Powered by KikBooks Widget

By on October 30, 2007, with 80 Comments

I can not believe this old-school optical illusion managed to slip trough my hands, and avoided being posted until now. I just hope this won’t be offensive to you, rather interpreted as a joke. Moreover, it’s meaning is even more interesting, when you recognize the satire of Sigmund Freud’s teachings. Those of you who study Psychology, or have heard of Sigmund Freud (one of the fathers of psychology), will find this even more intriguing. In short, Freud propagated that the highest motivator in human beings – isn’t power, nor primary needs (food, sleep…). His beliefs were that sex is the main force that motivates men and women (meaning of life?). Here’s what Brazzles wrote in her submission (you should be aware she made a little mistake, and thought Freud was the author of this image ;)

“Hi I love your site and while I was on holiday, I saw this illusion on a t-shirt and found it quite funny, obviously the creators name is on the image (!?), and I’m pretty sure you don’t have it on your site, if you’d like to put it up, thank you”

What is on a Mans Mind?

Comments

80 Responses
  1. Anonymous says:

    woo first and yehh not a bad illusion :p

  2. Lily says:

    This is really good and only the eyebrow looks bad.

  3. Maximilian says:

    now thats a bald spot no man would complain about

  4. Kyle Metzger says:

    I think the illusion guys are a little favored towards the naked people illusions…It’s kinda funny. But it is definitely unnecessary. I know I’m gonna get yelled at for this, and probably made fun of a lot, and that’s cool, but hopefully some people will agree too (please comment if so). The nudity is not necessary. A lot of people have this widget on their desktops…where children can easily see this. Also, as a person of faith, I don’t really appreciate this image just appearing on my widget. There are so many more wholesome illusions out there. But keep ‘em coming! They are very good illusions most of the time!

  5. Anonymous says:

    lol nice one

  6. shannon says:

    Although the nudity may not be necessary it is to make a point.

  7. Thoams says:

    I can kind of see where you are coming from Kyle but then again its not as if it is a real picture. It is just a drawing… Great illusion

  8. Anonymous says:

    “Also, as a person of faith, I don’t really appreciate this image just appearing on my widget”

    What’s being “a person of faith” got to do with “being a prude” or are you just stereotyping faithful people.

  9. Louis says:

    Yes Kyle, I am glad you recognize that you are setting yourself up to be made fun of. In lieu of gettin’ all religious in here, all i can say is – Get laid. Its a human body, the fact that you seeing it ignites all these sinful sexual fantasies doesnt mean its not “natural”. Great “illusion” it fits almost perfect

  10. Anonymous says:

    This isn’t that good and is obviously only on here b/c it’s a naked lady, at least it’s not a naked man. But, there are poeple w/this widget as stated before and kids who use the computer. So, I agree w/the earlier poster. Many of the illusions are amazing, but this being on here reminds me of Jr. High humor and nothing more. That’s why I didn’t add this to my Facebook apps and will probably remove the widget. Thanks for all the other good ones!

  11. Anonymous says:

    thats pretty hairy if u know what i mean

  12. Anonymous says:

    @Kyle

    What nudity? All I see is Sigmund Freud wrinkling his forhead. Am I missing the point?

  13. Anonymous says:

    i agree with kyle

    rock on kyle!!!!!!!!

  14. Iggy says:

    (Kyle and others, sorry if this offends) There is no bad thing about visualizing the human body as an art form. It is a beautiful thing that was created (however you believe) and is a part of nature. Children that are of the age to comprehend the fact that the images are nude are already of an age where they realize what a human body looks like just by observing themselves and piecing together the looks of the people around them. If they’re too young for that, they’re too young to understand the picture anyway. As for faith, that should instead mean for an even greater acceptance of the beauty of the body in a natural form, after all the Bible and Torah have an entire book about it. If the illusions were distasteful and demeaning, then yes I could see your point, but reacting to such pictures as this shows more of a personal discomfort with the body in general.

  15. Yawmy says:

    First, I´d like to say I appreciate the moderation of kyle metzger.
    However, I disagree with him. I think including nudity in an illusion is easier than including bodies wearing clothes, in general. Keep in mind that is not pornographical nudity, just a body without anything else.

