the fair is coming. september 30th.
and now for an old essay you’ll feel smarter and for reading…
when i am small
before i let this thing run away with your imagination, let’s just suffice it to say that i’ve been a skeptic of all things that the british introduce as “old art”.
there are simply way too many scams and manufacturings of FAKE artifacts to believe much of what they purport.
king tut is an example of this.
it’s mostly a bunch of fake crap with some genuine relics.
there’s nothing of much ACTUAL value.
kind of like a van gogh painting.
but what king tut and its mythos belies is the process by which FAKE ART is revealed to the world.
pick a “real” character from history, but not a REALLY IMPORTANT character. that way there is no refutable history already in place.
next, you have to find a location to bury your FAKE ARTIFACTS. but you can just make it up.
who cares if the artifacts are “borrowed” composites of real and fake origins?
so finding the location took several years and so did the “manufacturing of artifacts”. the guy responsible for claiming he’d found stuff refused to participate until his very livelihood was threatened. then he IMMEDIATELY found a site, lol.
anyway, you don’t need me to tell you that FOSSIL STUDIES and ART FORGERY are the same business. you can look up the history of each and see how FOSSIL STUDIES was born of ART FORGERY, not vice versa.
but now, the “essay”.
i put quotes on that because it’s mostly just other people’s assertions about the past but in a GRAMMAR that makes you see it differently.
mostly because you can’t look at the FAKE PICTURES of dinosaurs you’ve learned about since you were a child and SEE WITH YOUR OWN EYES that the architecture of many of these FAKE CREATURES would not even be able to feed or water themselves… some wouldn’t even be able to get off the ground if they fell over.
the caves of altamira
“discovered” in 1880s
A TIMELINE OF FOSSIL DISCOVERIES
:A key part of writing a coherent story about our origins is finding and identifying the remains of our ancestors and understanding their significance. Scientist will not always agree on identifications and opinions will change as new find are made and new ways of studying them are developed.
Gibraltar Skull Homo neanderthalensis side view
Photographer: Carl Bento © Australian Museum
A timeline of significant discoveries
1840s to 1850s
The first discoveries of ancient human fossils. Neanderthals were the first ancient humans to gain scientific and popular recognition. Their fossils began to be found in Europe in the 1800s but scientists had no perspective or evolutionary framework by which to explain them. Decades passed before they were recognised as being a different and extinct form of ancient human.
Opinions about the relationship between our own species and Neanderthals have continually changed. The early 1900s saw them as sub-humans, a stereotype that didn’t change until the 1950s when it was widely considered that they may be the ancestors of modern Europeans. New research in the 1980s led many to move them to a side branch of our family tree, a decision supported by the comparisons of the mitochondrial DNA of modern humans and Neanderthals in the 1990s and 2000s.
Gibraltar skull – Homo neanderthalensis. Discovered in 1848 in Forbe’s Quarry, Rock of Gibraltar
Neanderthal 1 skullcap – type specimen for Homo neanderthalensis. Discovered in1856 in the Neander Valley, Germany. Although originally presented as an inferior human that inhabited Europe before modern people, some felt that the differences between Neanderthals and modern humans were due to pathology and disease. This marked the effective beginning of Palaeoanthropology as a science.
1860s to 1890s
1868 – The remains of early modern humans found at Cro-Magnon in France.
These remains were the first firm evidence of the antiquity of our species, Homo sapiens.
1886 – Neanderthal skulls found in Spy, Belgium.
These finds supported the idea that Neanderthals were an ancient and distinct type of human, but exactly how they fit into our family tree was still debated.
1891 – Homo erectus skullcap found in Trinil, Java by Eugene Dubois, and described as a new species in 1894.
This specimen was originally named Pithecanthropus erectus as it was considered different enough from humans to be placed into a new genus. It was renamed Homo erectus in the 1940s, a species name that, in the opinion of most researchers, includes specimens from Java and China.
1900s to 1920s
1908 – Homo heidelbergensis named as a new species after the discovery of a jaw in Mauer, Germany in 1907.
This species was originally dismissed as being too apelike for human ancestry, particularly after the Piltdown Man find. In the 1960s it was grouped with other similar skulls and called archaic Homo sapiens, but today the preference is to use the original scientific name and to give this species an ancestral position on the human family tree.
1912 – Piltdown Man ‘discovered’ in England.
