| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Jordo
- FB Fan -
USA
98 Posts |
 Posted - 07/03/2005 : 15:29:28
|
I too would like to have sexual intercourse with Laetitia Casta. Then afterwards we could talk about feminist theory (for "pillow talk.")
It sucks shes not in Victoria's Secret anymore. What's she doing these days anyway?
-Jordan
my music! my music!
www.jordancooperLaLaLa.com
www.myspace.com/jordancooper |
 |
|
|
puredenizenofthecitizensb
- FB Fan -
Uzbekistan
150 Posts |
Posted - 07/03/2005 : 15:31:04
|
She's performing cunnilingus on Gloria Steinem.
 "this guy is a bad (boring) ripoff, puredenizen is the real deal." -dayanara
|
|
|
|
floop
= Wannabe Volunteer =
Mexico
15297 Posts |
Posted - 07/03/2005 : 15:33:32
|
quote:
Originally posted by Jordo
What's she doing these days anyway?
occupying space on my hard drive |
Edited by - floop on 07/03/2005 15:36:08 |
|
|
|
Thomas
* Dog in the Sand *
USA
1615 Posts |
Posted - 07/03/2005 : 15:39:06
|
Dave you are being Ridiculous. You are alienating yourself on the board, again. FB.NET T-SHIRTS.
"Our Love is Rice and Beans and Horses Lard" |
|
|
|
Thomas
* Dog in the Sand *
USA
1615 Posts |
Posted - 07/03/2005 : 15:43:49
|
I wonder if ART is exempt
"Our Love is Rice and Beans and Horses Lard" |
|
|
|
Thomas
* Dog in the Sand *
USA
1615 Posts |
Posted - 07/03/2005 : 15:44:23
|
Catch 22
"Our Love is Rice and Beans and Horses Lard" |
|
|
|
puredenizenofthecitizensb
- FB Fan -
Uzbekistan
150 Posts |
Posted - 07/03/2005 : 15:44:28
|
I'd sure like to suck on those.
"this guy is a bad (boring) ripoff, puredenizen is the real deal." -dayanara
|
|
|
|
Carl
- A 'Fifth' Catholic -
Ireland
11546 Posts |
Posted - 07/03/2005 : 16:24:46
|
| You know, I don't see what the big problem is with the original thread. There's a Pictures Of Beutiful Men thread. And while beauty is only skin deep, so what?! I don't see the point in making a big fuss over it. |
|
|
|
Dave Noisy
Minister of Chaos
Canada
4496 Posts |
Posted - 07/03/2005 : 17:18:50
|
Wow...what a disappointing lot.
Any more insulting posts directed at me will result in the author locked out, indefinitely.
I have done next to NOTHING to you, yet several of you have been very obnoxious and insulting - way more than necessary. And certainly not helpful.
If you have something to say, you're welcome to it.
And if you can't log in, you've been locked-out. If i find another account created, you will be PERMANENTLY removed. (Email me if you want to discuss this, you've forfeited your opportunity on here.)
 "Live life like you're gonna die...because you are." - William Shatner, You'll Have Time / Has Been |
|
|
|
Thomas
* Dog in the Sand *
USA
1615 Posts |
Posted - 07/03/2005 : 18:25:45
|
sigh
"Our Love is Rice and Beans and Horses Lard" |
Edited by - Thomas on 07/03/2005 18:27:09 |
|
|
|
two reelers
* Dog in the Sand *
Austria
1036 Posts |
Posted - 07/04/2005 : 05:16:49
|
dave n., are you cracking up ?
seriously, don't take yourself so important. i think you really have a big problem with your ego, considering your first post: "and it really bothers me seeing 42 pages and 22,000+ views on such a shallow thread." if it bothers you, then don't look at it !
deleting users because you don't like their views or they don't like what you have to say - WTF ?????
