why is this thread is still goin??

well i mustve missed alot huh? that boob thread i guess thats what you call it was very inappropriate...besides seeing users here making a thread about how revealing she was was a waste...talking about things like that huh? so much of a fan you are..so thats what you were interested in besides her singing...absolute waste...good idea to close it and keep it closed...swallowtailhas been very good on being a responsible mod...i respect his decisions and back him 100% on this.

Quote:
Stonewall is cool. I do have some issues with them that aren't relevant to this discussion, but suffice to say that I think they tend to ride on the back of some not-so nice social policies in order to achieve their ends.

As for my personal experiences, let me recap:
Bisexual. Transgendered. Androgynous. Native "American". Male. Oh, and adolescent. Forgot that one before.
I'm sure you're left reeling for some kind of conclusive dissertation.
Sorry, but my experiences are too personal to share with a variety of strangers on a forum I'm not entirely sure I can trust. This is why I have only alluded to them thus far. As I've stated, it doesn't take a rocket scientist or a fiction writer to imagine the consequences of defying so many social norms in such a limited body and span of time. In merely seventeen years, I'm pretty sure I've become/was born as the antithesis to nearly everyone's concept of what a dignified human being should be. I'm the universal punching bag, so to speak. The only positive is that I get to cut through everyone else's crap and get to the center of things without worrying about what the men in the black suits and ties think of what I'm saying. I don't have to act tolerant because I have nothing that I can reasonably be intolerant towards. So when society says, "You're wrong", I can legitimately say, "Thanks for stating the obvious, but I'm still pretty darn sure it isn't a form of discrimination to have sexual interests in another human being."

And now the post is on topic again.

Shuri/Eli

*hugs Pips* I can't even think of anything to say -_-

I have a history of dealing with women who think they're better than me just because they think they've faced more trials and tribulations than I have. I KNOW oppression isn't a contest- but these femi-nazis try to make it out to be one. The only reason I brought up my personal identity is to make the point that EVEN AS A FEMININE, WEAK "PANSY" MAN, I am expected to take crap from women that they are not expected to take from me. I can't say things to women that they can say to me, I can't say things ABOUT women that they can say about me, and I have JUST AS MUCH- if not more- of a history of oppression than most women I know. But because I am a man biologically, I'm supposed to take those experiences and deal with them myself while it's considered perfectly acceptable for a girl to cry and whine about it until the cows come home.

Disappointed and sad to hear this, if it is not too personal can you please elaborate about your experiences.

There are positives,in UK Stonewall makes the difference:

http://www.stonewall.org.uk/

Quote:
What's wrong with thinking of women in a sexual manner? Women think of men in a sexual way all the time and no one gets their undies in a wad. Why aren't you protesting Utada's oh-so objectifying depiction of men in "Tippy Toe" or "Let Me Give You My Love"? Clearly because she wrote those songs, Utada sees men as mere sexual toys to be used for her satisfaction and disposed of when they fail to entertain her anymore. Because she has sexual thoughts about men, she must view them as worthless. This is your logic applied the other way. Does it make any sense?

Yes and no. Yes, because the reality of the situation is that most of the entertainment industry is interested in presenting BOTH women and men as sexual marketing tools. No, because I don't think that's necessarily the way it should be: the merits of music and art should certainly transcend the physical qualities of the performers behind them. Amanda Palmer is the perfect example of a true artist: she is perfectly comfortable applying sex appeal when appropriate and has even posed in the nude, but that isn't what she sells her music on. She's a mature artist who isn't over-sexualized (she's in charge of her own body and takes responsibility for the things she does with it) nor overly modest. And Utada DOES present herself sexually- one of the things she has repeatedly stated she likes about singing in English the most is that she feels more comfortable singing about sexual topics. But even in her Japanese work she's gotten explicit. "I want your baby"? I wonder how many different ways that line can be taken. Hmm. Just because Utada doesn't walk around in see-through tops doesn't mean she isn't sexualized. She merely presents her sexuality through her music. Plus, let's be realistic. This is the female singer who has capitalized on the fact that she isn't afraid of sharing information like what panties she bought with her fans over her blog. Now unless you can provide evidence that she WOULD be offended over a thread discussing her breasts, the overwhelming consensus by any group of reasonably minded people would be that she wouldn't care.