In a gravel-pit at Piltdown Common, Southern England, in 1912, amateur collector Charles Dawson ‘discovered’ what appeared to be the long-sought ‘missing link’ between apes and humans. This fortuitous find – nine pieces of a large-brained human skull and an ape-like lower jaw with two teeth – was readily accepted by the British establishment due to their belief that a large brain was one of the first human features to evolve. Although inconsistent with later discoveries, ‘Piltdown Man’s’ authenticity remained virtually unchallenged for 41 years. In 1953, advanced analytical and dating techniques proved Piltdown Man to be a fake. The mandible was stained with potassium bichromate and the teeth had been filed down. Fluorine testing proved that the pieces of the skull were of different ages. This was confirmed in 1959 by carbon dating, which provided a date of about 600 years for the skull!
1924 – Discovery of the ‘Taung skull’ in South Africa, classified as Australopithecus africanus in 1925.
This fossil was clearly more ancient than earlier finds and anatomist Raymond Dart, who first analysed it, claimed it was a human ancestor. He was criticised very strongly by English scientists who believed in ‘Piltdown Man’. It was not until the 1950s that this species was fully acknowledged as belonging on the human family tree.
1929 – The first remains of Homo erectus found in China.
Chinese specimens were discovered in a cave at Zhoukoudian near Peking and named Sinanthropus pekinensis (‘Chinese man of Peking’). In the 1950s these specimens, and the ones from Java, were placed in the one species, Homo erectus.
1938 –Paranthropus robustus remains first discovered in South Africa.
Many of these fossils were originally given different names, which led to a confusing family tree. In the 1950s they were reclassified into the one species, Paranthropus robustus.
1959 – Remains of Paranthropus boisei found by the Leakeys in Olduvai Gorge.
This specimen OH5 (originally called Zinjanthropus boisei) was the first of our fossil ancestors to be given an accurate date with the new technique of radiometric dating. The date of 1.8 million years, obtained by potassium-argon dating, was announced in 1961.
1964 – Homo habilis announced as a new species after remains were discovered in Olduvai Gorge in 1960.
Although controversial, this fossil was the most primitive human to be classified into our genus. The family tree was still in a linear shape, with this species at the base.
1972 – Specimen KNM-ER 1470 found in East Turkana.
Originally thought to be Homo habilis, this specimen was reclassified as Homo rudolfensis in 1986 and made the type specimen of that species.
This specimen and another attributed to Homo habilis, KNM-ER 1813, are at the centre of the debate regarding which remains are attributed to that species. Homo habilis is a well-known but poorly defined species and scientific opinions about the attributed specimens vary widely. Scientists often disagree about naming fossil specimens as scientific names may be changed following new discoveries or there are different interpretations or new lines of investigation.
1974 – Discovery of ‘Lucy’ in Hadar, Ethiopia.
In 1978 this specimen, and a number of other remains from Laetoli, Tanzania, and Hadar, Ethiopia, was classified as a new species, Australopithecus afarensis.
1975 – Specimen KNM-ER 3733 found in East Africa.
This specimen was initially considered to be an African Homo erectus, but many now classify it as Homo ergaster.
This fossil was found in the same layer as a specimen of Paranthropus boisei, finally disproving the ‘single species’ theory that was popular at this time. Followers of this theory believed that only one hominin species could occupy an area at the one time and that the family tree was a single, evolving line moving through phases to modern humans. This find proved that the human family tree was more like a branching bush and that evolution was not linear.
1984 – Discovery in Kenya of an almost complete Homo ergasterskeleton, nicknamed the ‘Turkana Boy’.
1991 – discovery of fossils at Dmanisi in Georgia, dated to 1.8 million years old and tentatively assigned to the species Homo ergaster. More remains found in 1999-2001 led the discoverers to propose that the Dmanisi population were different enough from H. ergaster to be a new species, Homo georgicus (announced in 2002). Many other scientists believe that the Dmanisi and early H. ergaster fossils represent different populations of a single, highly variable species.
1995 – Ardipithecus ramidus announced as a new species after fossil remains were found in Ethiopia.
At 4.4 million years old this species was the oldest of our ancestors found to date. A more detailed analysis of the species was published in 2009.
1996 – Australopithecus bahreghazali described as a new species after remains were discovered at Bahr el Ghazalin Chad.