I joined the cult of Souled American / 'cause they are a damn' fine band |
|
|
|
dayanara
* Dog in the Sand *
Australia
1811 Posts |
Posted - 07/04/2005 : 05:21:10
|
i need the picture posting rules repeated to me one more time, please. i'm kind of slow.
i'm also wondering, dave, why you have time to post in here telling us not to pick on you but don't have time to delete the photo of a convicted child molester posted in the beautiful men thread by a troll. he obviously did it just to test you and get people riled up, but isn't this whole thing being done under the pretense of protecting children? perhaps if the three of you can't keep up it would be a good idea to appoint some new moderators? just curious. thanks.
i am sitting here observing my emotional discomfort. |
Edited by - dayanara on 07/04/2005 05:22:47 |
|
|
|
billgoodman
>> Denizen of the Citizens Band <<
Netherlands
6213 Posts |
Posted - 07/04/2005 : 09:50:52
|
I agree with Kathryn that posting/requesting pictures of girls below 18 years is something that should be eliminated.
Deleting the thread on that account is ok.
However, saying that we are shallow and should read some femminist theory
is insulting.
As one of the people who posted pictures (some explicit and mostly not, which can be said of the whole thread in general) I feel attacked.
My girlfriend is my best friend. She's so smart and creative
I love her, and I find her highly attractive
But I also find Diana Rigg attractive:
I don't know Diana Rigg, I don't particulary like the avangers, I don't care about her either (but I hope she's doing fine of course).
But I like to talk with some friends about her, about other women, just for the sake of it. Maybe we should post a disclaimer with every picture posted, reading: we think that women have their rights too, and don't belong in the kitchen and aren't breedingmachines.
 "I joined the cult of Jon Tiven/Bye!" |
|
|
|
remig
* Dog in the Sand *
France
1734 Posts |
Posted - 07/04/2005 : 10:09:31
|
shit.
 *  *  *  |
|
|
|
Carolynanna
>> Denizen of the Citizens Band <<
Canada
6556 Posts |
Posted - 07/04/2005 : 11:14:56
|
Wow, I go to the lake for a few days and....
Well as unpopular as it may be, I feel compelled to say that I agree with Dave on a number of points. There IS a bigger picture here.
Whether the whole thread should've been deleted is another issue. I didn't see the last questionable posts either. Its a debate over 2 issues that are both very important. But which one is more important is upto each individual. Its censorship vs. objectification. I myself, really don't like objectification after a certain degree and find it very damaging. Although I do understand human nature. Its a constant battle in my head. Fine fine line...
I will say that the thread was very good at confining these pics to one thread. Otherwise they seem to ooze out into more. So consequently I did like that thread for that matter.
__________
Don't believe the hype. |
|
|
|
speedy_m
= Frankofile =
Canada
3581 Posts |
Posted - 07/04/2005 : 11:30:21
|
I realise this my spark a heated debate, or just cause people to become angry with me, but this issue bothers me, so I'll say. Carolyn, I like you. As personality on fb.net, and as someone I've met in person. I respect the fact that you agree with some of Dave's views, and I respect that he is entitled to have those views. However, in terms of the nature of the majority of the pictures posted in that thread, I don't see an issue, and here is the potentially provactive thing to which I was referring earlier: some people might find the picture you posted of yourself (I'm sure you know the one I mean), to be pornographic or offensive. I don't, I think they were beautiful and it must have taken a lot of courage to do that. But it's something to consider.
I crept from a soft dimension/
Where one of my souls was lighter |
|
|
|
starmekitten
-= Forum Pistolera =-
United Kingdom
6370 Posts |
Posted - 07/04/2005 : 11:41:20
|
I actually can't believe you just said that.
I want to live, breathe, I want to be part of the human race |
|
|
|
Dave Noisy
Minister of Chaos
Canada
4496 Posts |
Posted - 07/04/2005 : 11:53:19
|
Wow...no name-calling. Thank you.
Sucks that i have to be threatening in order to get this far.
Two Reelers - it's much more deep than what you describe.
dayanara - the rule is no thread is to be a dedicated 'beautiful women' picture thread. It is sexist, shallow, chauvinistic and patronizing, to mention a few things.