  16. Julie says:

    Two words about the illusion: too true!

    And Kyle, while some nakedness *may* be offensive, in this case, it’s necessary for the illusion…as this is really what’s on a man’s mind!

  17. Roxanne says:

    I don’t think there is anything wrong with nudity. Why does anyone think nudity is unwholesome? The human body is beautiful. What is good about being made to feel bad about our bodies? I am a faithful Christian & love is what faith is about.

  18. Marky G says:

    I have to agree with Kyle on this one.

  19. Anonymous says:

    Kyle and Iggy both make very good points but I’ll have to stick with kyle. If a child has this widget, he or she could really get busted.

  20. Anonymous says:

    I heard that young children won’t be able to see the naked lady.
    That’s the point of this illusion, Freudian.

    And i’m with “this is a kind of art, it’s not pornography”

  21. Anonymous says:

    Get over it!

  22. Anonymous says:

    I really must also agree with Kyle on this one… my children often are on the computer and I have the widget on my desktop as well as facebook… Hopefully the nude images will stop – so that the illusion widgets on my computer don’t have to… I really enjoy the true optical illusions… :)

  23. Super Nova says:

    I have to agree with Roxanne and Iggy, and I’m only in 6th Grade. There is nothing wrong with the human body and is often looked at as art, which is the way I visulize this picture.
    Sorry for you Kyle, that you can see it that way !

  24. Anonymous says:

    I am also a “person of faith” and have absolutely no problems with this illusion. Now if it depicted a sex act, then I’d have a problem, but simple chaste nudity is not against bible values. In fact God told several of his prophets to go around naked for years at a time.

    If you are a Catholic, the Pope has written that simple nudity is not against Catholic values, and is not immodest.

    I look at this image as more a work of art, and I feel that denying kids the experience of the great masterpieces in art (not that this is one of them) many of which are nudes would be wrong.

  25. Laura says:

    Is any one else slightly disturbed by his hair being part of her… who-who? LOL

  26. Anonymous says:

    not really an optical illusion…it’s not like you have to stare at it for awhile or there is some trick involved to seeing it. looks to me as tho Freud enjoyed plump chicks with huge jungle muffs…jeez you could take a weed whacker to that thing…as for offending people isn’t the internet like tv, radio or print? if you don’t like it don’t watch, listen or read it. no one is forcing anyone to be a grown up.

  27. James Rodgers says:

    Sorry this is a pet peeve of mine, so I am going to go into one….

    “as a person of Faith”, just what is that, maybe a phrase to allow people to feel good for believing something they cannot prove? If they could, they would be person of fact, not faith. So a person faith could be a person of unproven theory or to quote Einstein, evolved superstition. It does not sound so good now, does it?

    Did they take a bite from the fruit of the wrong tree to noticed she is naked and that this is bad. Who told them she was naked, and who told them this is bad, What are they worried they will think or do after seeing this picture? What is it that they are not in control of?

    I suggest that some of the comments complaining show that what Vurdlak explains the artist was trying to illustrating, is spot on, so keep them coming. I think it is a classic as an optical illusion but also by how it provokes a little deeper thought.

    Please, please, please, use your powerful minds to look at the world around without superstition.

    Just imagine for a moment you are the sort of person who wants everything proven to you or a theory stated as theory and not passed off as fact, then imagine how you feel when someone says. “As a person of(Faith)unproven theory and evolved superstition”…. welcome to my world and I reckon many others of you out there.

  28. Anonymous says:

    my husband had a tee shirt with this same design on it 15 years ago but it was no sigmund who did it and it was much better. i was not so easy to see the female body and it was a true illusion. this is truly just nudity. i’m a woman of faith…it doesn’t bother me. it’s just not an illusion. find the original and you will have the illusion.

    • Dushi61 says:

      This is the original. I had this poster hanging in my bedroom 35 yrs ago. I am a man of faith. I believe in the power of oneself.

