This is everything wrong with this hobby in one photo.

[Grosby]

Well I come back after 18 hours or so and...no Grosby. I guess he was not interested in a real debate after all.

I'm still reading here but your replies to others, following my post, led me to feel it wasn't worth bothering, that your arguments weren't going to advance to be anything more than what you'd already posted. The claim of not being able to respond to some people because of your mobile phone (being difficult to type on) is also the kind of excuse that makes one feel like just not bothering. I thought I'd just forget it and I figured you'd forget it too. You say now though that you still want me to reply and so I will, here we go:

1. Select three people addressing me that you deem complete "nonsense" and call them out on it by name (i.e. quote them) with a one or two sentence remark on why it is unfair, inappropriate, etc.

By "nonsense" I was referring to people posting gifs, making jokes, etc. You misunderstand me there.

2. Select what you consider the single best response to my position, which I have allegedly failed to address.

OK. I've clicked a random page and from that page I've quoted two posts. These do fine. While I don't expect you to reply line-by-line it would be good if you could respond to the whole or at least do more than respond to an isolated line.

If my wife could answer in this thread she would tell you that I treat her very well. I am the consumate gentleman. I always open her door and the like. She would also tell you that I do about 98% of the cooking and probably 90% of the cleaning. I make more hourly than her but she makes more yearly. I am hardly what you would call a male chauvenist pig. But I also like erotic art. Boris Vallejo and Frank Frazettta are 2 of my favorites. I'm a big Conan fan as well. In almost all of his art work he is painted as being the hero who is saving the damsel in distress. What you are trying to do Starpuffs is paint me and others like me who like this kind of art as mysogynist. Can't it be enough in your eyes that we just like this kind of artwork? That we are not trying to hold back women or mistreat women, that it's just a style that we think is cool?

This whole thread reminds me of a little dittly I read in Readers Digest before. A man was going to a door a little ahead of 2 women. As he got to the door he held it open for the ladies to go through. The 1 rolled her eyes and said, you don't have to open that door because I'm a woman. The man responded back. I'm not holding this door because you're a lady, I'm holding the door because I'm a gentleman. Not all men are trying to "put you in your place" Starpuffs. You just look like you're looking for a reason to be offended.

This is a hobby built on entertainment and fantasy....hard to get upset over someone's fantasy figure. We all have our personal preferences and what we like in this hobby doesn't define who we are in reality.

I've met many members on this board at SDCC and they were all stand up, respectful guys. Who cares if some may like a scantily clad figure....or will be checking out the women dressed as slave Leia at conventions..I'll be on the look out for the sexy men dressed as gladiators.

 

[hoodonit00]

Well I certainly do not want a guy to be rude or unkind, but I do not hold men to notions of being a classic "gentleman". Equality is a two way street and I dislike women who hypocritically demand freedom from social norms but expect men to lock-step maintain dated gender norms, especially bilking poor guys for free dinners and stuff. And if a guy tells me I am pretty, I want it to be spontaneous, not some duty to flatter my ego (which it does).



The guy I recently dated was a grocery clerk at the organic supermarket where I shop. If I were the shrill feminist harpy of everyone's imagination here I doubt he would have asked me out or I would have accepted him. I stopped seeing him only because he was adamantly against having children and that is a deal breaker.

Interestingly I was dumped because a guy about a year ago because he found this hobby "odd and materialistic". So I do commiserate with guys here that get **** for their collection, just not guys who get **** for the misogynistic pieces in their collection.




The above is typical of a an Aunt Sally/strawman fallacy. The fact I went out of my way to compliment several of the male members in a post prior to yours in this thread calls out your post for the nonsense it is. I also took obvious jokes from EvilFace and others in stride.

If you had real integrity as a "gentleman" to feign to be, instead of getting on my case for voicing an unpopular opinion, you would take to task the people who deride me as ugly, lonely, lesbian, etc. and other alleged personal accusations that have nothing to do with the issue I presented.

If I really thought people were being unfair to you, being the "gentleman" I am, I would stick up for you. Being as I agree with what most have said(not the parts you quoted here) I see no reason to. I don't consider what I posted as "getting on your case". I see it as posting the truth that you are looking for something to be offended at just like you do in other threads. Defend yourself, wouldn't want you to think I was a chauvinist or anything.

