Site Pic

Site Pic

Bob
Bob

October 23rd, 2005, 11:18 pm #1

Someone said that you should change the site pic, as it has been the official pic for a long time. My suggestion is that you post a pic more representative of the clientele . . . not so young or cute as the current pic. That is false advertizing. May I suggest . . the next pic should be a woman at least 55 y/o . . . preferably 50-100% overweight . . . maybe some facial blemishes. This would represent the site, and cause, more accurately. Thank you!
Reply
Share

Adelle
Adelle

October 24th, 2005, 12:56 am #2

That sure doesn't sound like my friends or me. Of course we can't show you our titties because we are all under 18, that magic age, and N54 might freak. Yes, may of the folks here are older or degenerate, neo-feminist activists like me (or both) but 'children are the future' and it is my peer group that needs the support and input from a site like this. Most of my peers will 'dress like sluts' but would never be caught dead without a bra and certainly not topless. Like, eew. It’s not as if we have a problem rebelling or being different just as long as we are different the same way and our rebellion is accepted by our peers and NOT by the adults in our lives. It’s complicated and girls have a lot of baggage they have to get over (thanks to mass media in the form of magazines and video) before they can be comfortable braless, topfree or nude. We saw what happened when JJ showed one little tiny bejewelled nipple and Much Music is not ready to take on the FCC because it isn’t about promoting social change as much as about money. It’s ALWAYS about the money.
Reply
Share

Nat
Joined: January 1st, 1970, 12:00 am

October 24th, 2005, 1:04 am #3

Someone said that you should change the site pic, as it has been the official pic for a long time. My suggestion is that you post a pic more representative of the clientele . . . not so young or cute as the current pic. That is false advertizing. May I suggest . . the next pic should be a woman at least 55 y/o . . . preferably 50-100% overweight . . . maybe some facial blemishes. This would represent the site, and cause, more accurately. Thank you!
And how would you know what our members look like? I think your comments are presumptuous and bigoted.
And changing the photo to suit you would be the last thing I did.
In fact, I'm wonder why I continue to put up with you at all. With every post you make I come closer to pressing the ban button.
Reply
Like
Share

michaela
michaela

October 24th, 2005, 2:13 am #4

Someone said that you should change the site pic, as it has been the official pic for a long time. My suggestion is that you post a pic more representative of the clientele . . . not so young or cute as the current pic. That is false advertizing. May I suggest . . the next pic should be a woman at least 55 y/o . . . preferably 50-100% overweight . . . maybe some facial blemishes. This would represent the site, and cause, more accurately. Thank you!
I think you are just being an idiot, presuming you know who this site represents.

You would fall over in a faint if I were to challenge you with what I am. Put your money where your nouth is, Bob. When you are talking to me you are talking to a member of the 'viking cyclists race team'. That is road race bicycling, to you. I may be forty five years old, but I could kill you on a bike, and so could my team mate!

Stop being such a mouth. Like I said before, you don't know shit from shinola.
Reply
Share

Bob
Bob

October 24th, 2005, 9:37 pm #5

And how would you know what our members look like? I think your comments are presumptuous and bigoted.
And changing the photo to suit you would be the last thing I did.
In fact, I'm wonder why I continue to put up with you at all. With every post you make I come closer to pressing the ban button.
I was not intending to offend anyone. In fact, I think if I were female instead of male, the response to my thread would be totally different. Women have been complaining for years about the representations of beauty in media (younger, slimmer, clear skin, perfect teeth, etc.) and the harmful effect this has upon them in terms of self-image and feeling like they must compete and/or don't measure up. If women say this, then why is it a problem if a man does?

I think it is more bigoted to say that the same statement is fine when one person says it, but terrible when another person says it . . . based simply upon some characteristic in which they differ. Would we say that a woman is being bigoted if she made a valid criticism of a man, or men? Of course we wouldn't. But, today, a man cannot even agree with something women have already said without being negatively-labeled for doing so.

The same goes for race issues: Bill Cosby still takes heat (as well as being applauded) for taking to task the behaviors of certain black folks. But, if a white celeb were to say the same things, he/she would be universally condemned and attempts would ensure to try to ruin that person. The statements are the same . . but the reactions are vastly different because of the race of the speakers --- this is racist thinking.

We give lip service to wanting to bring down the walls that separate people, but then we (even the staunchest defenders of free speech, equal rights and diversity) maintain those walls by continuing to treat people differently based upon their race . . . their gender . . . their age . . or any other salient characteristic. If you try to silence people like me, then you don't really support freedom and equality.
Reply
Share

JB
JB

October 24th, 2005, 10:36 pm #6

Someone said that you should change the site pic, as it has been the official pic for a long time. My suggestion is that you post a pic more representative of the clientele . . . not so young or cute as the current pic. That is false advertizing. May I suggest . . the next pic should be a woman at least 55 y/o . . . preferably 50-100% overweight . . . maybe some facial blemishes. This would represent the site, and cause, more accurately. Thank you!
Bob you did make me laugh with this one, but please understand that I was not laughing with you but at you, for saying such things.

Please think before you push "respond".
Reply
Share

Joined: October 23rd, 2005, 3:12 pm

October 25th, 2005, 3:42 pm #7

I was not intending to offend anyone. In fact, I think if I were female instead of male, the response to my thread would be totally different. Women have been complaining for years about the representations of beauty in media (younger, slimmer, clear skin, perfect teeth, etc.) and the harmful effect this has upon them in terms of self-image and feeling like they must compete and/or don't measure up. If women say this, then why is it a problem if a man does?

I think it is more bigoted to say that the same statement is fine when one person says it, but terrible when another person says it . . . based simply upon some characteristic in which they differ. Would we say that a woman is being bigoted if she made a valid criticism of a man, or men? Of course we wouldn't. But, today, a man cannot even agree with something women have already said without being negatively-labeled for doing so.

The same goes for race issues: Bill Cosby still takes heat (as well as being applauded) for taking to task the behaviors of certain black folks. But, if a white celeb were to say the same things, he/she would be universally condemned and attempts would ensure to try to ruin that person. The statements are the same . . but the reactions are vastly different because of the race of the speakers --- this is racist thinking.

We give lip service to wanting to bring down the walls that separate people, but then we (even the staunchest defenders of free speech, equal rights and diversity) maintain those walls by continuing to treat people differently based upon their race . . . their gender . . . their age . . or any other salient characteristic. If you try to silence people like me, then you don't really support freedom and equality.
We can only base our response to what you said here on what you have been saying all along since you showed up. You say that all women past what, age 40? are fat, pimple faced, and sex crazed. So I think bigot does fit quite well in this application.
Reply
Like
Share

Bob
Bob

October 25th, 2005, 10:25 pm #8

I also said some unflattering things about middle-aged and older men, but I guess those don't figure into the "bigot" equation.

Funny how: Women can't be anti-woman . . . men can't be anti-man . . . whites can't be anti-white . . . and minorities aren't usually accused of being anti-minority (except for the "Uncle Tom" or "Oreo" labels . . I guess there is some exception to the rule there). But take the exact same statements and switch the speaker, and there is "bigotry" all over the place.
Reply
Share

Joined: October 23rd, 2005, 3:12 pm

October 26th, 2005, 12:38 pm #9

Pretty much.
Reply
Like
Share