  29. Anonymous says:

    Wowo it’s an illusion? O.o

  30. Anonymous says:

    KYLE I TOTALLY AGREE W/YOU! I AM A PERSON OF FAITH TOO AND THIS ILLUSION IS WAY OVER BOARD. ALL THIS PICTURE SAYS IS THAT GUYS ARE TOTAL HORNDOGS!!!!

  31. Andrew says:

    Well to begin with it really isn’t an illusion. It’s a hidden picture. I’m sure we can all agree on that.

    On a side note I’m going to say some thins that may be slightly provoking.

    First to Kyle: It you don’t lke it, don’t look. If you have children and put a program on your computer that you know occasionally shows nudity it is your own fault if said children see this image. Don’t bash the site, bash youself. Also, this is not the forum to bring up any topic of religion in unless the image in and of itself is widely reguarded as regious in nature.

    To the others who fell into bashing Kyle: It is very juvinile to fall into bashing someone because of their personal beliefs. Bash their actions, bash their clothes, bash their cars, but leave their beliefs alone. Remember that the moment you open that door, you become a target too. Stick to commenting on the images, leave the people alone.

    To thse who “sided” with Kyle and bashed the image based on personal beliefs, the same thing I said to Kyle applies to you.

    Anyways, Not the best “illusion” I’ve seen here, but not the worst either. Keep ‘em coming.

  32. Anonymous says:

    She definetly needs a shave

  33. Anonymous says:

    Did anyone actually understand why this picture is so significant? The point is to see that Freud believed that sex was the ultimate motivator. I think this is a wonderful drawing.

  34. Stephen says:

    Dear oh dear: what’s all this fuss about children? I frequently point my 11-year old son at this site and have no problems with it. I suppose I must conclude that he is more mature than some of the commenters here.

    (By the way – there seems to be some problem with the site; I couldn’t comment in Opera because the CAPTCHA didn’t show up, and had to switch to Firefox.)

  35. Tara says:

    I actually agree with Kyle Metzger.
    Whats the point in it all?
    I want to see things that I will personally enjoy.

  36. Fink Productions says:

    “Oh my god! First this illusion then this will become a hardcore porn site!”

    Come on people, first off, this illusion would not make as much since without the nude female, especially if you actually know about Freud.

    Next, it’s not like people are going to see this and they’re going to go out and commit “sin”. I believe most females have seen a naked female, and most men too, IT’S A BODY! It’s not a picture of sex. I don’t think if a child sees this illusion they become destined to the pole.

    This is one of the problems in the world, and especially America, people just get so pissed about small things.

  37. Anonymous says:

    How on God’s green earth can this be distasteful and offensive in nature? Art (and yes, even comics are considered an art form) is many things. Did it catch your eye? Did it convey something to you? Does it have meaning? (more importantly, did YOU give it meaning?) Did it resonate? I can continue but I think I’ve made my point. One more point of thought… should we cloak all the great (nude)statues of the world that can be found on and in many of our institutions? Jeez! if it offended you, get over it.

  38. Dallen says:

    Kyle, as a “faithful” person i believe you should know this years and years ago there was no ,showers, plumbing, clothing, ect. ect. now in modern days this might not be “accepted” but its art and i predict we will be walking naked in 20 years because clothing just gets shorter and shorter

  39. Anonymous says:

    I think the image is cool. She just needs to shave!!

  40. Anonymous says:

    Fink Productions: Read comment no. 39. I am an American. Not all Americans whine, and some of us even use our brains. It’d be hard pressed to deny that even in your country you have the complainers, ignorant blokes and so forth. The bottom line here is commenting on the picture and the effects of the content. I might point out that your “American” comment is JUST as ignorant as the people of faith and once your bruised ego dissipates, you may even agree with me.

  41. Anonymous says:

    If you don’t like genitalia then you are part of the wrong species. You made your mistake at birth. please continue to failure accordingly.