1995 – Announcement of a new species, Australopithecus anamensisafter remains were discovered in Kenya.
1997 – Homo antecessor announced as a new species after remains were found in Gran Dolina, Spain.
These are the oldest humans (genus Homo) found in Western Europe (dated to 800,000 years old) and may be the ancestors of modern humans and the Neanderthals. Their species designation is debated.
1999 – Australopithecus garhi announced as a new species after parts of a skull were discovered in Bouri, Ethiopia in 1997.
2000 – Discovery of a well-preserved skeleton of a young Australopithecus afarensis, nicknamed ‘Lucy’s baby’, in Ethiopia. It is the earliest juvenile hominin ever found and dates to about 3.3 million years old. Published in 2006.
2001 – Kenyanthropus platyops announced as a new species after the discovery of a skull in Kenya in 1999.
There is some debate about the validity of this species. In 2003, scientist Tim White argued that the reconstructed skull of Kenyanthropus platyops may be a misreconstructed skull of Australopithecus afarensis.
2001 – Announcement of a new species, Orrorin tugenensis, after fossils were discovered in Kenya in 2000.
This is the earliest dated fossil (6 million years old) that may be an ancestor of humans. Its position on our family tree is still hotly debated.
2001 – Ardipithecus kadabba announced as a new species. Remains of this species were found in Ethiopia over a number of seasons from 1997-2000.
2002 – Sahelanthropus tchadensis announced as a new species. It was discovered in Chad in 2001 and dates to about 6-7 million years old. Scientists consider the find to be of major significance but debate its relationship to humans. It is very possible that it comes before the split between the human and chimp line, making it an ancestor of both branches.
2004 – Homo floresiensis, a type of dwarf human discovered on the Indonesian island of Flores, is announced as a new species. Fossils date from about 12,000 to 100,000 years old, making this a contemporary of modern humans. This species was not ancestral to modern humans and may be a descendant of Asian Homo erectus or a yet to be discovered Homo species.
2009 – Publication of study of Ardipithicus ramidus skeleton, first found in 1994. The skeleton provides the first substantial fossil evidence about the appearance of the last human-chimp common ancestor and confirms that living African apes do not much resemble this ancestor, as was commonly thought.
2010 – Publication of a new species Australopithecus sediba. The first specimen was discovered in 2008 at Malapa in South Africa. Remains date to about 1.8 million years old. There is much debate about these remains and the species designation, with many considering them to be late A. africanus rather than a new species.
2010 – release of nuclear DNA analysis carried out on a finger bone and tooth from Denisova cave, Russia (found in 2008) reveals the remains come from a species that is neither Homo sapiens or Homo neanderthalensis. This suggests a fourth human species (as Homo floresiensis was extant in Flores) was still in existence between 48,000 and 30,000 years ago.
“The 1922 discovery by Howard Carter of Tutankhamun’s nearly intact tomb, funded by Lord Carnarvon, received worldwide press coverage. It sparked a renewed public interest in ancient Egypt, for which Tutankhamun’s mask, now in the Egyptian Museum, remains the popular symbol. Exhibits of artifacts from his tomb have toured the world. In February 2010, the results of DNA tests confirmed that he was the son of the mummy found in the tomb KV55, believed by some to be Akhenaten. His mother was his father’s sister and wife, whose name is unknown but whose remains are positively identified as “The Younger Lady” mummy found in KV35. The “mysterious” deaths of a few of those who excavated Tutankhamun’s tomb has been popularly attributed to the curse of the pharaohs.
In 1915, George Herbert, 5th Earl of Carnarvon, the financial backer of the search for and the excavation of Tutankhamun’s tomb in the Valley of the Kings, employed English archaeologist Howard Carter to explore it. After a systematic search, Carter discovered the actual tomb of Tutankhamun (KV62) in November 1922.
King Tutankhamun’s mummy still rests in his tomb in the Valley of the Kings. On 4 November 2007, 85 years to the day after Carter’s discovery, the 19-year-old pharaoh went on display in his underground tomb at Luxor, when the linen-wrapped mummy was removed from its golden sarcophagus to a climate-controlled glass box. The case was designed to prevent the heightened rate of decomposition caused by the humidity and warmth from tourists visiting the tomb.