 

[Star Puffs]

By "nonsense" I was referring to people posting gifs, making jokes, etc. You misunderstand me there.

My, you just happen to show up finally after I mock your conspicuous absence. Then you prevaricate and completely dodge my first request. Well, you had your chance to show some integrity and you decided to sneer at me further.

If calling out someone like fosing for the likes of what I quote below is something you truly find a Herculean task, then you are a coward with no interest in a real debate and thus not worth responding to further. Your intent has always been to maximally insult me and then claim victory if I ignore you or walk away, even if I do so in contempt.

 

[Lejuan]

You just happen to show up finally after I mock your conspicuous absence. Then you prevaricate and dodge my first request. If calling out someone like fosing out for the likes of what I quote below is something you find a Herculean task, then you are a coward and hypocrite with no interest in a real debate and thus not worth responding to further.

And yet you call me a coward and a hypocrite for apparently having avoided the question of parallels you make between Back Americana objects and the design trend typified by the Iron Man/Black Widow custom. Then I take you to task on it, call out your b.s. and you haven't responded since. Either I'm on your ignore list, or you're shying away from an issue that has permeated your posts throughout this thread.

You opine the negative language used to describe 'women with an unwelcome opinion' and yet your language in this thread has been typically patronising, adversarial and downright offensive. I imagine this is why many people are responding the way they are. Not because of your opinion. It's because of how you choose to express yourself. You hide behind the veil of sisterhood, but the reality is that if you were a male in this place, people would respond to you exactly the way they do now. It's not because you're a woman. It's because you have no class.

 

[Grosby]

I'm not absent. I said in my first line that I'm still here and still regularly reading along.

I'm not dodging your first request (it sounds now though like you are actually dodging my request...). I thought you misunderstood me and thought I was talking about something else. If not, I don't understand why you'd want me to point out what I feel is 'nonsense' (relative to your original post), it seems like it's all pretty straight-forward, but if that's what you want I can certainly do that. From the first page:

That's just a picture of Leonardo DiCaprio squinting.

I look at that pic and see everything that is awesome with this hobby.

That's just a person poking fun. There's a lot of that in between legitimate replies, that's all I was saying.

EDIT: By "legitimate" I mean posts that Star Puffs could respond to, that offer a counter-argument.

 

[hoodonit00]

And yet you call me a coward and a hypocrite for apparently having avoided the question of parallels you make between Back Americana objects and the design trend typified by the Iron Man/Black Widow custom. Then I take you to task on it, call out your b.s. and you haven't responded since. Either I'm on your ignore list, or you're shying away from an issue that has permeated your posts throughout this thread.

You opine the negative language used to describe 'women with an unwelcome opinion' and yet your language in this thread has been typically patronising, adversarial and downright offensive. I imagine this is why many people are responding the way they are. Not because of your opinion. It's because of how you choose to express yourself. You hide behind the veil of sisterhood, but the reality is that if you were a male in this place, people would respond to you exactly the way they do now. It's not because you're a woman. It's because you have no class.

Well said, Especially the last paragraph.

 

[devilof76]

Any woman who feels objectified by this doll is not secure in her own femininity.

 

[fosing]

demmit. more words.

 

[Star Puffs]

And yet you call me a coward and a hypocrite for apparently having avoided the question of parallels you make between Back Americana objects and the design trend typified by the Iron Man/Black Widow custom. Then I take you to task on it, call out your b.s. and you haven't responded since. Either I'm on your ignore list, or you're shying away from an issue that has permeated your posts throughout this thread.

You opine the negative language used to describe 'women with an unwelcome opinion' and yet your language in this thread has been typically patronising, adversarial and downright offensive. I imagine this is why many people are responding the way they are. Not because of your opinion. It's because of how you choose to express yourself. You hide behind the veil of sisterhood, but the reality is that if you were a male in this place, people would respond to you exactly the way they do now. It's not because you're a woman. It's because you have no class.

"Then I take you to task on it, call out your b.s. and you haven't responded since. "

"Not because of your opinion."

Again I am not responding in detail to you solely because of the glaring, almost unreal hypocrisy you represent. For a self-styled "anti-racist", a label you used to parade around this site, pretending that people constantly hectoring me as "feminist" are not upset by my gender or liberal nature of my opinion, but merely my lack of "class" is 100% bs.

