The discussion is interesting, but I don't like that so many responded with variations of "If the photos make you feel pervy, then you must be a real perv!" I think part of the reason looking at those photos might make you feel "pervy" is not that you're turned on. It's that you feel like a voyeur and you feel you are wasting time--that there's nothing really to be gained, that the experience is masturbatory in the figurative sense. The photos would not have to be sexual to make you feel that way. They could be lolcats or whatever (as someone pointed out in the comments).
Maybe it is a comment on the quality or intent of the art.
Excellent post. Does a great job explaining the omnipresent male gaze.
From the page: "I think one of the most subtle but significant ways that male privilege plays out is the male-as-default/woman-as-other attitude."
wow, summed everything up very nicely.
This person summed up everything I agree with about the sexualization of women in the media and anywhere else.
It is sad that women are seen as only beautiful bodies in all kind of adverts, starting from food, drinks, clothes downright to even PETA. It is also shame that one cannot enjoy watching artistic photographs of children without being seen as a paedophile or god knows what. It is sad that we came to such drastic ideas, fuelled by paranoia and a sex-obsessed public.
And also: How many times when your stumbling do you get some portrait of a dewy skinned, doe eyed example of feminine beauty? And how many times do you get a man, a sexy-looking honest-to-god hunk? And why is that? Why is coyness sexy in a woman and not in a man?
The male as the norm means that women are continually othered and reduced. It has become so normalized that it is downright dangerous.