I have *no* problems with an occasional *on topic* 'she's hot' kinda thing. I *do* have a problem with a thread being dedicated to this. One reason is that i strongly object to the objectification of people, men or women. It generally results in less respect for those who don't 'meet the standards', and for many it is also very demeaning.
There are very few women on FB.net, and i am highly doubtful that these sort of threads (and attitudes toward women) help to change this, or encourage participation. It results in making people feel even more isolated.
There are many more reasons why this thread was excessively negative, it'd be nice to see some other people speak up. (Too bad the precident has been set with these bully tactics. Clearly, anyone who feels the same way as i will also feel like they will be attacked. Good job with your 'free speech' values. With power comes responsibility, as they say..)
Honestly, i don't see what the problem is. I made a request. (Poorly worded, as i already said. Again, sorry.) It isn't cruel, unfair, or even unusual in the realm of message boards. There are plenty of other things to talk about, and plenty of other websites out there to oogle womens bodies.
Sorry, not on FB.net.
billgoodman - sorry to be insulting. I don't believe i said 'you are shallow'. I stated that the thread was shallow. And above, that the behaviour of discussing and staring at women's bodies is also shallow. (In the context of the thread. If you were to actually talk about the women, who they are, etc, i would have a much harder time being offended.)
The behaviour, in my opinion, is shallow. That doesn't mean the people are.
I'm sorry you feel attacked. Try putting yourself in the shoes of a woman visiting the thread, and what results in the expectations of what guys find 'beautiful' about women. Tell me how this isn't shallow. Tell me they wouldn't feel attacked in some ways.
Thomas - wtf? This isn't a street in the US. There are already many rules, some stated, some assumed. Before you ever found FB.net, you were already under rules not to say certain things. (Like FIRE in a crowded room.)
There are whole heaps of liberty here. I am much more offended by anti-vegan sentiment than i am the typical sexist fair, yet you don't see me banning anti-vegan remarks. The 'free speech' retoric is quite pathetic.
If you don't care to understand why i made this decision, that's your call.
If you don't like it, you're welcome to that, and to discuss the issue in a mature fashion. We may agree, we may disagree. Perhaps i'll learn something...and perhaps you will too.
The bottom line, however, is that i made a rule. It is not an uncommon, unacceptle or cruel decision (in relation to message boards.)
If you don't like it, you're welcome to voice yourself. You're welcome to try and convince me that i'm making a bad choice. You're also welcome to leave.
For those who decided to break it, or be disrespectful, tough luck. As you can see, i don't have to put up with your immaturity.
"Live life like you're gonna die...because you are." - William Shatner, You'll Have Time / Has Been |
|
|
|
Cheeseman1000
>> Denizen of the Citizens Band <<
Iceland
8201 Posts |
Posted - 07/04/2005 : 12:10:50
|
quote:
Originally posted by starmekitten
I actually can't believe you just said that.
I want to live, breathe, I want to be part of the human race
What, that he typed 'my' instead of 'might'? How does one make a typo like that?
Just kidding.
Are people not taking this too seriously? I don't know. You can't link to a picture on your hard drive, only already on the net, right? So in fact, no-one has taken away your pictures.
The thread didn't really bother or excite me: I'm still on dial-up, it took forever to load so I usually didn't bother. I'm all for seeing pretty girls though.
But citing free speech infringements? It's not 'Nam, there are rules. I'd be well in favour of a fully-clothed beautiful women thread: when I did check it, it was at work (broadband), and very tricky indeed.
But then, there were pretty girls. I don't know why I'm spouting on here, I can't really make up my mind on the issue.
How's that for a slice of fried gold? |
|
|
|
Homers_pet_monkey
= Official forum monkey =
United Kingdom
17125 Posts |
Posted - 07/04/2005 : 12:49:27
|
Excuse me, I've just cum.
Don't believe the type!
|
|
|
|
speedy_m
= Frankofile =
Canada
3581 Posts |
Posted - 07/04/2005 : 13:07:29
|
quote:
Originally posted by starmekitten
I actually can't believe you just said that.