Your post to which you refer had debate-worthy elements, but you elected to spend your first several posts before that in this thread with childish deflections or personal attacks on me. Just like Grosby, do not start off denigrating my responses, but then pretending how interested you are in hear my views further.

Buh bye.

 

[devilof76]

Lots of meaningless words.

 

[Grosby]

you are a coward with no interest in a real debate and thus not worth responding to further

I'm not actually asking that you debate me. I'm asking that you simply reply to the posts by hoodonit00 and Jen that I quoted above. It seems to me, as I said before, that you have a habit of ignoring reasoned replies in favor of responding to obvious trolling/joking posts that offer the option for easy replies. Other people have noted the same. Even above, on this very page, it seems to me like you're doing it again, you're trying to avoid responding to sensible/reasonable arguments in favour of bringing up this PMS image. You previously said you would respond to any post and yet I quote two and once again you find an excuse to get out of it.

 

[Lejuan]

Sorry, what was that? I missed the bit where you acknowledged that running around telling minorities how they should feel about racism was a mistake on your part.

_______________

 

[devilof76]

I'm not actually asking that you debate me. I'm asking that you simply reply to the posts by hoodonit00 and Jen that I quoted above. It seems to me, as I said before, that you have a habit of ignoring reasoned replies in favor of responding to obvious trolling/joking posts that offer the option for easy replies. Other people have noted the same. Even above, on this very page, it seems to me like you're doing it again, you're trying to avoid responding to sensible/reasonable arguments in favour of bringing up this PMS image. You previously said you would respond to any post and yet I quote two and once again you find an excuse to get out of it.

She's only here to condemn. That's all she's done. That's all she'll do.

 

[Kamandi]

How are we to feel about all the sexy girls who go to Star Wars conventions dressed as Slave Leia? Or any of the various female Jedi in their midrift baring costumes?

I think that stuff is less destructive than when I see gossip rags following the Kardashians, Paris Hilton or Lindsay Lohan. Those women have set feminism back much further than any customizer with some spare Black Widow and Iron Man parts.

 

[Star Puffs]

You previously said you would respond to any post and yet I quote two and once again you find an excuse to get out of it.

No, I said I would respond to "the single best" post. That is not "any" in its strictest sense it means 'one'. Evenso the fact you chose "two" does not bother me in the least because they are thematically related.

Still the fact you cannot even accurately report the simplest nuance of what I actually wrote (and which you can quickly verify) speaks volumes about the charade of interest in what I actually might say.

And an "excuse" you mean my expecting you to meet the conditions I laid out as a show of good faith on your part. If you were clever you would have just gone to my posts and repeated three I had already flagged myself (that solution is no longer acceptable since I just pointed it out to you). You could have met my rather easy challenge in less than five minutes work, far less work than you expect of me in crafting a meaningful reply to what was a worthwhile discussion on the nature of art.

 

[Mr. EcKo]

 

[Star Puffs]

How are we to feel about all the sexy girls who go to Star Wars conventions dressed as Slave Leia? Or any of the various female Jedi in their midrift baring costumes?

Asked and answered already, but even so...

My criticism is about how men depict women, not how women choose to express our sexuality of our own volition. I am fine with most of those sexy outfits. That is a strawman people have certainly loved to rage against in this thread. Edit: Nor am I against men creating nude art of women in general nor even against "normal" pornography. It is the themes of objectification, disempowerment and some creepy fetshism that I protest.

To use an example, do you recognize a difference between a white person and black person using the n-word? While blacks debate amongst themselves what is proper, that does not give whites a right to start using that word, even if they claim (based on comedic usage by blacks) to not mean it in a negative sense.

Well similarly, even if some women are in the wrong to pander quite as much to male fantasies at times, it is still their choice. The contrast between the real women in skimpy Iron Man outfits and the male artist creating his "sexy" Iron Widow is striking. One reflects a woman in control of female sexuality, the other careful control by a man, specifically designed with ludicrous vulnerability so as to not be 'too powerful'.

I think that stuff is less destructive than when I see gossip rags following the Kardashians, Paris Hilton or Lindsay Lohan. Those women have set feminism back much further than any customizer with some spare Black Widow and Iron Man parts.