His tomb was robbed at least twice in antiquity, but based on the items taken (including perishable oils and perfumes) and the evidence of restoration of the tomb after the intrusions, it seems clear that these robberies took place within several months at most of the initial burial.
Eventually, the location of the tomb was lost because it had come to be buried by stone chips from subsequent tombs, either dumped there or washed there by floods. LOL!!!!!
In the years that followed, some huts for workers were built over the tomb entrance, clearly without anyone’s knowing what lay beneath. When at the end of the 20th Dynasty the Valley of the Kings burial sites were systematically dismantled, Tutankhamun’s tomb was overlooked, presumably because knowledge of it had been lost, and his name may have been forgotten.
5,398 items were found in the tomb, including a solid gold coffin, face mask, thrones, archery bows, trumpets, a lotus chalice, food, wine, sandals, and fresh linen underwear. Howard Carter took 10 years to catalog the items. Recent analysis suggests a dagger recovered from the tomb had an iron blade made from a meteorite; study of artifacts of the time including other artifacts from Tutankhamun’s tomb could provide valuable insights into metalworking technologies around the Mediterranean at the time.
Reuse of Neferneferuaten’s funerary objects for Tutankhamun’s burial!!!
According to Nicholas Reeves, almost 80% of Tutankhamun’s burial equipment originated from the female pharaoh Neferneferuaten’s funerary goods including his famous gold mask, middle coffin, canopic coffinettes, several of the gilded shrine panels, the shabti-figures, the boxes and chests, the royal jewelry, etc. In 2015, Reeves published evidence showing that an earlier cartouche on Tutankhamun’s famous gold mask read “Ankheperure mery-Neferkheperure” or (Ankheperure beloved of Akhenaten); therefore, the mask was originally made for Nefertiti, Akhenaten’s chief queen, who used the royal name Ankheperure when she most likely assumed the throne after her husband’s death.”
my interjection here: this means that the researchers KNOW that historically this whole thing smacks of SHAMMERY. there was no REUSING anywhere else. this is merely the brits faking a burial site and REUSING stuff collected from elsewhere and adding 1000s of their own FAKE RELICS to the mix.
back to the quotes:
“This development implies that either Neferneferuaten (likely Nefertiti if she assumed the throne after Akhenaten’s death) was deposed in a struggle for power, possibly deprived of a royal burial—and buried as a Queen—or that she was buried with a different set of king’s funerary equipment—possibly Akhenaten’s own funerary equipment by Tutankhamun’s officials since Tutankhamun succeeded her as king. Neferneferuaten was likely succeeded by Tutankhamun based on the presence of her funerary goods in his tomb.
HERE’S HOW YOU KNOW IT’S FAKE:
As Jon Manchip White writes, in his foreword to the 1977 edition of Carter’s The Discovery of the Tomb of Tutankhamun, “The pharaoh who in life was one of the least esteemed of Egypt’s Pharoahs has become in death the most renowned.”
and from the LA TIMES,
This main portion of the show is on the Science Center’s third floor. Down on the first floor is the concluding section, where the heavy hand of the commercial packager is felt in full, tacky force. It tells the story of the tomb’s discovery by British archaeologist Howard Carter.
more from the LA TIMES
In 1907, Egyptologist and archaeologist Howard Carter was hired by George Herbert, the 5th Earl of Carnarvon to oversee excavations in Egypt’s Valley of the Kings. Carter had built a reputation for scrupulously recording and preserving discoveries. (here again, we have a grammatical indicator about the FAKE MARKET. carter “had to build” a reputation as being GENUINE since so many UNSCRUPULOUS ART FORGERS were passing fake stuff off at the same time.
BUT WAS CARTER SCRUPULOUS?!?!?)
Carter searched the valley for years with little to show for it, which drew the ire of his employer. In 1922, Lord Carnarvon told Carter that he had only one more season of digging before his funding would be ended.
Revisiting a previously abandoned dig site at a group of huts, Carter started digging again, desperate for a breakthrough.
On Nov. 4, 1922, his crew discovered a step carved into the rock. By the end of the next day, a whole staircase had been uncovered. Carter wired Carnarvon, imploring him to come at once.
On Nov. 26, with Carnarvon at his side, Carter chipped open a small breach in the corner of the doorway at the end of the stairs. Holding a candle, he peered inside.