I want to live, breathe, I want to be part of the human race
If you were refering to what I said, could you please clarify?
I crept from a soft dimension/
Where one of my souls was lighter |
|
|
|
darwin
>> Denizen of the Citizens Band <<
USA
5454 Posts |
Posted - 07/04/2005 : 13:26:50
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dave Noisy
There are many more reasons why this thread was excessively negative, it'd be nice to see some other people speak up. (Too bad the precident has been set with these bully tactics. Clearly, anyone who feels the same way as i will also feel like they will be attacked. Good job with your 'free speech' values. With power comes responsibility, as they say..)
Like Nixon's silent majority. "Many people agree with me but there afraid to say so." I don't see any evidence for that.
quote:
Thomas - wtf? This isn't a street in the US. There are already many rules, some stated, some assumed. Before you ever found FB.net, you were already under rules not to say certain things. (Like FIRE in a crowded room.)
Unstated rules leaves the king to do as he pleases. What rule did floop break? As daynara has repeatedly asked, the rule has been no nudity. Floop didn't break this rule and you didn't clearly state what the new rule was, but now he's locked.
quote:
If you don't like it, you're welcome to that, and to discuss the issue in a mature fashion. We may agree, we may disagree. Perhaps i'll learn something...and perhaps you will too.
Your tone has been anything but mature. Treating us as shallow individuals who would be enlightened if we read what you think we should read. Lecturing us about our "aggressive" responses. Throwing your weight around while you haven't even been here for the past 6+ months.
quote:
For those who decided to break it, or be disrespectful, tough luck. As you can see, i don't have to put up with your immaturity.
Not a mature response on your part. I don't know how you can expect us to engage in a mature conversation when you start with this attitude. This all could have been avoided if in the first message of this thread you had started a dialogue rather than sweeping in and deleting a thread and insulting the "moral" or shallowness of members of this community.
Many of us prize this community and we'll be sad if it's over. |
Edited by - darwin on 07/04/2005 13:32:53 |
|
|
|
starmekitten
-= Forum Pistolera =-
United Kingdom
6370 Posts |
Posted - 07/04/2005 : 13:31:26
|
quote:
Originally posted by speedy_m
If you were refering to what I said, could you please clarify?
I crept from a soft dimension/
Where one of my souls was lighter
Well it is, to my eye, taking an argument which was on principles and making it personal. I thought it a bit rude to be honest.
It takes a lot to post your picture on this forum, and from a womans perspective Carolyns picture of herself blossoming in pregnancy is a beautiful thing. Could be viewed as pornographic? Offensive? Our own sweet pregnant lady? I think it'd take a crazy head to come to that conclusion. The picture showed nothing untoward, it was posted small because of it's very nature, and it was 100% natural. I think it's easy to forget this place is a public forum sometimes so when you show yourself to it, it is like sharing a picture between friends, and you wouldn't expect your friends to draw that sort of conclusion.
I want to live, breathe, I want to be part of the human race |
|
|
|
speedy_m
= Frankofile =
Canada
3581 Posts |
Posted - 07/04/2005 : 13:36:47
|
I'm sorry you feel that way Tre. Please re-read the last two sentences of my post.
I crept from a soft dimension/
Where one of my souls was lighter |
|
|
|
Homers_pet_monkey
= Official forum monkey =
United Kingdom
17125 Posts |
Posted - 07/04/2005 : 14:03:41
|
Time for some of our little Icelandic pixie to cool everyone down.
