Leslie Kee SUPER...
 

Anybody know where I can download / view the book by Leslie Kee SUPERAYU or any other SUPER that he make? I also know there's an "Asia is One" Photobook....but not sure it's true or not...i would like to know if there's any available website to download the pic~:lech

um the Asia is One photobook exists but i think it's an old one, cuz i remember seeing GACKT's photo for that I think you can check the pictures on Leslie's website...?

just goggle super_____ and his name, you will be able to find some stuff...
but warning, it is Leslie Kee, so there will be half naked and completely nude men, some of them (the porn guy) are just down right... not. art. (yes I said it.)

why are the ppl are all naked @@
THAT'S not art >,< it's kinda disgusting

you should go back in time and tell da vinci that all his art work with naked people isn't art but disgusting

U don't understand me.... daVinci is a genius
Leslie Kee has take some Photos from Artist's they don't known in the rest in the World.
Or u wanna say me Super Manuel was kinda erotic or beautiful?

ahhh.. just fun for me haha :D
no no... SUPER MANUEL isn't beautiful anyway... :puke

but... in the one with gackt... he's naked? :innocent

^ lol here:

http://img294.imageshack.us/img294/1...iaisonevu8.jpg

http://ic.pics.livejournal.com/anna_...0/original.jpg

it's from Superstars Asia is one

Wow, I didn't know Leslie took these kinds of pictures. XD

Hm, while I think some of the SUPER photos are beautiful, I think there's a line between pornography and art. Some of the poses the men are in, well... they don't seem nearly as artistic as just pornographic. I don't know if that was his aim.

daVinci's paintings are overrated.

These are Leslie's art. They are an expression of himself. I guess he's just disgusting :shrug

Maybe Leslie is trying to make a statement about pornography and art. Although, I think it says a lot more about everyone else, that they would see things as porn first.

It's shocking how quickly people disregard sexual art as "just porn" and "disgusting" - and that "porn" and "art" seem to be different to many people. Porn IS a form of art. Porn is simply art that is deemed as incredibly erotic - yes, there's an industry around it and much is just produced for money, but the same can be said about music, film...still art, even if you personally don't like it.
And why is porn seen as something negative? It's a gorgeous thing, a great idea and I wish it would be discussed more openly and not be so banned from mainstream media. There is not a single logical reason to oppose porn I know of, if somebody could supply me with one that would be appreciated.

I feel like Leslie wants to provoke this kind of reaction sometimes.

How I see the line between porn and art, is if the intent of the artist is primarily to elicit sexual arousal, then it's porn. If the intent of the artist is to elicit something more nuanced, it's art. It's just really hard to tell which Leslie is going for. Not that it's a bad thing, in either case.

I don't see porn as negative. My only disagreements with porn is the portrayal of violence against women (and sometimes men), but that's a whole 'nother topic of discussion.

haha, agreed. why does the human body have to be disgusting? just because there's nudity does not equal porn or disgusting. :rolleyes

^ no but it's a question of aesthetics. Da Vinci never portrayed a lady or a man showing off all they have in ridiculous poses and bla bla....the gap between art and porn is well visible. Erotic stuff can be very beautiful if done in a right way, however in the most shots i've seen from leslie in this field, i can't say his erotic stuff is artistic xD For me nude body has to tell something more, thoughtful than "I am sexually aroused" or "trying to do that". It's very very easy to cross the line and go from tasteful artistic nude , to pornstar photoshoot with HQ equipment and good make-up....:rolleyes

Porn industry in general has no feeling in what it shows, it's driven by human instincts, biological stuff. There's no art in there whatsoever. Calling it art is just an excuse to make money and make people less pissed off about it being around. These days everythng can be called art if you wrap it nicelly in a smart phylosophy.....Porn industry does that....

but as someone already said...porn is actually a form of art when you get down to it. its all about what the artist wants to portray. maybe his work is pornography and art at the same time. i just don't like people dismissing it and saying its disgusting simply because of nudity or sex.

that being said, i am definitely not here to defend leslie's talent, lol, just to defend his right to create art in whatever way he sees fit.

*quotes from the edited post lol* hmmm.... I dunno... Porn industry in general has no feeling in what it shows, it's driven by human instincts, biological stuff. There's no art in there whatsoever. Calling it art is just an excuse to make money and make people less pissed off about it being around. These days everythng can be called art if you wrap it nicelly in a smart phylosophy.....Porn industry does that....

---

as for leslie.... I don't care about him anymore, because i just simply don't freaking understand that dude whatsoever lol i gave up on him lol

Yeah, we call that kind of porn, "bad porn".

I don't understand why there has to be a distinction at all. Porn can be porn, and also be art. It's not an excuse. It's the truth.