There isn’t much to see — a small gilded shrine and four pieces of jewelry, one of them the hefty pectoral with five lapis lazuli scarabs famously photographed around the neck of the water boy who alerted Carter to the steps in the sand that led to the ancient burial site. The items are nearly lost amid long walls of timelines about the discovery and Tut’s celebrity aftermath, along with photographic blow-ups and video talking heads.
The exit gallery offers up a kitsch crescendo. A fragment of a colossal but mediocre quartzite Tut statue that once stood outside the mortuary chamber is bathed in a pulsing sound-and-light show. A minor work of art, notable mostly for blocky bulk, has been tarted up with flanking digital videos where ghostly specters of the saga’s main players fade in and out over scenes of the vast Egyptian desert.
A drumroll arises, as dappled theatrical lighting brightens into full blaze on the boy king’s face. The digital screens intone that simply speaking Tut’s name will ensure his immortality — a marketing truism faking ancient profundity in an automated performance heavy on the ham and cheese. Time is better spent in the upstairs galleries, where a visitor is not made to feel like a pigeon.
It must be the most celebrated exchange in the history of archaeology. “Can you see anything?” asked George Herbert, the fifth Earl of Carnarvon, standing in a gloomy passageway cut into the bedrock of the Valley of the Kings, on the west bank of the Nile.
“Yes,” replied Howard Carter, the British Egyptologist whose excavations Carnarvon had been bankrolling for the preceding six seasons. “Wonderful things.”
Moments before, with trembling hands, Carter had dug a small hole through a sealed doorway blocking their path. After lighting a candle to test for noxious gases, Carter lifted the flame to the hole and peered through. There followed a suspenseful silence, as the archaeologist was struck dumb by the astounding sight. Finally, in answer to Lord Carnarvon’s terse question, he stammered his simple, awestruck words.
Wonderful things? Not half. Carter was looking at the antechamber to the royal tomb of the 18th-dynasty pharaoh Tutankhamun, who had died in 1322BC. The room was crammed with splendid, shiny objects – “strange animals, statues and gold; everywhere the glint of gold,” as Carter put it later.
Among the artefacts were shrines and caskets, alabaster vases and gilded chariots, three ceremonial beds and a gold throne. Confronted with this jumble of magnificence, Carter was astonished. “The first impressions suggested the property-room of an opera of a vanished civilisation,” he wrote in his notebook a few hours after the discovery on November 26 1922.
That Carter’s discovery altered life in the Twenties and Thirties is not in question. A craze for Egyptian exoticism convulsed the West, infiltrating both high and low culture across the fields of music, fine art, fashion, film and furniture design. The popular entertainers Billy Jones and Ernie Hare recorded the hit novelty song Old King Tut (“On the desert sand, old King Tutty’s band/ Played while maidens swayed”), spawning countless copycat records.
Jewellery designers, including the French firm Van Cleef and Arpels, began churning out brooches, bracelets, earrings, pendants, hatpins and other trinkets decorated with ancient Egyptian motifs, such as animal-headed gods, vultures and winged scarab beetles.
Cinema facades inspired by Egyptian architecture started appearing across London, including the Carlton in Essex Road in Islington, with its prominent lotus-topped columns (now a Grade II listed building). The impact of “Egyptomania” on the capital didn’t stop there: according to Robert Graves and Alan Hodge, writing in their social history of interwar Britain, The Long Week-End, “it was seriously proposed that the Underground extension from Morden to Edgware, then under construction, should be called Tutancamden, because it passed through Tooting and Camden Town”.
Dresses, coats, jackets and other items of clothing were embellished with Egyptian patterns, prompting one newspaper excitedly to report on a “Mummy wrap” evening gown. The vogue for women’s modern hairstyles was given an Egyptian twist: “Ancient Egypt Lives Again in Hollywood: Even the Bobbed Hair Reincarnated From the Flappers Who Lived When Tombs Were Built”, ran one headline, in the Los Angeles Times. The Irish designer and architect Eileen Gray created a wonderful lacquer “lotus console” for the French couturier and collector Jacques Doucet in 1924.
There were Egyptian chairs, Egyptian bookbindings, Egyptian-themed transatlantic ocean liners, and, of course, Egyptian films: from the erotic “Egyptian” dance in Fritz Lang’s Metropolis (1927) to The Mummy (1932), with Boris Karloff, and Cecil B DeMille’s Cleopatra (1934), starring Claudette Colbert.
