|
Image of the Day Images that will blow your mind - every day. [Blog] [RSS] [XML] |
|
Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
10-26-2007, 03:02 PM | #31 |
I can hear my ears
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 25,571
|
__________________
This body holding me reminds me of my own mortality Embrace this moment, remember We are eternal, all this pain is an illusion ~MJKeenan |
10-26-2007, 07:17 PM | #32 |
Operations Operative
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: scotland/uk
Posts: 664
|
|
10-26-2007, 09:07 PM | #33 |
trying hard to be a better person
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 16,493
|
ok, my husband just fell for the 'you start' knock knock joke. It was very funny.
__________________
Kind words are the music of the world. F. W. Faber |
10-28-2007, 07:47 AM | #34 |
Doctor Wtf
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Badelaide, Baustralia
Posts: 12,861
|
Okay, serious discussion if we may.
Is this politically objectionable? I shared these pics with a female friend who is normally pretty easygoing and broad minded, certainly not prudish. She reacted strongly against it. I can see some point to this: it can easily be interpreted as a obvious display of female genitals, being used as an entrance/exit point. If you're particularly vigilant about objectification of women, I can see it being objectionable. I can see this but I still think the weirdness of it is funny. She thought that the funniness was overwhelmed by the offensiveness. She tried to convince me of this by asking how I would react if it were a male character with it's anus being used as the entrance. I reacted that it would be at least as funny (ha ha ha they're crawling up its arse!), and less offensive (since sexual violence towards men is much rarer than towards women). She had trouble believing my reaction. So, once you've stopped laughing and wondering WTF the designers were up to and if they could possibly have not noticed... do you find this objectionable on grounds of pandering to the objectification of women and consequent sexual violence? If you are male, would you react differently if it were an obviously male character with the anus being used as an entrance? If you are a pervert ... do you find it ... arousing?
__________________
Shut up and hug. MoreThanPretty, Nov 5, 2008. Just because I'm nominally polite, does not make me a pussy. Sundae Girl. |
10-28-2007, 08:37 AM | #35 |
The future is unwritten
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 71,105
|
She's over reacting. It's not a woman it's a damn cartoon character with an air pressure seal. Anything, anyone sees passed that, is from their own imagination, and the creator is not responsible for that.
|
10-28-2007, 09:00 AM | #36 | |
still eats dirt
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 3,031
|
Quote:
|
|
10-28-2007, 09:30 AM | #37 |
polaroid of perfection
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: West Yorkshire
Posts: 24,185
|
I always thought Pikachu was male anyway, which is why just thought it *snigger* amusing rather than anything more troubling.
Even if Pikachu were female, I'm with Bruce on this. I don't feel guilty biting into a carrot - I don't see it as a phallic symbol and thus secretly display my desire to emasculate men. Your friend needs to lighten up a little. Unless of course there is a deeper reason for her distress, like she was once goosed by Goofy or something.
__________________
Life's hard you know, so strike a pose on a Cadillac |
10-28-2007, 09:56 AM | #38 | |
Doctor Wtf
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Badelaide, Baustralia
Posts: 12,861
|
I agree with this part.
Quote:
C'mon, when everyone "imagines" the same thing, immediately, you have to admit it is either very strongly suggested or clearly depicted. Face it (so to speak), it looks like a vagina and everyone "got" that straight away. No one has posted asking for an explanation of why we all think it is funny. This is not one of those subliminal symbols which may or may not be there, and which we can argue about. It's there. I cannot believe that no-one in the design process noticed. The went with it anyway. So they are responsible for it. This doesn't prove it is objectionable, just that they are responsible. Instead of being an objectionable objectification of female anatomy, it could alternatively be interpreted as a positive statement celebrating and glorifying the female power of pregnancy and birth-giving. (Damn, when did I turn into a postmodernist theoretical feminist? Just how much did that damn tick suck out???) But I agree with SG that she could lighten up a little. I think it is more funny than objectionable.
__________________
Shut up and hug. MoreThanPretty, Nov 5, 2008. Just because I'm nominally polite, does not make me a pussy. Sundae Girl. |
|
10-28-2007, 10:22 AM | #39 |
We have to go back, Kate!
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Yorkshire
Posts: 25,964
|
Well....I think there are things worth getting upset about in this world and things not worth getting upset about. Even if it had been a giant inflatable female character....still wouldn't find that a problem.
I am a feminist and have been since I was about 12 years old. I think there are more important covert signals in the world which are problematic (low wages, a tendency for less valued jobs to be traditionally female, a corresponding tendency to over value professions which are nominally 'male', mysogyny in some sections of society and some of the rules around divorce.) It pisses me off when people get all het up about terminology (the word Chairman now becoming Chairperson for example). And it pisses me off when people get het up about stuff like this. If the character in question was a female figure with pneumatic breasts and a sexy swimsuit....then I'd be a little perturbed. It isn't. I used to go into a pub when I was about 15 years old. On the wall behind the bar was a piece of card with packets of peanuts hanging from it. As the peanuts sold they revealed the figure of a woman. Very sexual, very available, wearing a thong, with her breasts bare and a come fuck me pose and expression. That was exploitative. This isn't. One of the problems with the feminist movement is that it has on many occassions, in my view, chosen the wrong battles. Men are not our enemy. Sex is not our enemy. Our own sexuality is not our enemy. Tell your friend there are more important matters to get upset about. |
10-28-2007, 10:27 AM | #40 | |
We have to go back, Kate!
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Yorkshire
Posts: 25,964
|
Quote:
If this display was at a male club, and all the people climbing in were men...then there'd be an argument for its being exploitative. BUt it isn't. There's a danger with attitudes like your friend's that any depiction of the female form becomes problematic. Why shouldn't we celebrate it? Why shouldn't we celebrate the role of women as life-givers? Male and female, young and old, we all come from the same place. That's a powerful thing. |
|
10-28-2007, 12:21 PM | #41 | ||
The future is unwritten
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 71,105
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
||
10-28-2007, 02:38 PM | #42 |
™
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 27,717
|
|
10-28-2007, 11:18 PM | #43 |
Doctor Wtf
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Badelaide, Baustralia
Posts: 12,861
|
I was there already. I reckon you were too.
Are you really saying you needed UT's text to make you notice the resemblance to a vagina?
__________________
Shut up and hug. MoreThanPretty, Nov 5, 2008. Just because I'm nominally polite, does not make me a pussy. Sundae Girl. |
10-29-2007, 07:43 AM | #44 |
The future is unwritten
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 71,105
|
You were told up front it was amiss, so you were looking for something naughty. Porn is in the mind of the beholder.
|
10-29-2007, 09:16 AM | #45 |
I think this line's mostly filler.
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: DC
Posts: 13,575
|
The only beholders that wouldn't see that, text or no text, would be boys young enough to not know that boys and girls have different parts.
__________________
_________________ |...............| We live in the nick of times. | Len 17, Wid 3 | |_______________| [pics] |
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|
|