![]() |
:lol:
Nice one, respectfullySexybon. |
Y'know. There are times this place restores my faith in humanity. Bruce, Zen, and V, you totally rock. Blokes that get it.
Sexy BonBon: very funny :P @ Merc: it's really not about wanting to cover up the titties. It's about context and about a determined culture. |
Wow, that was spectacular. Once again, nice try Bruce. I guess the bottom line is that free speech allows everyone to expose themselves.
|
Dear sexanob- you, sir, are one smartfunny MF. :lol2:
Dana, thanks for the kind words. very kind, thank you. |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
Thanks for the reply mercy. I'll start with your conclusion.
I don't know you very well, but it is not for lack of desire or effort. I do listen/read what you post. I do make judgements about what I read. I also keep my mind open, and keep adjusting my conclusions as my understanding changes. It seems clear that I don't understand you. I think I still don't. I won't put words in your mouth, but I will try to explain how I came to the conclusions I made before. I'll try to follow along the same track you made. One more thing. I'm not trying to persuade you or beat you down or show you up. I love women in general, and I've loved a number of them in particular. You know what--rather than a big long windy blah blah blah blah, I'll ask you something. For me, my understanding of the term "tart" in this context is approximately equal to "whore". When you used it, it really pushed a big button for me. Let me ask you this, what is your feeling, your understanding of the word "tart" here? Perhaps we're much closer than I imagined, perhaps I'm hung up on something I misunderstood. |
Quote:
But yet mob mentality lead the way... |
It's all about context really. Depending how it's used the word 'tart' like the word 'slut' can be fun, or it can be derogatory. The context here was that in response to a comment I made about the tabloid use of a particular and very focused lexicon around women and the whole idea of 'Page 3 Girls' in which women show off their tits as a bit of fun in between news stories, is damaging. Not because it is degrading (though I think it is), but because it is wholly dismissive.
You then respond with a comment about 'tarts' showing off their tits on page 3. Essentialy you responded with the same language and dismissive tone to which i was objecting at the same time signalling that you see no problem with women's bodies providing light relief in between serious news stories. Like I said before: I am not on a campaign to cover up the titties. I just think the message it sends when they are just thrown in as an object to gawp at before continuing on to the next news item, is a very unfortunate one. It certainly struck me as horrible when I was growing up with that shit. |
I'm glad to hear it.
If you go look at post #120, the first place the word "tart" appears in this thread, you'll see it is used in a much more derogatory way. "tart, slapper, hooker". I've read other references that confirm this. This is where I get my understanding of what "tart" means in the context local to where this is happening, the UK. Your use of tart, with your expanded explanation, makes for a very different conversation. Calling a page three girl a hooker is different than calling her a tease. I'm not part of the mob, I was going from the context here. Truce? |
It's so hypocritical to make these judgments when one willingly begs for tit shots on a regular basis. Sure, you can argue it's that person's "choice" but honestly I think it plays on self-esteem and a need to be liked. It's very sneaky that way: I LOVE and RESPECT women. Nice cunt there, by the way. Thanks for showing it...I don't give a fuck what your reasons were, really. I'll pretend that it all comes down to your deep love and acceptance of your "self" though I've not often cared much what you've actually had to say. I will pretend that you didn't feel it was a way to get attention, acceptance, money, love, or any of the other motivators that might make the action seem due to lack of self-esteem or other unsavory notions, and that instead it's just that we're all progressive folks who are really in tune with our bodies and the people's intentions around them. Odds are probably 1 in 10 you really are just a happy exhibitionist, but in my mind I'll apply that label to all who bare it, so as not ever have to deal with the fact that I indeed may be a lecherous old fool.
|
Who are you talking about im? I hear you describing thoughts and actions and motivations of a number of parties in your post, but it's confusing. rather than put words in your mouth, would you please expand on just who you are "speaking for" and who you're "speaking about"? thanks in advance.
|
'Everyman' with exceptions and 'everywoman' with exceptions. It's a general jab at the calling out of the "wrong" words to call women by those who have no qualms objectifying women in a hundred other ways, and of women who present the opportunities for objectification.
Quote:
The only way you tried to put words into my mouth was to assume that I meant anyone in particular. Look around. It's the way of the world, doncha know? And I'll jump on every chance I get to point out the hypocrisy of it, and to point out that's why we've "come a long way baby" but we still have so so so far to go. So, no, it's not about you or you or you or you, per se. It's about the "everyyou." |
Quote:
|
But truly, it wasn't about merc in particular. Not because I don't think he's just as guilty as the rest of us, but because I don't think he's any MORE guilty than the rest of us. The fingers pointing at him were laughable, given my previously stated feelings on the issue.
OK, merc? ;) (Funny how everyone is jumping up to see if it's about them. Yeesh. Feel like a heel much?) :lol: |
Quote:
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:47 AM. |
Powered by: vBulletin Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.