The so-called “Nile style” became a sort of brand that could be used to flog everything from luxury goods to mass-produced biscuit tins and ashtrays. In 1923, the Daily Express gave this brand a name: “Tutankhamun Ltd”. Even avant-garde contemporary artists were not immune: the sculptor Alberto Giacometti, with his brother Diego, created a plaster table lamp inspired by a calcite lamp from Tutankhamun’s tomb, while the painter and author Wyndham Lewis christened his pet dog “Tut”.
Moreover, as Graves and Hodge pointed out, the public was not excited by the spectacular finds of Leonard Woolley, who, earlier in 1922, had begun excavating the ancient Mesopotamian city-state of Ur in modern-day Iraq. Unlike Woolley, Carter “received sacks of fan mail, just like a movie star”, according to Paul Collins, one of the Ashmolean curators. “The excavation was viewed by the public like a branch of the entertainment industry.” So what was going on?
For one thing, Carter’s discovery coincided with the dawn of the mass-media age. In the first deal of its kind, The Times paid £5,000 to Lord Carnarvon for exclusive access to the tomb and the rights to supply the world’s press with news and photographs. Taking advantage of innovative technology such as the telegraph and moving film, reporters vied to scoop one another as Carter began the painstaking process of cataloguing Tutankhamun’s possessions.
But there is another, more poignant reason for Tutankhamun’s popularity: the impact of the First World War. The vulnerability of this pharaoh who had died while still an adolescent moved a public coming to terms with the loss of so many young men on the Western Front.
An article published in The New York Times in 1923 confirms that people at the time viewed the story of Tutankhamun through the prism of the Great War: “As the objects have been brought out, spectators have remarked that, from the manner in which they were bandaged and transported with almost tender care on the stretcher-like trays, they reminded one of casualties being brought out of the trenches or casualty clearing stations.”
Carter, himself, also believed that the war was an important factor: “One must suppose,” he later wrote, “that at the time the discovery was made, the general public was in a state of profound boredom with news of reparations, conferences and mandates, and craved for some new topic… The idea of buried treasure is one that appeals to most of us.”
The Tutankhamun excavation team, including Howard Carter, third from right
At the same time, Tutankhamun also came to be associated with something else entirely: the glamour and excitement of a raucous world letting its hair down and trying to forget the war. The opulence of the objects in his tomb resonated in an age of greed and excess – and, before long, widely circulated photographs of the pharaoh’s gilded funerary mask had turned him into a pin-up boy for the Roaring Twenties.
As famous as sporting heroes and movie stars, Tutankhamun was one of the first examples of that peculiarly modern phenomenon: the global celebrity. As Christopher Frayling put it in his 1992 book The Face of Tutankhamun: “Tut was young, he was hip, and he evidently liked to surround himself with the latest luxury items: his funerary arrangements were like being buried with a favourite Type 35 2-litre Bugatti racer.”
As a result, elements of ancient Egyptian art and design quickly became essential components in the new Art Deco mode. “The pylon, the winged scarab, the cavetto cornice: all of these appear in Art Deco architecture,” explains Ghislaine Wood, a curator at the V&A who specialises in 20th-century art and design.
“Think of great high points like the Chrysler Building in New York, which has a lot of Egyptian iconography on it. Thanks to their pure geometric forms, Egyptian buildings were a big influence on modernist architects.” For Graves and Hodge, Tutankhamun “seemed somehow to embody the modernist spirit”.
According to Paul Collins, of the Ashmolean, the coming together of all these factors produced a perfect storm of publicity for Tutankhamun. “The extraordinary coincidence of the development of mass media and a flourishing economy, especially in the United States, combined with the moment of discovery, fuelled the rise of Tut,” he says. “Everybody wanted a piece of Tutankhamun – and mass production meant that they could have one, whatever their social standing.”
In other words, “Tut-mania” was a symptom of the times. “If the tomb had been discovered before the enormous cultural changes wrought by the First World War,” Collins says, “I don’t believe it would have had the same impact.”
Tagged: , event , gathering , SoMa , san , francisco , city , california , scott , richard , torbakhopper , kink , gear , fetish , festival , party , men , women , man , gay , lesbian , transgender , sunshine , summer , sun , muscles , muscular , sexual , liberation , exploration , freedom , bondage , black , leather , tattoo , harness , beard , bare , back