Rutledge, Ph.D., faculty director of the media psychology program at the Massachusetts School of Professional Psychology, points out because of selfies, “There are many more photographs available now of real people than models”. Selfies enable us to broadcast to hundreds of people a perception of ourselves that transcends into a definition of character and social relevance. For the “normal” person, posting a selfie through social media feels like an empowering act.

Both women and men are likely to alter photos with filters to “improve” their image. The user’s need to edit their image indicates the precarious balance between feeling empowerment and feeling anxiety over selfie sharing. In reality, control over your image reception is an illusion. According to Andrew Keen points, the user loses all control of reception once the photo is made public. Keen tells Straight, “It’s the opposite of controlling your own image.”  People post pictures of themselves looking attractive to generate more positive feedback. They become obsessed with accruing “likes” and comments on their photos. As a result, the process of making a selfie attractive has become very precise. In Grisham’s USA article he notes it has been shown that women will place the phone at high angles to make their eyes larger, cheekbones more defined, and we all remember the “duck face” trend in which women pulled their cheeks in and made “kissey” faces. And like women, men set up their pictures in very specific ways. Exploring these differences reveals insight into social pressures men possibly feel, and it is not a stretch to assume that a media driven porn culture would cause men to edit photos because they want the same validation women seek from selfie sharing.

What I have observed is that men are far more likely to take a selfie at eye level showing their chests and arms than women. Typically, men photograph themselves at least from the torso up flexing their arms or abs to show muscle. Often they are shirtless while flexing, there is far less emphasis on their faces and much more so on their bodies which could reveal a desire to appear strong and play up their physical abilities. On a tumblr site titled “Selfie Boys” men, many of whom are gay (another category of selfie takers that has been marginalized), post pictures of their penis or in poses that allude to sexual acts. Looking at photo after photo of a penis with the “#selfie” tag makes it clear that men are suffering from powerful feelings of insecurity. It is evident from these photos that the porn culture we live in puts extreme sexual pressure on men, straight or gay, to the point that they would rather share an image of their a penis than of their face. How is that any less disturbing than a woman filtering her face? These men are hiding behind their “manhood” feeling so insecure and invaluable they chose to identify themselves only as a penis. Perhaps these men are just trying to send images that they believe others want to see?

But thus far no one has thoroughly explored the ill effects of selfies or of porn culture on men. Scholars, especially Gail Dines, have only generated a lot of persuasive buzz blaming men for creating a porn culture, not considering whether they too are victims of it. This could be because of the belief, extolled by Dines, that masturbation and pornography are men’s primary experience viscerally and bodily with the Internet. Dines argument proposes that women and girls only have one way of visibility, and that way is “fuckabilty”. But I am woman and selfie taker myself, I know that when I am framing a pose that I am thinking more about how my friends, both male and female, will receive my photo. I am not thinking about just my male peers and I think the same would apply to most women also. I just want to take a goofy picture and send it to a few friends because I wish they could be there with me. Additionally, this model perpetuates a prejudice that women are less sexual than men. I think it is shocking that many writers still draw their conclusions from gender distinctions founded on assuming that men have an inherently higher desire for sex than women. Biased assumptions like Dine’s lead to more assumptions, particularly that women take selfies only for men, which limit the scope of the selfie problem. After browsing the Selfie Boys website for only a few minutes I am persuaded to argue strongly that there are men who similarly feel that their only way to acceptance is through their fuckabilty.

When we acknowledge that men are also sensitive we can understand that there are some men only feel valuable when they are perceived as sexual, and selfies reveal that. It is a mistake to approach the study of selfies assuming that only half the population would suffer harmful effects of the social phenomenon. We live in a society in which, according to a Samsung survey, selfies account for 30 percent of all photos among people ages 18 to 24.  And 91 percent of teenagers admit to posting photos online. And with the staggering popularity of selfies, I ask how could selfies not engender similar abuse on men by pressuring them to take socially acceptable, or sexual pictures as well? Yet, because of gender biases we have assumed that women are more likely to suffer insecurity over their images than men, so thus far selfie criticism only enlightens us to the problems they pose for women.  I argue that men do have similar concerns about acceptance and it is worth exploring selfies because these sexualized portraits are equally troublesome. Perhaps cultural scholars will similarly find that men are sharing selfies to satisfy the demands of perceived masculinity, similar to women taking them for perceived femininity.

—Sharon Singletary


 Bussel, K. Rachel. “Dear Mrs. Hall: Boys and Men Can See Sexy Selfies and Still Respect
Women.” Medium.com https://medium.com/boinkology-101/e775d466b17c

Keen, Andrew. the author of Digital Vertigo: How Today’s Online Social Revolution Is Dividing,

             Diminishing, and Disorienting Us, disagrees.

Lang, Ian. “Selfies: Why Taking Selfies is the Least Manly Thing You Can Do.” AskMen.com.

Murphy, Meghan. (April 3, 2013) “Putting the Selfie under a feminist lens.” Straight.com.

Nimrod Kamer. “Thinkfluencer Episode 1: Selfies video.” (August 29, 2013)

Seville, Rachel. (July 23, 2013) “Can Men Take Selfies?” Four-Pins.com http://four-

Walker, Melissa. (August 2013).“The Good, the Bad, and the Unexpected Consequences of
Selfie Obsession.” Teen Vogue http://www.teenvogue.com/advice/2013-08/selfie-obsession

400 Years Later, Pieter Brueghel the Younger Painting Will Debut at Frieze Masters | In the Air: Art News & Gossip | ARTINFO.com

400 Years Later, Pieter Brueghel the Younger Painting Will Debut at Frieze Masters | In the Air: Art News & Gossip | ARTINFO.com.