  42. Anonymous says:

    Great illusion, though I have a hard time visualizing what the “boob” is on his face. A wrinkle? lol

    And I completely disagree with kyle and all you others agreeing with him. GOD FORBID A CHILD SEES A NAKED BODY. Honestly, grow up. There is nothing wrong with the human body and there’s no point in censoring your kids to that stuff (which they hopefully already know about anyways). Chances are, if they use a computer then they’ve looked at naked pictures online, hell the majority of them have probably jerked off. So what? It’s only human. Stop raising your kids like stupid ignorant animals and wake up to reality. It’s really not as bad as you’re little book(s) make it seem.

  43. Anonymous says:

    I owned the actual tee-shirt at 15 years of age.(30+ years ago). Even at that age I had an understanding of the concept, (men do respond to the physical more then emotional), but my enjoyment was more in the people who actually looked at the shirt, and then voiced their opinion. Hate to say it, but I never had anyone including men tell me it was incorrect. My only regret is I can’t find the shirt, not even to replace it.

  44. Jochen says:

    does anyone actually know who originally created this work and when? i have unsuccessfully been trying to find information about it for a while now.

  45. jolia says:

    nice iggy– stated very well…. intelectual comments such as — keep em coming!

  46. Kleetus7 says:

    For crying out loud people! It’s just a picture! I’m a person of “faith”, and I don’t find it offensive. Honestly! God created the human body, not to be ashamed of, but for someone to be proud of! I’m not saying that ALL nude images that can be found on the internet are ok, but this one is just a joke! There’s no sexual content in the least! Sure, there’s nudity, but that’s different. People aren’t born with clothes on, they don’t bathe with clothes on, heck, some of ‘em don’t even sleep with clothes on! *cough cough* Anyway, if you find this image offensive, just avoid it.

  47. Anonymous says:

    To Kyle Metzger:
    Not everyone shares your belief system or values and it is not up to others to sensors themselves because you don’t agree with what they are postings. It’s not the responsibility of others to protect you from images you are not comfortable with, that is your responsibility. If you don’t care to see what is on this widget then you should not have it on your computer. No one forced you to see this and no one is forcing you to continue to look at this site. It’s pretty arogant to expect an entire website to change because you feel it has inappropriate material based on your belief system. You obviously know that once and awhile there is an illusion that is graphic or that contains nudity so now it’s up to you to either deal with it or stop looking at it. As for the fact that children might see it, well a widget shouldn’t be doing the parenting, parents should. It’s a parents resposibility to shield their children from what they feel is inappropriate. If they don’t find this widget appropriate then they shouldn’t have on their computer either. It’s ridiculous to think it’s someones elses responsibility to protect you from what you may find offensive. If that is what you feel is right for you then that is your choice, but you made that choice for you not everyone on this earth so it’s up to you to shield yourself from it. Take a little responsibility for yourself and protecting your moral code. It’s pretty ridiculous to expect that other people change for you to feel comfortable. Stop trying to push your moral standards on everyone else and wake up and realize that so you don’t get to decide whats right for everyone only yourself. And if this site is not right for you then it’s responsibility to not look at it.

    PS: I love this site and this illusion is a very clever image of Frued. I’m sure Frued would be pretty proud!

  48. Anonymous says:

    To all the parents out there complaining about their children seeing a naked lady:

    STOP EXPECTING THE INTERNET TO DO YOUR JOB!!!

    If you don’t want your kids looking at it then it’s your responsibility to not let them do it or to check what they are going on and make sure it’s appropriate. It’s your responsibility as a parent not to have a widget on your computer that may very rarely show images containing nudity.
    Delete it if you don’t like.

    How many of you complained that your kids might see nudity yet took no responsibility in sensoring what your children see and still have the widget on your computer?

    You obviously all now know that occasionally there is nudity on this site so if your children continue to look at it, well, then that’s just bad parenting on your part because you know it’s on here. Take some responsibility for what your kids are doing on your computer and stop acting like its the duty of everyone else to protect your children from what you feel is inappropriate.

    As for the people of faith who are offended:

    EVERYONE ON THIS PLANET IS NOT PART OF YOUR FAITH AND DONT HAVE TO ADHERE TO WHAT YOU FEEL IS APPROPRIATE BASED ON YOUR FAITH!