Don't believe the type!
|
Edited by - Homers_pet_monkey on 07/04/2005 14:04:17 |
|
|
|
dayanara
* Dog in the Sand *
Australia
1811 Posts |
Posted - 07/04/2005 : 14:03:53
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dave Noisy
dayanara - the rule is no thread is to be a dedicated 'beautiful women' picture thread. It is sexist, shallow, chauvinistic and patronizing, to mention a few things.
shouldn't that be put in the faq? "no threads offensive to dave noisy even if they contain no nudity or otherwise illegal content."
quote:
There are plenty of other things to talk about, and plenty of other websites out there to oogle womens bodies.
it's not about oogling, dave. you're not listening to what people are telling you.
quote:
Try putting yourself in the shoes of a woman visiting the thread, and what results in the expectations of what guys find 'beautiful' about women. Tell me how this isn't shallow. Tell me they wouldn't feel attacked in some ways.
riiiiight, well seeing as i am a woman....yep. i don't feel attacked. i think sometimes very liberal men, such as yourself (and i consider myself a lib as well before you turn this into an us vs. them thing), try way too hard to sympathize/empathize/whatever with women and end up missing the mark by about a thousand miles. we appreciate the effort on our behalf, but sometimes you just need to settle down. women are not helpless, we can and will fight for ourselves when we feel demeaned. i'd like to point out that even tre (sorry to point you out, tre) who had a major problem with the thread in principle thinks it should exist.
quote:
The bottom line, however, is that i made a rule. It is not an uncommon, unacceptle or cruel decision (in relation to message boards.)
so if i posted the jennifer connelly picture in a thread discussing a jennifer connelly movie that would be fine? i still don't understand the rules. again, i'm very slow.
i posted a picture of a woman i thought was physically beautiful in this thread. i am a woman. floop posted a picture of a woman he thought was physically beautiful in this thread. floop is a man.
floop is locked. i am not.
i am sitting here observing my emotional discomfort. |
Edited by - dayanara on 07/04/2005 14:09:24 |
|
|
|
remig
* Dog in the Sand *
France
1734 Posts |
Posted - 07/04/2005 : 15:12:21
|
Ah, This is dignity!!!!
* * * |
|
|
|
remig
* Dog in the Sand *
France
1734 Posts |
Posted - 07/04/2005 : 15:16:35
|
Thank you lady for hiding yourself. Now we can have a real discussion on higher levels.
* * * |
|
|
|
Carolynanna
>> Denizen of the Citizens Band <<
Canada
6556 Posts |
Posted - 07/04/2005 : 15:23:41
|
quote:
Originally posted by speedy_m
I realise this my spark a heated debate, or just cause people to become angry with me, but this issue bothers me, so I'll say. Carolyn, I like you. As personality on fb.net, and as someone I've met in person. I respect the fact that you agree with some of Dave's views, and I respect that he is entitled to have those views. However, in terms of the nature of the majority of the pictures posted in that thread, I don't see an issue, and here is the potentially provactive thing to which I was referring earlier: some people might find the picture you posted of yourself (I'm sure you know the one I mean), to be pornographic or offensive. I don't, I think they were beautiful and it must have taken a lot of courage to do that. But it's something to consider.
I crept from a soft dimension/
Where one of my souls was lighter
Aw Mike I like you too sweets.
But nah, its not about being pornographic.
Its can at times be disheartening, for any woman, to be constantly bombarded by pictures of near perfect women. Especially when the vast majority of us cannot live up to that. Which was obviously not the intent of my pic, big and preggers does not equal perfection. Even the most confident of women have to battle with the fact that if you look like that you get special attention. Its a tough battle to not fall for that. To be confident on your own without that. Even for the most "beautiful" women. But like someone said, noone had to look at the thread.
__________
Don't believe the hype. |
Edited by - Carolynanna on 07/04/2005 20:20:45 |
|
|
|
billgoodman
>> Denizen of the Citizens Band <<
Netherlands
6213 Posts |
Posted - 07/04/2005 : 15:26:47
|
I think that Dave can do things like this
because this is still his site
and he's the boss
but (as he stated himself) the way he did it was very poor, even a bit stupid
(now don't block me Dave!)
He said sorry about that, so that's ok, kiss and make up
so we could stop the war now
however
I still think that the majority of the thread was ok
like 90%, the 10% of unacceptable stuff are reason enough to delete the thread,
but I don't think saying that posting a pic of Carrie Fischer in a white dress
is being sexist, only because we are talking about how good she looks.
