|
|
Sex Blogging, Gratuitous Nudity, Kinky Sex, Sundry Sensuality
ErosBlog posts containing ""fetish fuel""
July 11th, 2023 -- by Bacchus
For several months now, I’ve been looking for generative art tools that aren’t worthlessly crippled (for my pornographic purposes) by built-in #pornocalypse censor-filters. I have been made aware that I could in theory run some of the AI generative art tools myself on local hardware, but I don’t have enough local computing power. Until today, I haven’t found an online tool, one anybody can use, that would return me so much as a single bare nipple. And not for lack of trying!
Until today, I said. Today I discovered the AI Horde Image Generator Bot on Mastodon, and immediately started poking at it. My first try was overly complex, and not technically successful; I asked for “a plump topless pregnant hobbit woman with a fat ass and big bare breasts, bending over washing potatoes in a creek, fantasy, forest, lush forest, green forest, lush vegetation, sunshine, erotic, colorful Style: fantasypunk” and the image I got featured a woman who was not topless, not a hobbit, and not washing potatoes. But she certainly is plump and pregnant and, if that’s how you like to roll, erotic:
That’s already the best result I’ve ever had when viewed through the lens of the “could this image be fetish fuel for someone” query. Yes, our bodacious wading lady certainly could. But I decided to try again, with a much simpler prompt. We demand nipples!
Before now, the pornocalypse filters in every tool I’ve tried have totally nipple-blocked me. So now let’s try for “a cottagecore witch who is entirely naked with big bare breasts, fantasy, colorful, erotic, NSFW” and see if a horny guy can get a couple of damned nipples in this joint. Answer, yes! Although I’m not confident those nipples are pointing quite in the right direction:
That qualified success (we can work on the nipple-pointing next time) was enough to send me searching for the provenance of the tool I was using. The bot is powered by the AI Horde which is “a crowdsourced distributed cluster of Image generation workers and text generation workers.” Crucially for my purposes, they allow and process adult queries, although individual participants in the distributed network of image generation workers have the software ability to refuse such queries. They’ve explained their porn policy in good detail, and there’s not a word in it I can find objectionable:
Does the Horde allow NSFW?
The answer must be: Yes, but voluntarily!
As the horde is effectively just a dumb pipe between workers and clients, barely one step above pure p2p, it is impossible for me to figure out which requests or generations are NSFW. In fact, way more powerful companies than myself have tried and failed to do the same, often completely destroying their service in the process.
As I do not have the resources or the capability to filter NSFW myself (I AM a solodev after all), like the generations themselves, I have to offload this decision, to the community itself.
So the recent update to the bridge adds two new fields to the client request APIs and 1 new field to the worker API.
The worker’s bridge now adds a new “nsfw” variable, which is sent to the Horde when the worker checks-in. It defaults to True which allows the worker to serve all requests like before. However if this is set to False, then this worker will only pick-up requests which are marked as SFW and will skip all NSFW requests. So if you, as the owner of the worker, don’t feel comfortable serving NSFW request, just flip the switch and you’re safe. And if you want to ensure that nobody sends a NSFW requests marked as SFW, you can enable the NSFW filter on your end, which will return a black image on NSFW generations.
…
I believe this approach can satisfy all parties now. Workers can ensure they generate only what they’re comfortable with, and clients can mark their requests accordingly, with an extra safety belt for “accidents”.
Of course the Mastodon bot is not the only way to access the AI Horde. They also have a web tool and a variety of other interfaces, clients, and apps that I’ve only just begun to explore. Understandably enough, resource constraints for free anonymous users appear to be a problem in the web tool, but there are paths (signing up, donating, becoming a generation worker yourself) for getting higher priority in the system. All of this for more research on another day. For now, the bot works well enough to play with!
Similar Sex Blogging:
February 26th, 2019 -- by Bacchus
“It’s quite clearly obvious that they are utterly disgusting and must do in fact disgust any decent-minded people!” That’s how this tightly-wound retired British major opens his sputtering interview with an amused BBC reporter. He goes on to rail at length about the five or six shops that have mannequin porn “up against the glass” where “you can really not avoid them!”
I don’t know if anybody else in the seaside resort town of Eastbourne in East Sussex in 1959 was unduly aroused by shop window mannequins, but judging by the height of this major’s dudgeon, I think we can safely conclude that they were powerful fetish fuel for him. Projection much, major?
No, he’s very convinced the mannequin porn is a public menace: “I cannot believe that these displays are anything else but harmful.” And as always, the lurkers support him in email:
“I’ve had numerous letters and telephone messages from people, not only resident in Eastbourne, emphatically endorsing my action. I’m hoping that local opinion may ultimately put a stop to these unpleasant exhibitions and thereby remove a slur from the good name of this town.”
Similar Sex Blogging:
January 26th, 2019 -- by Bacchus
These photos push lots of buttons for micro-fetishes (or at least, recurring themes closely attended to) here at ErosBlog. I’ve always had a soft spot for images featuring opulent bathrooms and fancy plumbing. Furthermore, I’m quite partial to en déshabillé women at their ablutions. Plus, since these photos show harem-induction preliminaries from a 1960s soft-porn version of the Victorian classic The Lustful Turk, they push not only all the general Orientalist harem-fantasy buttons that lurk throughout the Western literary imagination, but the very specific power-over fantasy that’s often summarized (among men, at least, and sometimes with a wink and a leer) as “have that one bathed and sent to my tent.”