I have a history of dealing with women who think they're better than me just because they think they've faced more trials and tribulations than I have. I KNOW oppression isn't a contest- but these femi-nazis try to make it out to be one. The only reason I brought up my personal identity is to make the point that EVEN AS A FEMININE, WEAK "PANSY" MAN, I am expected to take crap from women that they are not expected to take from me. I can't say things to women that they can say to me, I can't say things ABOUT women that they can say about me, and I have JUST AS MUCH- if not more- of a history of oppression than most women I know. But because I am a man biologically, I'm supposed to take those experiences and deal with them myself while it's considered perfectly acceptable for a girl to cry and whine about it until the cows come home.

And your logic is, once again, self-defeating. Applying the concept that men are biologically stronger to women is the EXACT MANNER in which women were oppressed from the beginning! Men are stronger- therefore, that inherently makes them more capable of working, particularly in labor jobs. Women can't carry as much weight or handle as much physical stress, so I guess that means we should just deny them jobs we men don't think they're fit to take on. And you know that the idea of a woman slapping a man and getting away with it actually stems from patriarchal perspective? Because women are weaker than men, it is expected that a man will endure physical abuse from a woman because it would be humiliating to step down to her level. It isn't out of regard for the physical well-being of women that men don't slap back; it's to protect their machismo and maintain as high an ego as possible. So here we have more double-standards. Maintain a masculine rule of conduct that PROTECTS women from being treated fairly when they don't want to be, but eliminate all the ones that prevent them from being treated fairly when they want to be. This is madness. This is ultra-feminism.

Also, I'm sorry for taking so long to respond. Work and other things got in the way.

I'd also like to make it absolutely clear that I am NOT anti-feminist. I believe that women should be EQUAL in EVERY WAY; and that the women fighting for EQUALITY are noble and respectable. However, to me, and I know this is crazy, but that means women are attributed the same freedoms and rights as men, and they take the same level of responsibility as men for their actions. Unfortunately, this is not what I see occurring widely in America. What I see is masses of women who want to be extradited from the consequences of their actions and given free-reign to do whatever they want in the name of "correcting" the discriminatory attitudes of yesterday (ultra-feminism). That isn't equality.

Shuri/Eli

Quote:

*hugs Pips* I can't even think of anything to say -_-

Personally, and just my humble opinion I would like to have seen a more mature understanding from the off, a more sensitive attitude, but locking the thread was justified at the time, however this doesn?t necessary mean that the thread should remain locked indefinitely, and perhaps reading some of members responses, there seems an universal acceptance that this was a ?fun? thread, I wish I can understand this point of view but I cannot, after debating this topic with family and friends, they too feel I overreacted and put far too much weight on strangers opinions on internet forums.

Ever since I can remember I have never been a fan of breasts, or, as I called them when I was little, bosoms. I longed for the arrival of my own, and put socks down the front of my vest so that I could see how they might look.
When I drew female figures I used to pencil in a "u" on each side of the chest and put a dot in the middle of the u. I told people they were pockets, but no one was fooled. I may have been so interested because I was breast-fed, but I don't think so.

Like all the other young owners of chests without breasts, I looked long and hard at the bare-breasted women especially on holiday in Nice France , wondering if I was destined to have the long pointy kind or the round kind, hoping I wouldn't end up with the kind that had huge nipples and not much else.

Photographs of the real thing were far more satisfactory than breasts in art, which were usually small, pale, understated lumps.

I think that breasts have lost their charisma. Where once "boobs" were a secret waiting to be revealed, now double welts of marbled flesh propped up by balcony bras are pushed at you by waitresses, and receptionists of all ages, and in all states of scrawny, bloat, and freckle- and wrinkle-dom.

Where once you would have blushed to display a bra strap, dresses are cut so low that the bra and its bulging overspill are on permanent display.

Now that you can buy them, bosoms are over.

May be it?s the "ladette" culture that admiring glances, have been replaced by slobbering.

This Guardian issue is the latest research into the ladette phenomenon, if phenomenon is the correct description
http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2006/jan/23/pupilbehaviour.schools

Quote:

If you're picking on someone else's cultural past or where they're from, or what their longing countries did... I'd advise you not to.

Wow, What a waste of seven pages (and my nights sleep), but at least people are caring about the community.

The thread in question has been continuously been off topic and the source of much flaming. For me, the behavior there more so than the topic is unbecoming of the community. It is also clear that this topic has offended some people. I am in agreement with the locking of the topic.
The topic will remain locked.


There seems to be some articulated debate going on here and not the usual flaming i would have expected so this topic will remain unlocked for now.