I think people just want "porn" and "art" to be within their realms of comfort. Then they can say "oh well, this is done TASTEFULLY, so it's okay."

Well I'm sorry, making people comfortable is not an artist's job. In fact, I would think it's more their job to make you uncomfortable.

I'm damn happy with Leslie's work. He's trying to make people see and understand that this style is natural, it's an expression, it's sexy, raw, powerful, and fun. It's another side to a lot of us.

And think about the fact that he's doing it in a place like Japan. It's necessary and needed.

Hell. It looks like it's needed everywhere else too.

No one seems to understand pornography at all. It's not just about sexual arousal. It's about the representation of human sexuality.

I don't know about you guys, but my sexuality is not well represented by some Venus de Milo-Leonardo da Vinci-classical archetype. Thank god.

whatever. That's my 50 cents on porn.

I think I love you.
This is what I tried to say but I guess didn't come across.

Hm, maybe I have the wrong perception of pornography. When I think of porn, I think of it as being used only for sexual arousal purposes. Based off of some of the incredibly kinky stuff I've seen, a lot of it I cannot in any way perceive as art - for instance, bestiality, snuff films, and rape, and of course other things that I've really never wanted to see.

... Then again, the only kind of porn I've ever come across is the kind on 4chan. So I hope that's not what the majority of porn is like.

Leslie's photos, on the other hand, I can see how it can be seen as both artistic and pornographic. So my initial reaction's that it's simply porn might just be that, an initial reaction. The line between pornography and art on Leslie's photos is fuzzy, so maybe it's a little of both.

You guys have a lot of interesting opinions. :)

:D
I'm only going to really comment on this because I think Leslie's work involves some kink themes...but first of all, it's quite difficult for people who aren't into these things to understand them and be tolerant to begin with, let alone see them as "art".

But it does remain that, these sorts of things do occur, and heavily, with humans. Of course some of those things are illegal, so I won't go into that, but when it comes to being tolerant, it's important to remember that there's a reason why these things exist. They do mean something to someone, somewhere. And to them, a graphic picture of some kinky act, for example, could be a part of who they are and incredibly important to them.

If it's an expression of who they are, and it's extremely pornographic, how is that any different from any other piece of art that is an expression of someone else's humanity?

When it comes to Leslie, I think his messages are loud and clear lol I guess he prefers them that way. I think his photos are pornographic, but softly so. They aren't really that graphic.

I kind of felt sorry for him when Super MANUEL came out. I mean, I didn't like it...Manny isn't my style...but it was kind of awful seeing people condemn it because of the sexual themes he included.

People even do the same with Ayu sometimes...I mean, like the disgusting ****-shaming that came out with Party Queen. It just shows how much many still don't understand and aren't tolerant with human sexuality.

Fair enough. I propose that pornography is then a type of art. Well, crudely-done art that has to make its point with a sledgehammer, that is. :laugh I'm thinking of B-list porn, of course, not Leslie's, though I contend he's making some bold statements with his art.

this is such a old age question.
You cant define art so in such, everything can BE art.
Or the fact that the majority of society defines what art is.

I dont think the majority of society views porn as art, so it is not art.
What Leslie does is art, but he also does 'porn.' (of course im just referring to his Super book with the gay guy. some of that is just down right porn.)
But nudity does not = porn. There is a line in that.

haha, i agree with you. honestly, i can go out and take a picture of a rock and say its art, and maybe it is? who's to say other than the person who created it?

whatever guys...art or porn...if anybody would like to upload the HQ scans, I would like to have it~ :)

Leslie Kee photobook-'SUPER TAKU' preview



very very vulgar!

i hope 'SUPER AYU' like this too, LOL~

^Those pictures really make us wonder how that original Super Ayu would look like...full nudity? Uh oh...Be prepared if we ever see anything like this...

(By the way, how do Japan view in terms of adult content?)

That's a disappointingly small **** right there...shame, with that body...
Nice photography, some poses and angles look off, but that's probably because it's no scans.

'SUPER MAROKA'

http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m3...remvo1_500.png

well he IS...what he is :laugh Maybe he's a grower, not a shower.

Anyways. I kind of like that guy...but I think...well idk if I said this, but I don't really care for Leslie's...vision...of.... masculinity...I guess lol

Who was that guy though, was he related to Ayu in some way? He's not a dancer right.


And cool, one for Maro.

That would work...if there weren't hard pics in there :innocent Asians are only 2cm smaller than Europeans on average in that department, one can hope for something better xD

Interested in the Maro one. Always liked that guy...and there seem to be at least hidden-nude shots in there.

:yes

I think you can't really find scans of them or view them. I guess you can only buy them:grumpy

I really doubt Ayu would show off her goods to the public let alone her fans..

Size queen much? :rolleyes :rolleyes

I'm sure if there was nudity in Super Ayu it would have already been all over 2ch and the internet by now.