Overall I agree. I am constantly disappointed in life my how vapid and vain otherwise intelligent women can be. My point as clearly stated in the original post is the effect on this hobby and in particular the potential impact of that aesthetic in turning away women who otherwise are invested in the exact franchises and themes that drive this hobby.

All of this tirade about sexuality and sexy outfits in general is a strawman rebuttal to avoid discussing what I wrote. Notice how literally no one (to the best of my knowledge, correct me if I am wrong) has actually quoted and analysed my original post. Personal attacks and patronising remarks about my tone, lack of class, etc. are much easier than finding fault with my views.

 

[devilof76]

Right. If a man sculpts a Willendorf Venus, he's obsessed with big ****, round ***, and a belly to toil for the sake of his heirs.

If a woman sculpts it, she's defying the patriarchal bondage of skininess and other forms of torture for the sake of appeasing the demands of men's aberrant domineering sexual delusions.

**** off.

 

[a-dev]

demmit. more words.

Many words indeed. I've added dictionary.com to my toolbar favorites list because of this thread!

 

[Grosby]

Your intent has always been to maximally insult me and then claim victory if I ignore you or walk away, even if I do so in contempt.

I would just like to go back and point out that I was the one who walked away and you clearly understood that. You answered my post and I said nothing more. I only later replied because you posted this:

Well I come back after 18 hours or so and...no Grosby. I guess he was not interested in a real debate after all.

How can you say then that it's "always" been my intent to claim victory by having you walk away or ignore me? (That's a rhetorical question, just to be clear!) So that, like much of what you write, doesn't make sense. I walked away and only returned when you called me back. Had you not called me back I had no intention of posting again.

On top of that, I feel now I shouldn't have returned because you are doing precisely what I expected you would, the reason why I originally chose not to reply - you're ignoring reasonable comments in favour of literally anything else you can find (in this case, a joke post someone else made 20 pages back and now my choosing two posts instead of one).

No, I said I would respond to "the single best" post. That is not "any" in its strictest sense it means 'one'. Evenso the fact you chose "two" does not bother me in the least because they are thematically related.

Still the fact you cannot even accurately report the simplest nuance of what I actually wrote (and which you can quickly verify) speaks volumes about the charade of interest in what I actually might say.

You are 100% right that I was wrong there. I don't know how but I somehow misread it as you requesting two comments. This comes even after multiple readings. Maybe it's because it was the second point and through that I confused myself. That does not speak well of me - maybe I'm a dummy, I can accept that - but it's good that you say the two comments do not bother you and so there is hope that you can still reply to them.

And an "excuse" you mean my expecting you to meet the conditions I laid out as a show of good faith on your part. If you were clever you would have just gone to my posts and repeated three I had already flagged myself (that solution is no longer acceptable since I just pointed it out to you). You could have met my rather easy challenge in less than five minutes work, far less work than you expect of me in crafting a meaningful reply to what was a worthwhile discussion on the nature of art.

A challenge? Again, I think you misunderstood me or I misunderstand you. There have been legitimate posts in this thread, people who have responding seriously and thoughtfully to your original post (and have shown you the same level of respect or lack of respect that you have shown them), and then there has been people who have made joking or trolling posts. Some of the latter I feel has been at worst in bad taste but always completely harmless to anyone secure with his/herself.

My point in mentioning the latter was just that you repeatedly return to those posts instead of the serious/thoughtful posts. My theory for this, as I said, was that you didn't actually have a strong argument and thus were choosing to reply only to comments that offer an easy reply. Cherrypicking, as someone earlier said. You could prove me otherwise by replying to the two posts I singled out and yet for some reason you don't. You make a point of saying that you can reply but then you don't reply. Thus, we go back to my original point: your argument is a superficial one that doesn't hold up to questioning and even you are aware of that.

Your next move: Again you wont properly respond to the posts by hoodonit00 or Jen that I quoted. Instead you'll just dissect my post here or come up with some new particular you want me to answer for first. Or you'll ignore me. If it's one of the two I'd highly recommend the latter.

EDIT FROM THE NEXT DAY: If you do actually want to respond to proper counter-arguments, forget my request and anything else I've written and just reply to Jen and Kamadi's posts on the next page. Both respond directly to your original post, point by point, and are reasoned, sensible and respectful.