No, I’m discussing it, like adults do. If someone can convince me that a bunch of beefcake shots of men is somehow in line with what I believe to be the community ethos, then I will withdraw my objection.
That’s an unfair attack and you know it.
Once again, it’s not just beefcake shots… most of them aren’t in fact, beefcake shots.
I think the community ethos can and should include satirical take downs of societal norms about gender and sexuality. Which is how I view this thread…
7 Likes
66 photos posted.
Two are women!
12 could be considered “beef cake” shots - aka in a state of undress.
The rest are all wearing clothing. In fact most of them are wearing MORE clothing than the gif of Kristen Wig.
I reassert my claim that this is less “objectification” (save those 12 beef cake shots) and more an appreciation of talented males.
I mean… Jemaine Clement and Michael Sheen and Richard Ayoade are just famous for their beef cake status right?
Am I adulting right?
13 Likes
Can I just throw in a quick note about how moronic and utterly pointless it would be to try to exact “revenge” for literally millennia of worldwide misogynistic patriarchal oppression and exploitation by posting some racy photos of guys on a niche website?
Consider me doubly insulted.
Miss me with that condescending tone, dude. You started this needless conflict.
And I don’t appreciate you making such decisions for everyone else on the site.
You could have contacted me directly if you felt there was an issue.
14 Likes
Okay, I’ll bite.
If it isn’t in line with what we decide our “ethos” is at this moment, does this apply unilaterally? Does any post with pictures of half-naked men get memory holed? What about half-naked women? Why not make sure everything here is G-rated, no nudity of any kind, not even partial nudity? No talking about attractive people at all?
Basically, this is your opinion, man. I seriously doubt you’ll approach this judiciously and even-handedly, and flag all posts and threads featuring half-naked women. Even a dead cat can see you just have an axe to grind.
7 Likes
Are you in a better position to determine the community ethos than the mods are, or do you determine the community ethos on behalf of the mods?
I perceive that you find this topic objectionable, impossible to ignore. I perceive that you judged the purpose of this topic as revenge, although I read just a few minutes ago in the originating post that it was a continuation of a thread from bbs.boingboing.net. My perception is that a number of gay male users don’t view, appreciate, and comment on beefcake or male actors out of revenge for “the male gaze.”
Are any of my perceptions cockeyed or entirely subjective and unique?
Some options presented:
- Ignore forthwith the topic
- Take it up with the community mods either in private chat or by flagging
- Accept your opinion as n=1 and each user liking or commenting on this thread gets n=1 for an opinion, and sum each side.
12 Likes
I didn’t make any decision, I flagged what I thought was inappropriate and specified, with a direct response to you, what my problem with this thread was. And look what happened - we started a dialog about objectification. If the point of this thread was really to (as @mindysan33 said) to make a point about objectification, isn’t dialog better than just promoting objectification of others?
I’m just sorry I wasn’t here in July - I think this conversation should have been had a long time ago.
If I had seen any thread that involved half-naked (or more) women, or one specifically titled “Hey Lets Objectify Women Now” I would have responded the same way.
No. I won’t ignore what I see as objectionable behavior. The “well then don’t read it” argument doesn’t work here, because this is a place we are building together. That means we all need to respect each other’s opinions and collectively decide what this place is through discussion.
I did. But to flag this privately without engaging in dialog would be pusillanimous, and would not contribute to a real discussion.
Right and wrong are not determined by “likes.”
1 Like
vs.
Ok, but if we disagree, and I get more likes than you then who is “right”?
11 Likes
Prove it:
https://bbs.elsewhere.cafe/t/the-arrivals-lounge/14/546?u=learnedcoward
Show up there with your hue and cry. I dare you.
It’s a woman in a bikini. Oh, the outrage, the horror, my innocent little eyes…
I will hold you to this. I expect you to throw a massive conniption just like this one every time you see a picture of an attractive woman. Otherwise, you can just drop this now, and let everyone be.
12 Likes
Right and wrong are not determined by you. The mods were here before you. The mods have closed threads. They didn’t close this one. Is this an oversight on their part, do you think? Or is this a “I’m right, everyone else merely has an opinion, including the mods and admin” declaration you’re making? Did you see that a mod has already contributed to this thread?
I see my questions were not answered, not even the solicited check on my perception. Only a rebuttal to a summation of options, several of which are echoed from upthread.
7 Likes
So does one mere flag from you carry more weight than the average member’s?
Because the notification I got stated that this post (which I had practically forgotten by this point) was flagged by multiple members, (which again is news to me) and it was hidden.
No, actually, you didn’t. Maybe that’s what you meant to do, but that’s not what actually happened.
This is what you posted, after LC put in his two cents, and your reply is solely addressed to him:
Congrats on inadvertently (at least, I hope) demonstrating one of the many sunconscious microaggressions which we women deal with everyday several times a day; having our voices/input be automatically marginalized or ignored.
Kudos.
17 Likes
You’re doing everything except mentioning Jesus by name.
This isn’t a dialogue, it’s pushing a rope.
2 Likes
Nope. So apparently I’m not the only one who objects.
Yes, I did. Check back a few posts to comment number 72. My reply was to this thread, which was started by you and unless you changed the settings you would have been notified of that response;
I think I’ve sufficiently proven that’s not the case, and that my first comment was to you as the originator of this thread. You can continue to try and make this a case of “micro-aggression” if you like, but the facts speak for themselves.
You know who’s not in this thread and should be?
John Cho!
He’s super underrated!
15 Likes
Or… you rallied other ‘like minded’ people to suddenly flag a forgotten post that didn’t seem to be bothering anyone else up until now. (I really hope that isn’t the case, because it’s petty as hell, but those are the apparent optics here, and it’s not a good look.)
Again the timing is awfully suspect, but being that I don’t have the auth to see who flags what, I guess I’ll just have to take your word on it.
Also; a generic post is not addressing me directly, as you should well know. (Perhaps you assumed I have my notifications set to ‘tracking’; I do not.)
Your initial comment didn’t bother to @ me, or reply directly to any of my many comments on this thread.
But whatevs, clearly you’re right and I’m wrong because, reasons.
Same shit, different dude.
I’m not trying to ‘make a case’ of anything; I just noticed this seems to be the 2nd time you’ve tried to ‘fix a problem’ that doesn’t actually exist, and frankly, that’s rather concerning to me.
6 Likes
If you haven’t yet, watch the movie Columbus. It’s so good!
4 Likes