So what? If somebody has professional, hard nudes taken and released it's only natural to comment on that aspect of shortcoming amongst the beauty that is the rest :innocent

Honestly. LOL

I love how in the second link it's only slightly blurred and shaped still like a schlong. I didn't see the point of the blurs. :laugh

If this ever happens, then it would be quite a controversial scandal! (Just wondering)

Da Vinci was not making art of men rock hard, sitting in front of mirrors exposing their @$$holes, sexually posing and touching themselves. Just sayin'.

^ your are right, lol.. he did all the touching... lol.
But in all seriousness. Art is defined by the times. Some of the stuff Leslie does I considered art, other stuff I think he does because he likes it. If he wants to call it art, so be it.

Funny thing about art is you can't say "this isn't art!" because it's either too much this, or that. If it kicks your emotions in the balls, it's art. If it makes you think or feel, it's art. You don't have to like it :)

But dear lord, those pictures. Hnghngnhgnghgghhhhng. I approve.

...that we know of.

who is to that's not art tho..y'all seem threatened by male sexuality.

It's not threatened by sexuality it's disgusted by perverts. The more morality breaks down to support the views expressed by perverts the more lives we see flushed down the toilet in this world. Usually the lives getting destroyed the most are kids who deserve the same chances some of us had to grow up having a childhood, not walk down the street in one of the many cities that sells porn out of a metal box like its a newspaper and lose the innocence of being a child because some stupid polititians decided to appease someone else by changing laws that should still be there.

Do you have proof(in the form of scientific, undisputed studies), backing any of your points?

So you have
- a loosely defined "perverts"
- morality "breaking down" in support of those "perverts" - who are they?
- lives getting "flushed down the toilet" because "morality breaks down" - could you get more specific?
- kids not being able to "have a childhood" - I'd like to see studies regarding this. I'd argue that society's repression of sexuality is more hurtful than those "perverts" you speak of. It is scientific fact that children enjoy sexual play(I am NOT talking about something involving adults, I am talking about an exploration of sexuality that involves only children, without even adults watching), it's sometimes even considered vital for their upbringing - but sexual play amongst children is severely repressed in modern society. Just look at age of consent laws! Having your first sexual encounters when you are over 14, 16 or even 18 is a ridiculous law, as that is already long after puberty begins and you may have already developed a negative connotation to sex by then.
- children "loosing innocence" - I'd argue that children are anything but innocent. all humans, from birth, are highly sexual beings and children cannot yet repress any of their urges willfully.

I'm not writing a science book, I'm stating the problems many people have with pornography being viewed as art. There are reasons it's called pornography and not called art.

And if you people keep asking for a source for every sentence someone replies with you are going to needlessly fill threads. Why don't you try giving your own statement and let others freely make theirs. This is a public forum that is kind of what they are for. Not to run to your friends who were given moderator positions they don't deserve so they can help you to blacklist everyone who doesn't share your opinion. If you want to alk on a forum allow it to operate like one where we can all speak freely.

So I am assuming you have no sources for any of your statements and are not willing to discuss your position because you realize you cannot defend it?

You talk about children losing their innocence, lives being flushed down the toilet, morality breaking down and "perverts" - those are some serious accusations to society as a whole - and when somebody questions what you say you reply in a manner disregarding everything that was said.
BTW, I have no friends in moderator positions. I don't like the way this forum is moderated, I prefer more liberal moderation that merely deletes spam and cleans up old or unneeded topics, but lets people discuss freely. Since this is a discussion forum (not a "share your opinion and then don't enable a discussion of them" forum).

Are you even familiar with Freud's and Kinsey's research related to child sexuality or do you just pull every single thing you say out of your arse?

Y'all are a trip, loves it.

You're taking one post I tried to make in quick Reply to the current discussion on this thread & making this whole discussion belong in a thread of it's own. So please just agree to disagree. I usually don't mind reading your posts and would like to avoid adding more to the ignore list.

If you don't like how it is moderated either then let me post my own statements wthout quoting 100s of sources same as I let everyone else do. I don't ask that everyone change to have my opinion and I don't ask them for sources I let them speak and if it something where I have a much different opinion, then I post my opinion. It doesn't mean I expect you to agree.

And no I'm not familiar with Freud or Kinsey or any other papers of any doctor of any kind. I'm familiar with the Holy Bible, King James Version from 1900 A.D til now. It tends to disagree with most psychologists & therapists so I tend to ignore them completely.

^ Actually I really wouldnt go with Freud or Kinsey...
both were crack-pots.
Freud: I really dont know what's wrong with you, but lets blame your mother, she's a woman.
Kinsey: And most likely gay ^_^.

he's a crack pot because he's most likely gay? okkkay :thud

No... lol thats not what I said.