Hey guys! Long time no see! I went on an extended vacay and I was away from my computer for far too long. I hope you all forgive me. I thought I woudl come back with some awesome news about the potential, recent rediscovery of a Peiter Brueghel the Younger painting.

Johnny Van Haeften, London Based dealer of 17th century works, discovered the lost painting “The Census at Bethlehem” in Africa. He traced its journey from Antwerp in 1611 to the Delamere faimly in Africa in 1940, the last source of its known where a bouts.

It will debut this week at Frieze Masters in London.

How to recognize the artists of paintings… – The Meta Picture

How to recognize the artists of paintings… – The Meta Picture.

I saw this over on the Meta Picture while I was not working on my writing assignment, and it may have made my day. For all of you art history students and scholars, this is totally for you! And even not, well it is still pretty funny and has some actual good advice I wish I had known in school!

The Art of Altering Women: Thigh Gaps

Today I became aware of a horrifying social media trend taking instagram, tumblr,  twitter, and other image blogs by storm. It is the #thighgap trend. Teen girls and young women take photos of their thigh gap and up load them to their platform of choice to celebrate the achievement of gaining a thigh gap by starving themselves, exercising to the extreme, and self loathing. I am appalled. It is bad enough that girls feel pressure from advertisers to engage in extreme behavior to achieve a culturally lauded homogeneous and exclusive “perfection,” but now they have the means to make their own depraving imagery. You can also read the disturbing wishes that these girls post alongside these photos as motivation:

“With those ankle boots I would also like:

A nice pair of legs with a thigh gap

A flat stomach

My collar bones to stop hiding away

To be able to fit my hand round my arm”

  • “Me: I want to lose weight
  • Friend: You aren’t fat?! If you’re fat then I must be obese
  • Me: You’re not fat though and I never said I was ‘fat
  • Friend: If you want to lose weight then you obviously think you’re fat
  • Me: You wouldn’t understand.”

“Today I ate an actual meal. It felt as though I just drank lead that immediately hardened at the bottom of my stomach. The aftermath felt as though I was twisting a dagger from behind my rib cage.”

 “im currently fasting and im on day three i plan to go as long as possible which will probably be a week to twelve days then ill start adding some liquids like soup and broth so if any one else is fasting or dieting and needs support my kik is : stolenangelz”
and my favorite: “What you eat in private you wear in public.”
Artists have not always been considerate to the wants and realities of a being a woman when it comes to recreating them. In fact the topic of women in art is

Diego Velázquez The Toilet of Venus (“The Rokeby Venus”) 1647–51

so long I could not cover it in this small post, in fact I should probably make a blog just for discussing the appropriation of women’s bodies in art. But for now let’s just take the Rokeby Venus for example. Diego Velázquez decided that the model wasn’t curvy enough in reality so he “fixed” the problem by removing her rib. He altered her anatomy to achieve a compositional balance that would be impossible to replicate in reality. And of course he is not the only one, just go google “Venus of Urbino” or “Madonna paintings.” Back in the Renaissance, Baroque and Rococo periods, artists were mostly men and so paintings of women were created to engage the male viewer. Later feminist views of the paintings deemed this perception the “male gaze” and rightfully accused it of being biased and objectifying woman as a man’s sex object. Artists were creating long and large bodies of impossibly voluptuous and languid women. Also  impossible— especially when they removed ribs, lengthened legs, and other editing of the anatomy— and of course not healthily to aspire to.

And today women are still surrounded by ads that constantly tell them they are ideal enough. Ads are not altered by paint brush any longer, now they use  photoshop to create eerily hyper real photographs of unreal subjects. These images of altered women are powerful— they are created to be so. They speak to the viewer in a direct and personal way. Only now it is to the opposite extreme , we are told we should be smaller.  And women have responded  with tumblers dedicated to thigh gaps and thinspo support that validate a sick obsession with obtaining a shape that is impossible, dangerous, and small.
I think that is what gets me the most riled up. Women live a dichotomous culture in which they are told they can be strong and smart but all of the imagery of women reinforces the idea that to gain acceptance they need to appear weak and frail. It is almost like they are pressured because somewhere along the way they got the idea that they shouldn’t take up any room in the world. Everything about the women appearing in these sites is small, weak, frail and delicate. And boney… These women struggle to control their appearance, and to feel loved by themselves and others. To have this control they harm themselves, and each other, and  they are creating a cult of imagery that supports abusive dieting and exercising behavior; all in the hopes of having a gap between their legs or to see their chest bones. Some women are still ashamed to have a figures, they still are convinced that being natural is not enough and that they have to suffer work towards “perfection” and give up being strong in the process.
But if art can cause harm, perhaps it can heal too. Below is an image of my no thigh gap. Please share a picture of what you love about yourself. I know this strays off topic a little from what the blog is about, but I am so very upset by this and I needed to somehow work it into a post. We need to use art to make images that make people better, sometimes that does mean asking us to digest information that we don’t want to hear, and disturb and shock, or just confuse us, but these thinspo blogs and thigh gap pictures are not “art;” they seem to me to be tools of self hate and of abuse towards women. Art should in the end empower us to think more or do more. I am sharing this photo to remind girls that real women don’t just take up space, they force others to make room for them ’cause they are strong and proud and beautiful in more than one dimension, and they deserve that place.
My Thighs Touch and it is awesome