*Smack!*
Hey, what’s that sound?
That, it turns out, was the sound of me writing myself smack into a brick wall. Uh, ouch.
I initially drafted this post a few months back, and found that I couldn’t post it. So I wrote a little note to the future and buried it in my drafts folder:
In early October 2018 as I am writing this, it’s looking a lot like the United States Senate is about to vote to put a rapist on the United States Supreme Court. Which means — I just discovered — that my over-fifty cis-male privileged white thoroughly-calloused nerve endings are feeling just a tiny bit raw about rape culture. In fact those nerve endings are feeling too raw, it turns out, to post Victorian-era rape porn (reimagined as 1968 soft-core sexploitation) in order to mine it for fetish fuel.
And that is not a limit I ever expected to set for myself.
I don’t even think I’m setting it now. Not once and for all, not for all time. I have more than once characterized my editorial goals here at ErosBlog as unabashed and unapologetic male-gaze writing about porn, while striving not to be a complete dickhead to and about women. Rape fantasies, and rape porn that embodies and depicts those fantasies, are enjoyed by men and women both (I do not say “alike”) and their role within rape culture is complex and controversial. I’ve cheerfully and noisily waded into those controversies in the past, with my trusty shield of “well, actually” in one hand and my slippery staff of mansplaining in the other. When it comes to porn that encompasses elements of rape culture, usually my reflex is to publish and be damned. For reasons. Damned good ones, I think.
But not today, dickhead. Not today. Not in early October 2018. Because if my not-so-very-touchy nerves are currently so raw about rape culture that I flinched at a bit of light-hearted “have that one bathed and sent to my tent” harem tomfoolery — a meme that I’ve cheerfully deployed at least four times previously — then I don’t need to ask a rhetorical question about how it’s going to feel to the women in my audience today, the day that women are lining up to be arrested at the United States Senate as Susan Collins blathers at length about what a fine and innocent man Barty McBoof is.
I don’t need to ask, because I already know. Today is just not the day for it. I’ll put this post in my queue with a hold note. I’ll post it on a happier day for women, or for the United States, or for the world. An election day, perhaps, or an impeachment day, or an indictment day, or an embolism day, or an infarction day, or a “resigns to spend more time with his family” day.
So, if you’re seeing this — nice day, isn’t it?
I woke up this morning in a sunny bedroom with the notion that having yesterday watched a powerful woman teach the president of the United States a badly-needed lesson in manners and Constitutional governance did indeed qualify today as a nice day. Cheers!
Similar Sex Blogging:
April 8th, 2018 -- by Bacchus
Here’s a bit of 1950s art photography that’s chock full of fetish fuel, completely harmless, and utterly banned from Twitter. I could lose my Twitter account for posting it there, just as if it were revenge porn or concealed locker room video:
This upskirt photo dates from 1954 and is by photographer Vivian Maier. It appears to show a fancy display of clothing for women, with skirt and petticoat and hosiery and shoes on a display mannequin set on a glass base over a mirrored floor for the express purpose of showing off the hose and petticoats to better effect.
Twitter’s policy on “upskirts” photos, to be strictly fair, is that they ban them — and accounts posting them — because they might be examples of non-consensual nudity, with a human victim. In this “life-in-plastic, it’s fantastic” no-humans-involved scenario, Twitter’s policy against upskirt photography shouldn’t come into play. It ought to be fine, posting this photo to Twitter.
{hollow laughter}
How much do you want to bet that actual upskirt bans happen because of a cheap filter that detects the word “upskirt” (and variants) and (I’m less than certain about this part) feeds it to a hasty human review layer by somebody who might or might not look with an eye discerning enough to tell that the legs in question are plastic?
I don’t propose to try the experiment. Chilling effect, thy name is Twitter. The problem isn’t the perfectly-reasonable policy; it’s Twitter’s demonstrated failure to implement its policies in any sort of fair or reasonable way.
Similar Sex Blogging:
December 28th, 2017 -- by Bacchus
OK, here’s some fetish fuel for you rubber/neoprene people! How about Natalie Wood, preening outside her dressing room on the set of The Great Race in 1965 in a zippered wetsuit?
I was able to find this one in a ridiculous 2560-pixel-wide format on a Russian ma1warez-installing site (from whence I ganked it, no worries, I wouldn’t link you there) if you want to zoom right in and — ahem — admire the form-fitting textiles and textures at your leisure.
Similar Sex Blogging:
December 22nd, 2017 -- by Bacchus
Somebody once said that every fetish you could possibly have, you might have seen first in an Archie comic. I don’t know if that’s true, but they were always rich with what my good friend Dr. Faustus calls “fetish fuel.” This stocking-fetish panel from Betty and Veronica #312 (December 1981) is just another fine example:
Veronica: “I always preferred stockings to panty hose– and they’re quite acceptable!”
Betty: “And very flattering!”
Similar Sex Blogging:
June 3rd, 2012 -- by Bacchus
Fetish fuel for somebody I’m thinking:
From The Nun’s Story (1959).
Similar Sex Blogging:
|
|
