BTC: Saucy ’80s “Female Gaze” Yoga Workout Video

Last week’s BTC starred a gorgeous, mega-talented yogini in an elegant-yet-questionable ad that blurred the lines between art, athleticism, sexuality and voyeurism. This week’s BTC features, uh… these guys:

Thanks for the tip, Mythical Man.

Nope, nothin’ blurry about this one! *chortle*

As of yet, no confirmation –though certainly a lot of speculation– as to whether this was a Playgirl or Chippendales production. Either way, what bliss!

8 Responses to “BTC: Saucy ’80s “Female Gaze” Yoga Workout Video”

  1. joasakura Says:

    ..flexible. =d

  2. Анна Says:

    It’s just strange that their brother in 80s stripping, Brian The Tennis Player, hasn’t yet graced the pages of this fine-art purveying magazine of yours.

    I’m doing it for the music.

  3. david Says:

    ok wait- and i’m not trolling, i honestly don’t understand- how is the video of the girl ominously pandering to voyeuristic sexuality, reducing the person of the yogini to a commodified consumable quantity and debasing the sacred, totally-not-intrinsically-sexual practice of yoga, but this video here playful, healthy and completely ok?

    i mean, as far as submissive positions go, you can’t get more extreme than the ironically named “plow posture” this video opens with. now, as far as i’m concerned, both videos are totally acceptable, and also sexy and also examples of impressive yoga. but, to everyone who was made so uncomfortable by the equinox ad: how is this different in its essentials other than by the gender of the yogis?

  4. Meredith Yayanos Says:

    Okay. First of all, my chortling is coming from a very sarcastic, eye-rolling, greasy hipster kinda place, here. :)

    Secondly, context and presentation are key, and while there’s no denying the athleticism of these guys, I don’t think the clip’s essentials are so similar at all. One deftly and quietly blurs the lines, the other is just blatantly over-the-top ridiculous. One is high camp, the other is far more subtle. One has an absurdly overwrought and suggestive Horny Lady voiceover and orgasmic grunting noises in its soundtrack… the other, well, doesn’t! Bottom line: one is manipulative and elegant enough to truly captivate, and the other is just crass and, frankly, very silly.

    No? :)

  5. david Says:

    thank you for responding. :) i wasn’t criticizing the posting of either video, for sure, nor was i addressing you specifically, meridith, for posting them- nor am i trying to offend or argue with anyone by commenting here. my own opinion by the way is that objectification isn’t intrinsically wrong in the first place, but a natural and unavoidable aspect of interaction with people that you aren’t engaged with intellectually but still find pretty or physically impressive in some way.

    and yes, i agree with everything that you say about both clips, but still, there was a current of thought not just here, but also on other sites discussing equinox, that it was bad. nor complicated, subtle, or challenging, but actually sinister and degrading, unpleasantly injecting sex into the subject of yoga- perhaps even against the performer’s will. that’s the impression i got from reading a variety of comments from various offended women and men.

    so, certainly, this one isn’t subtle or challenging and yes, humour makes it seem non-threatening- and keep in mind, that i personally think both videos are great- but i definitely think the men in this video are being objectified and in a much more extreme fashion and i’d be very surprised, if this video had been of ladies doing the same moves, and narrated by a sleazy male voice, like ron jeremy, if it didn’t provoke the same offended response as the equinox ad.

    meredith, you never actually said the first video was threatening or offensive, so my comments here might not be properly addressed to you specifically, but a lot of other people seemed to feel that way, and to them i submit: either objectification is equally wrong for both genders, regardless of the humour, camp, subtlety or elegance with which it is presented (in which case, i think your point of view is cheerless but at least consistent) or, and this is my opinion, if you found yourself unoffended by viewing men as sexy, somewhat ridiculous objects here, perhaps you should not be offended by other people seeing a woman as a sexy, powerful object of grace and poise there. then, as long as everything is consensual and non-cooercive, we can all just enjoy the fact that bodies are nice.

  6. M.S. Patterson Says:

    Oh wow. That is hilarious.

    I appreciate the chest fur, though. Were this to be produced these days, I doubt it’d be there.

  7. Анна Says:

    I like you, david.

  8. Bat Says:

    Looks like the brother component to this: