View Single Post
Old July 18 2012, 12:43 AM   #71
Idealistic Cynic and Canon Champion
RJDiogenes's Avatar
Location: RJDiogenes of Boston
Re: Jessica Nigri: Babe of the week #29 (July 2012)

^^ She probably figures any publicity is good publicity.

iguana_tonante wrote: View Post
Great to talk about it in theory. It makes you feel all enlightnened without the need to actually do anything. Very convenient. Put yourself in other people's shoes for a change, not just for a day but for years and years of harrassment, and see how you like it.
As I said: For longer than you've been alive. Ah, but I forgot: those decades working in OB-GYN and women's advocacy is just a "shtick" so it doesn't count.

"Hot or not" ≠ literary critisms.
Uh... okay, if you say so.

Yes, sexism and objectification of women makes me quite cross. It's one of the few things that actually do. What's the alternative? Shrug it off because it's not about me? I actually care about people, instead of keep saying you are so liberal and enlightnened, but not doing anything about it.
Again: Sexuality is not sexism.

So what's up with you making excuses for this kind of behaviour in these threads?
What excuses for what behavior?

Treating women like pices of meat is not harrassment? Then what is it?
Not harassment. In any case, the "pieces of meat" thing is your slogan, not mine-- as far as I'm concerned, female beauty is as open to discussion as any other topic.

{ Emilia } wrote: View Post
You really think history ended when the civil rights movement "won", huh?
No, of course not. That's why I always speak up against the backsliding. We're obviously in the "one step back" of the cycle now.

Nonsense, sure you'd like honest comments. I can believe that.
But degrading comments? Criticism that just makes fun of you and your terrible lack of imagination and writing skills and how you lack the intelligence to write anything that's even remotely interesting? (I'm not saying this is true. I'm just trying to illustrate the comparison.)
You'd ask for some kind of civil behaviour and rightly so.
That would be rude, but I could handle it. I've already said many times that rudeness is bad in any context. My original comment was in response to Trekker's rudeness, you may recall.

That civil behaviour is what's lacking in this thread. And let's be blunt here: objectification of women has a long history and it's quite amusing how a self-proclaimed enlightened progressive just turns a blind eye towards it when it happens in our day and age.
Again, rudeness is always bad. What Rob and iguana are objecting to is the very concept of the thread.

You can repeat it again and again but it's not going to make it more credible.
It really amuses me how you're trying to paint yourself as progressive and liberal when in fact many of your views are shamelessly backwards. Accusing us of seeing sex as "icky" is just so ridiculous considering who we are. Do you really believe this? I mean, seriously?
The two Italians who have absolutely no issue with sex or nudity of any kind in any media? Or RobMax who is left-wing and progressive enough to be an honorary European?
That was my point. Thus the sarcasm. Note the winky. I was pointing out the hypocrisy.

But obviously you won't question your own behaviour. In fact I don't even recall any outrageous sexist posts made by you, you just keep defending others who do make those posts. Does that make you proud? You don't write terribly sexist comments yourself but you defend the people who do because your whole agenda is to push back "silly PC feminism". I guess you miss the times when it was okay to treat women like that?
I'm not sure who you think I'm defending, aside from the star of the thread, so you'll have to be more specific. The rest of this comment is rather arbitrary and contradictory to everything I've ever posted, so that also requires some explanation.

See, that just shows how you don't understand it. I have no issues with women wearing revealing clothing, female beauty, aesthetic art, or the people expressing themselves through it.
I didn't think so. That's why I asked.

I have issues with a sexist audience who's only interested in "I'd do her!". People who don't see these models/actresses as artists who create a piece of art with the director/photographer but just as objectified pieces of meat they "would do" or "wouldn't do because they got that boring generic supermodel look and an ugly forehead!!!1!".
Okay, that's good.

This whole discussion is a lot about the tone used in these threads. The people criticizing it don't have issues with talking about looks or giving compliments.
That's not what I'm seeing. I'm seeing people objecting to the very concept of talking about looks, because it's "treating people like pieces of meat" and "promoting rape" and "sexual harassment." Some pretty off the wall stuff here.

What I would mind are tasteless or objectifying comments given in a degrading tone and that's what we don't like in this thread.
Of course. Rudeness is bad in any context.

Nobody cares if a random nerd says "She's not my type." but making a degrading joke about somebody's looks or objectifying the woman solely as a sex object... that's silly.

I love how it's always the closet sexist, racist or homophobe people complaining about political correctness.
Good thing I'm the opposite of all those things, huh?
Please stop by my Gallery and YouTube Page for a visit. And read Trunkards!
RJDiogenes is offline   Reply With Quote