moviefreakedmind

HansiG said:

If it’s pretty, you fuck it. There is no gay.

Sounds racist.

Lord Haseo said:

moviefreakedmind said:

Lord Haseo said:

He said something to the effect of “I’d bang her”

Sounds transphobic.

FTFY

HA! I actually thought about that. I think he actually said he’d be willing to have a relationship with a transgender person though.

Lord Haseo said:

He said something to the effect of “I’d bang her”

Sounds homophobic.

TV’s Frink said:

http://io9.gizmodo.com/10-stupid-arguments-people-use-to-defend-comic-book-sex-1636381824

At least half of those aren’t stupid. Yes, if you don’t like it, then don’t buy it. I can’t stand Family Guy but you don’t see me running around bitching about how evil it is. I’ll say it again, anyone deeply offended by this nonsense deserves to be offended. If you are hurt that easily then I hope you lose sleep over it.

yhwx said:

And that’s amazing.

I guess. There are a lot of countries that have last much longer than this.

yhwx said:

It could have.

Yet never has.

yhwx said:

There are many places where it could have all fallen down.

It never has.

I think it’s implied by saying that they can’t handle a cartoon that maybe 100,000 people max have even read. Either way, I was just pointing out that it’s unpleasant to be accused of being against women when you aren’t.

yhwx said:

I’m just amazed it’s lasted 240 years. Barely, but still.

LOL! Why?

TV’s Frink said:

You keep saying you have met a woman before but I don’t believe you.

I just don’t think they’re as weak and fragile as you apparently do.

The United States of America is the greatest country on earth.

TV’s Frink said:

imperialscum said:

I don’t understand people who see the problem with stressing good physical attributes of woman (or man for that matter). Especially when the same people think stressing intellectual attributes is a good thing in contrast. Physical and intellectual attributes are essentially the same/equivalent. They are both largely inherited and they both can be perfected to some degree through hard work.

If you have something outstanding, there is no reason not to show it. People who hate stressing of either attribute are either jealous of one’s genes (inheritance) or jealous of one’s hard work.

I’m sure that was drawn by a woman.

Who cares who it was drawn by? It’s a cartoon depicting a fake, nonexistent woman dressed as a cat. Anyone who is offended by it deserves to be offended.

yhwx said:

Duracell “Misogynist” Energizer

The irony is that by doing this, people like you are turning “misogynist” into a meaningless word. Much like how if you tell people they’re transphobic for not wanting to have sex with a transgender person then they’ll simply embrace being a transphobe, people will soon wear “misogynist” as a badge of honor if you keep telling them they’re a misogynist for liking a cartoon comic book character.

Jeebus said:

darth_ender said:

Oooooh…I get it. It’s the atheist version of that “Hate the sin, love the sinner” thing. Caughtcha! How progressive!

The difference is that “Love the sinner, hate the sin” is usually referring to homosexuality. In that case, the ‘sin’ is a part of who they are, and something they can’t change. Religion is a belief, that can indeed be changed.

“Your sexuality is inherently sinful and wrong, but it doesn’t change my opinion of you as a person.”

vs

“I hate Christianity, but it doesn’t change my opinion of you as a person.”

People’s religion is often as important to them (if not more so) than their sexuality.

yh “Oh right, because you have to post on everything.” wx

TV’s Frink said:

moviefreakedmind said:

TV’s Frink said:

Jeebus said:

yhwx said:

moviefreakedmind said:

I know but nobody who claims to care about objectification comments on male objectification.

That’s a problem.

Or perhaps neither are a problem.

Yeah, you’re right, female objectification is perfectly fine. That’ll learn em.

My problem is that people say that every single instance of a woman appearing in any media is objectification.

No one said that and no one says that. But if you think ridiculous Catwoman bewbs are the same as an episode of The Gilmore Girls…

Well it certainly seems that way. I’ve never seen Gilmore Girls and I’ve never read a Catwoman comic book and I don’t care about either. If you think that a sexualized drawing of a fictional character is misogynistic then you have low standards for oppression.

I’ve heard it all before; with all due respect I’m not interested in a debate about the two mediums.

I’ll read the whole blog post later.

Dek Rollins said:

yhwx said:

Dek Rollins said:

yhwx said:

moviefreakedmind said:

Tyrphanax said:

moviefreakedmind said:

It’s like someone put a hand grenade in a clip-art library.

On the albums sleeve you can turn an inner, circular paper to change the imagery on the front. It’s pretty neat.

Are you one of those vinyl people?

Are you anti-vinyl? Vinyl is great; deal with it.

I don’t really like the culture of vinyl people. Especially the people who say it sounds better than CD.

The “culture” of vinyl people? And in what way does it not sound better than CD?

I’m not going to vouch for the inherent quality of either medium, but an album that was originally released on vinyl almost always sounds better on vinyl, because CD re-releases are commonly remixed or remastered, and this usually ends up changing the songs for the negative.
(example: the remixed version of Leftoverture by Kansas contains too much reverb)

Usually the early reissues of CDs were remastered for the worse, but today the CDs are usually properly mastered for the digital format. ZZ Top was never able to get this right until 2013 when their CDs were finally released properly, and are pretty satisfying.

I don’t know what he’s getting at with the CD thing, but I’ll admit that some of the extreme audiophile crowd can be very pretentious and rude to people just trying to ask simple questions. I usually avoid that type but I wouldn’t call it the “culture of vinyl people”. I don’t think that’s what he’s referring to though so I have no clue what he’s talking about.

yhwx said:

Dek Rollins said:

yhwx said:

moviefreakedmind said:

Tyrphanax said:

moviefreakedmind said:

It’s like someone put a hand grenade in a clip-art library.

On the albums sleeve you can turn an inner, circular paper to change the imagery on the front. It’s pretty neat.

Are you one of those vinyl people?

Are you anti-vinyl? Vinyl is great; deal with it.

I don’t really like the culture of vinyl people. Especially the people who say it sounds better than CD.

A lot of it can depend on your equipment. If you have a bad turntable then it probably won’t sound as good as a CD in a Bose CD player, but generally speaking analogue sounds much better on a good setup.

Tyrphanax said:

moviefreakedmind said:

It’s like someone put a hand grenade in a clip-art library.

On the albums sleeve you can turn an inner, circular paper to change the imagery on the front. It’s pretty neat.

TV’s Frink said:

Jeebus said:

yhwx said:

moviefreakedmind said:

I know but nobody who claims to care about objectification comments on male objectification.

That’s a problem.

Or perhaps neither are a problem.

Yeah, you’re right, female objectification is perfectly fine. That’ll learn em.

My problem is that people say that every single instance of a woman appearing in any media is objectification. Even cartoons are objectifying women. Whatever people like you call “objectification” is not a problem.

I know but nobody who claims to care about objectification comments on male objectification.

yhwx said:

The original Star Wars poster has an image of a muscular Luke with his shirt torn open. Either that image is just as bad as these images (which is insane), or neither of them are bad, but the double standard is incredibly obnoxious.

Well, yes, both should be equally treated.

Well, they aren’t.