On Coxi and pretention.

Coxi was a photographer on deviantART who thought he was heaven's gift to deviantART. He repeatedly posted inflamatory comments and tried to get people to hound certain artists off of dA. Ironically, he was recently banned.

Using Google, I found a cache of some of his journal entries. The illogic in them is rather astounding.


misogyny rocks !!

Journal Entry: Tue May 9, 2006, 4:43 PM
I see where this is going.

so i've been introduced to art and a new photographer on DA lately and everyone seems to find it cool, amazing, funny, well in newskool terms people would say: "it rocks"

it's actually a shame that people aren't able to see misogyny and sexism in so many works that are praised as masterpieces, artworks and art photographs.
If most people don't see something that's obvious to you, clearly the flaw is in their perception.

no matter how well it was taken, how complicated and creative the setup was, no matter how good it looks and how intresting the thought behind it is, if the the whole work is built up on misogynic ideas, there is no way to find appreciation from me.
Note: Where he says "misogyny", read "OMG NAKED LADIES".

there are always artists that work with these ideas to provoke and to send the opposite message but that's a very risky strategy and needs to be clarified but these are rare and often just cover their real motivation which is misogynic with a protest against it as a sort of excuse.
I know English isn't his first language, but that sentence still made no sense whatsoever.

i can't understand how blind people can be not to see how models are used to get degraded all the time. it's even more shocking how models agree to that and how they support these ideals and concepts. it's a shame how few people care about women as human beeings and not sexual objects, dolls and lolitas.
Because taking a picture of a fully-grown, consenting woman in a sexual manner=degredation.

men are afraid of strong women, men are afraid of gay men. these men are weak and they search for weak women to feel strong and powerful and some of them are photographers.
Read that again; I'll wait.

So he's claiming both that the photographers taking these pictures are insecure, that said photographers are all male, and that the women appearing in these photographs are weak. Wasn't feminism about ending the forced sexualization of women? And why would a straight photographer want to take pictures of gay men? Why should anyone take pictures of anyone if they don't want to?

Coxi first came to my attention when an artist ranted about a since-deleted post in his journal. It had a thumbnail of a picture, and an extensive analysis. The picture itself was of a girl in pink, apparently recently fallen on her back, giving the viewer a view of her panties. Two perky breasts protruded from her chest, and the dress was frilly.

According to Coxi, the work perpetuated beauty ideals, was sexist, and pedophiliac. Apparently he missed the part where most anime art on dA was drawn by females, and the character displayed had boobs. And we shouldn't draw people confirming to the current standard of beauty, ever.

another ban / criticism & DA's double standard

Journal Entry: Sat Jul 8, 2006, 2:16 PM
!natashalyonne got banned for: [link]

she was not even mentioning names and did not outline a single person and the discussions were constructive.

deviantart allows any kind of feature in jounrals, with thumbnails and mentioning other deviants, but criticism is an immediate ban, just like it was in my case but this time nobody was mentioned personally.
Note; the entry, dumped from the Google cache, was two dozen fetish photography pics of largely bondage'd women and women acting like lesbians. Underneath it were illogical rantings abou the "subjugation of women on dA". (Completely missing the point that these women chose to be submissive, not subjugated.) Coxi's original entry was deleted because, under dA's terms, it was essentially harassment. Several times more pics and an near-identical rant? Banninated.

intresting that many people say that that is why they are here. some people note me and ask for it. other's don't ask for it but receive critisism from me. why ? because they post work.

when you post work, you make it public. you know people will see it and think about it. you have to face reactions of all kinds and as an artist and the creator of it you should be capable of giving arguments for defending your position or agreeing to criticism.

so when i criticise from my point of view, i want an answer, be it agreement or disagreement. i also give answers when i see there is sense behind criticism.

it is definately a big shame that public criticism gets cencored, because a person was mentioned.
That wasn't crit. That was basically telling people to go over and flame.

this person makes their work public so is responsible for it. only allowing agreement is dictatorship.
It wasn't that you disagreed with it, it's that yo-gah, nevermind.

deviantart has their rules. people say to me i should accept them to stay a member here, but i prefer to be kicked out insted of agreeing to some points that are against my view and i also can't agree to double standards.
See, um, you already agreed to abide by their rules or GTFO when you joined. Sorry.

DA wants to have an image that accepts everyone and their art as long as it is not against people's rights.

so they accept national sozialism, something you get in jail in europe. the usage of the swastika is highly forbidden in middle european countrys and needs an official permission if used in art, films, theatre...

what's my point ? my point is that there is no problem to draw underaged girls in sexual poses almost naked
Well, it's not like some underage girls can be sexually mature, or you didn't explain how the original work was pedo other than the fact that she was wearing pink.
but cencores photojournalism that shows half naked children. DA cencores photos of dead animals, which are also element of photojournalism, but allows artworks that convey necrophilia.
Hey, look, a false analogy! Let's look at the reasons dA gives for allowing some works but not others.


Nothing? Okay, then you're taking out of your-
so. i aks you now, what is the point to cencore such things on one side and allow well packaged sexism, misogyny, pedophilia and also necrophilia on a daily basis ?

i wonder if these people even know what they feature on their frontpage with DTFs and DDs, which are the much bigger evil than photojournalims that documents reality.

in my honest opinion, this journal was definately "free speech" as was the one i got banned for.
I love how "free speech" applies to him, but not the people doing the work he objects to. What were you saying about a double standard?
ps: a ban does not change a thing at all. i have my opinion and i have the will to state it. deleting a journal that criticises something doesn't make things disappear. the ban shows more how helpless this system seems to be, to just vanish things but not argue them.

so much for now.
If they wanted you off so much, they would've just banned you outright, instead of waiting over a month.

So, in conclusion; coxi is a dick, a pretentious wad who thinks that "analysis" can replace little things like asking the artist what their piece meant. His logic? Not earth logic.


i always thought he was trying to push the boundaries of what fame allowed him to do... i don't think he really meant for his entries to be decomposed in such a way...
Coxi was truly full of himself -- I argued with him once before and boy did he have a hard time keeping to his arguement.

I'm glad he's gone from dA, he was a douche who wasn't making any difference, just a big racket of ignorance. :/

Glad to see someone broke it down, a fine read. -thumbsup.-
haha. someone linked me there..

great entertainment. good job :)

Post a Comment