If we said things like:
yeah she looks gorgeous, she can't fucking act though, no woman can, the one reason why they are in movies is that we can jerk-off at the same time.
That's sexist
But, I can also see that 'sexist' is in the eye of the beholder.
Needless to say, I can't get it that the thread lasted months
and 45 pages while the prime-moderator didn't like it in the first place
and thinks it's shallow and sexist. If you don't want shallow and sexist topics
delete them after a day, or a week, not after months and without a warning.
So you did have to right to do it
but you the way you did it was not that nice
like you said
and apologized for
so...
it's cool
(maybe you could apologize again though)
"I joined the cult of Jon Tiven/Bye!" |
|
|
|
NimrodsSon
* Dog in the Sand *
USA
1938 Posts |
|
|
Thomas
* Dog in the Sand *
USA
1615 Posts |
Posted - 07/04/2005 : 16:06:52
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dave Noisy
Thomas - wtf? This isn't a street in the US. There are already many rules, some stated, some assumed. Before you ever found FB.net, you were already under rules not to say certain things. (Like FIRE in a crowded room.)
Before I ever found FB.net? I'm a founding member of FB.net. I don't remember anyone else coming up with the idea. I don't get credit at all for that, and I've never asked for it in the past.
As for the Pictures of BLA BLA BLA thread. I might have looked in there once or twice. I don't think I've ever posted in there. You opened up a can of worms by posting a THREATENING THREAD with the same TOPIC NAME. You where looking for a fight and you found it and YOU WILL WIN because you CAN PLAY GOD!
In the future delete said thread and be done with it. PERIOD!
SEND ME THE DAMN SONG DATABASE
"Our Love is Rice and Beans and Horses Lard" |
|
|
|
Blaspheme Quarantine
- FB Fan -
United Kingdom
13 Posts |
Posted - 07/04/2005 : 16:09:07
|
Great god in a bottle, I was thinking about starting to contribute to this forum until I saw this. If the thread was generally within the rules, surely it would have been a more sensible and mature moderating decision to either delete or at least edit the posts with problem content?
Deleteing such a massive thread is of course akin to cracking a walnut with nuclear missile. And not one of the old ones either... a proper Trident jobbie.
So really, what it comes down to is a moderator with the "shining knight" complex deciding he's arbiter of what represents decent moral values, when his job should in fact be to enforce the actual rules of the board. Absolutely disgusting. What's even worse is the condescending attitude he's handed out here, and the maintaining of the "beautiful men" thread.
Or maybe he just loves the cock, I dunno.
Thought I'd just wade in here and say what I thought. I guess I ought to add in that I've read a fair bit of feminist literature, and I ran for head girl at school (despite being a boy), so I understand exactly what it feels like to be sexually discriminated against.
I'll go burn my Pixies albums now, because they're morally bankrupt. After all, one of them has some bird with her boobs out on the front cover. Shocking really.
edit - actually, I've decided that the mod doesn't love the cock. I bet he's too much of an emotional ascetic to love anything. Doesn't even masturbate like us dirty earthbound maggots. |
Edited by - Blaspheme Quarantine on 07/04/2005 16:16:52 |
|
|
|
Chris Knight
= Cult of Ray =
USA
899 Posts |
Posted - 07/04/2005 : 16:57:42
|
I have some questions:
What's sexist about being sexually attracted to women or viewing photos of them? Is being sexually attracted to men and viewing photos of them also sexist?
What's NOT sexist about taking action before asking the women on this forum what they think, or before taking into account the differing biologies of men and women? What's not sexist about assuming that the women in the pictures were too unintelligent or unenlightened to realize they were being "exploited" when the pictures were taken/published, or that women need to be protected by men from exploiting themselves? |
|
|
|
Carolynanna
>> Denizen of the Citizens Band <<
Canada
6556 Posts |
Posted - 07/04/2005 : 17:07:11
|
Again its not sexist its objectifying.
But I admit that it is a fine line between admiring the female form and objectification. And the line is often in the eye of the beholder.
__________
Don't believe the hype. |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
'pictures' of beautiful women thread
