I have to admit that I am absolutely frothing on this photographer at the moment
Just like I was Joseph Szabo around 4 years ago,
This photographer has sparked such an interest and wonderment at his work that I have found myself spending hours searching for more candid, lucid and outrageous images (which I am happy to say I have found; see above).
There are dicks tits ass legs lips eyes nose face fingers thumbs shoulders knees located in nearly all of his photographs, and even something such as a thumb can be turned into the most provocative gesture you have ever seen.
I admire people like this who push the boundaries regardless of the consequences, or the "reputation" that they might tear down with leaping outside of the 'norm'.
Richardson has come under allegations that he is forceful with his subjects, forcing them to participate in poses or acts of a sexual nature that they did not feel comfortable with.
However, these complaints have been denied by a network of people from the fashion and photographic industries such as Abbey Lee Kershaw and Kate Moss who have defended Richardson and his work,
The models on Terry's side explained that at any point a model has the option not to participate and say no, it is never a forceful gesture from the photographer.
Which brings me to my point.
When someone is noted for freely using and abusing the way we view basic human traits (in this case: sexuality, decadence, sensuality, violence, satire) to express irony, or whatever their aim may be...it will usually bring splashback with it.
For instance, the most famous and recent little trouble bubble that Richardson has gotten tangled up in is the photoshoot of the Glee cast for GQ magazine.
IT IS FOR GQ.
I dont know why the parental board of shit had a fucking say in what GQ had to print.
The freedom of expression will always have its oppressors, but come on... parental boards?
It is too much of a cliche to be believable.
The ironic thing out of all that kerfuffel is that even though their children would not get away with purchasing a copy of GQ in a newsagency, but they would be privy to a bit of pay TV AKA every single entertainment news show that broadcast the scandalous photographs in HD which im sure the kiddies were wide eyed to, while their stuffy high collared parents with their "christian values" were tele-conferencing the neighbours over their husband's GQ subscription.
All im saying is freedom of expression is vital and what makes the world colourful.
I understand the legalities of freedom of expression, as in sexual or lewd acts with minors, animals etc to be wrong and harmful.
And by no means do I condone anything against the law to do with F.O.E.
(excluding drug use)
But anything above the line of the law that celebrates the inner atoms of a so called perverts brain, I am all for.
Besides, Ive seen bigger perverts standing outside the gates of the beery checking your CHILDREN'S I.D's.
Someone call her parents!