    If you don’t like what you see then you shouldn’t have this widget on your computer. I enjoyed this image and thought it to be very funny and clever. I’m offended that you think I shouldn’t have been able to see it because people I don’t even know find it morally offensive to them. Your beliefs are not my beliefs or morals and are not my responsibility and I shouldn’t have to miss out on images because you don’t feel comfortable. It’s your job to adhere to your morals not everyone elses. You know it might be on here so if you still knowingly look at this site then you have no one to blame but yourself.

    I too have a moral code that I live by, but I take responsibility for how I live up to that code and what I feel is appropriate for me. If I do not feel like a widget or anything else in life does not fit into what I believe is morally upstanding then I choose to not be a part of it. I never feel that it is the responsibility of others to change who they are for me.

  49. Anonymous says:

    People will bitch and moan about anything! Everyone is different and everyone enjoys or is “comfortable” with completely different things. Not everyone sees sex or nudity as offensive or morally wrong. If he started sensoring every image that someone had a problem with there would be no images left on this site. Some people hate this picture and I love it! And the same goes for everything posted on here. Not everyone is of your faith. Not everyone has to only enjoy images that are okay with your faith. The world is full of different people who you can’t control. The only person you can is you… so you control what you look at on the internet and stop trying to make everyone be like you.

    • Jonathan says:

      February 13, 2013
      I’m not sure if my comment is going to “Anonymous”, you appear to know the most however, your last post was in March 2009. Whoever sees this: I have a watercolor painting of this “illusion” not the drawing. I have had this over 50 years and I am trying to find out who the artist is and when was it painted? If anyone out there has any clue to the answers please respond.
      Thanks

  50. Talise says:

    u rock kyle

  51. Drew says:

    Hooray! Sigmund Freud!

  52. michael says:

    yehey!! I can now read minds! Ahahahahaha!

  53. hero2222 says:

    why the hell do I see a naked woman????

  54. purplepeopleeater says:

    the women is way to obvious but still really cleaver

  55. roelin says:

    eww thats disgusting and her veg is to bushy

    • Kelly says:

      Its VAG u moron veg is short for vegetable.
      me and my boyfriend were wetting ourselves stupid when you refferred to it as a vegetable

  56. Weierdo says:

    EWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW

  57. amaya says:

    ewwwwwww that is so not a good one you can see it right away

  58. cosimos says:

    i wasn’t looking for porn

  59. Hannah says:

    Ummm, ok, i saw that straight away while my mum was in the room. I scrolled down just as she turned to the screen.

    LOL!!!!!

  60. Ashley says:

    someone needs to trim the lawn… if you know what i mean… hahaha

    • Kelly says:

      Oh my gosh, lol thats HILARIOUS
      didya see roelins comment
      he called her ‘lawn’ a vegetable
      lol

    • happydoodle says:

      ohmigosh i saw tht comment!!! lol it was funny how he called it a veggie. lets hope it was a typo and he didnt actually mean “veg”!!!!!! LOL!!!!

  61. joe says:

    only straight men and women will see it correctly and think these things!!

  62. Maddy says:

    Hmmmmmm True Msg…. as sketch describes bushes are nesdy…

  63. Someone says:

    She needs a shave, but then the man would loose his eyebrow lol

  64. A says:

    Haha thats mint

  65. jhed says:

    He’s thinking to have some fun with a very very wild lady. ahahahaha

  66. judyahansen says:

    I’m telling ya I laughed so hard at the first response , OMG! I hurt from it , some funny stuff there. Sorry what were we talking about…

  67. Grace says:

    Through my hands not trough

  68. Tacos says:

    DAFUQ?! Now THAT’S an bush!

  69. boobs says:

    I like that girl… she got great boobs.

  70. Anonymous Pagan says:

    All of this, I believe, is unnecessary.

    All this illusion states is that men only think about naked girls. Which I (being a girl, I wouldn’t know) think isn’t true.

    I find this offensive, but you are allowed your opinions, so if you like it, that’s fine by me.

Speak Your Mind

You can add some images too.

Pinterest