semiotic_pirate: (SpartaTweak)
I just added 24 unsearchable interests on my profile.

The challenge: Try and figure out which ones will be unsearchable.
semiotic_pirate: (wild at heart)
"So a bunch of men in the world are in love with Mary Jane, and they buy a model of her standing in a sey pose. Big deal. You can belittle the men in this case all you want; and you’re probably right, who the hell pays 125 dollars for a comic figure. That being said, they arent the only men to ever fancy an unrealistic representation of a woman.

I will never understand what modern feminists are trying to accomplish. Equal pay for equal work, ok I can see that one. Fair representation in science and math? Maybe there wouldn’t be such an issue there if all of the “smart” women became mathematicians instead of women’s rights studies majors (yawn).

But seriously. On the one hand, you people are all about sexual empowerment and liberation. And then you complain when men look at you as sexual objects! You glorify the female body and defend the right of any women to dress the way she wants without attracting unwanted desires. And then you condemn men for picking out figures of women wearing sexy clothes. You obsess over shows like Sex and the City for depicting women in an empowered position. But when men see that show, all they see is four shallow, slutty, shoe shopping, man obsessed, gossipy, but most importantly, TYPICAL - as in fitting all of the most negative sterotypes men have about women. And yet somehow it is empowering. So we just dont get it. "

Quote from this reponse to a post by pandagon regarding the Mary Jane collector's statue ($125).

Okay, lets take this one point at a time, shall we?

1. "Love" is not what men feel for MJ, especially not this depiction. That would be lust, pure and simple.

2. By enclosing the word smart in quotation marks, this person, whose screen name is White Male, is deliberately implying that women in general are not smart at all and that is why there is not equal representation in math and science. That it has nothing to do with decades of socialization, etc.

3. Sexual empowerment & liberation does not equal being objectified. It means that we can be sexual beings who can make their own choices about when, where, how, and with whom. It does not mean that we want to be objects, implying that we are just property to be bought. It is one thing for a man to admire and desire a woman (or even a distorted representation of a woman) it is another for that man to want to OWN said woman, as an object - that said woman is not a person in her own right.

4. Women who like Sex & the City do so because the women depicted are the ones CHOOSING to do what they do. They make their own money, and spend it the way they want. They make their own decisions about who, where, and how to satiate their sexual needs. They are a community of four, who are growing and evolving in their wants and needs through life. Are they "shallow" because they think about themselves?

Please, someone else give me a hand in explaining the HUMAN side of this explanation.

This is the image of the statue in question:

I liked this (quoted on pandagon from feministe in another response) take on the whole issue much better: "When a girl or woman picks up “Wizard” and can’t make it 5 pages in without being grossed out by the softcore and the sexist jokes, or when a woman walks into a comics shop and sees statues like MJ, Emma and Supergirl proudly displayed in a place of honor, and when (as you said) she can’t buy JLA without the Peej cover– or when a woman goes to a website and sees misogynist ads with a woman who’s got a lock over her mouth– more likely than not, she’s going to put down the magazine, walk out of the comics shop, and close the website. If the creators and retailers are okay with the fact that, *to the average person*, they look like a bunch of creepy perverts, then fine– they don’t need to change anything they’re doing.

But I don’t think, judging from the response from DC, that they even realize how bad the Peej cover looks. They really just do not *get* that most people, if you showed them that JLA cover without any context and asked them to guess what the comic is about, and who it’s for, would probably guess “It’s about huge breasts, and it’s for men who want specialty fetish porn about huge breasts.”

They don’t realize *how they look* to people that aren’t familiar enough with the superhero comics industry to know that this crap is just business as usual. *That’s* what makes this a big deal.

The women who got their comments deleted from Sideshow’s website– most of ‘em, I can say with some degree of confidence, are Internet nerds of one stripe or another, and most of them are probably within the target market for Sideshow’s Buffy or LOTR or Star Wars or manga collectibles. Sideshow just spit in their faces. Similarly, the women who left reasonable comments on Quesada’s blog and got those deleted? Yeah, they basically just got told by Marvel’s *Editor-in-Chief* to get the fuck back in the kitchen and make him a sammich.

And for every woman that left a comment and got it deleted, there were probably 20 more lurkers that watched it happen. And again, that’s what makes this a big deal– the fact that a lot of the people who are *really upset* about this *could* have been comics fans, and now probably never will be. I know a lot of people on my livejournal friendslist, mostly women, who have never bought comics before– but lately, they have been going into comics shops to buy the Buffy S8 comics, or the Supernatural prequel comics, or Joss Whedon’s run on “X-Men” or “Runaways.” And I know a lot of people who like the Spider-Man movies, and back when the last movie came out, I was recommending Ultimate Spidey left and right.

But these days, man. I just cringe when I think of a friend of mine walking into a comics store and seeing that Peej cover, or other covers like it. *I love comics*. And I love superhero comics. But some days, they do stuff that’s just indefensible, and I can’t in good conscience recommend DC or Marvel comics to my friends any more. And, yeah, that’s what makes this a big deal."

This is so true. I was a major comic book geek-fan throughout the late 70's and 80's. Life started happening and I fell away from that part of my life, but now I have begun to look back and to check out what's on the shelves at the local stores. When I would occasionally see stuff between then and now, it would all be about the extreme distortion of both male and female physiques. It made a parody of what the human body actually looks like, the story-lines were degraded and overly oriented towards sexualizing and objectifying the women. The dross outweighed the good stuff and made it so I couldn't make myself wade through the morass to get to it either. We will see if I can find anything worth getting hooked enough on this time around to subscribe to.

Another pet peeve: Before, the universe of characters were loosely knit, that way if you just wanted to read ONE series, you could, and not suffer from missing "vital" parts of the story-line. These days, you cannot do that. They cross-market and cross-pollinize their story-lines all over the place. Talk about annoying.
semiotic_pirate: (wild at heart)
WTF?! Self-immolation? GAH! How the hell do you accomplish that? I mean, how does a young teenage girl suffering in a forced marriage, having been beaten and raped repeatedly by her husband... Oh. But really... self-immolation? How is that effective? And why choose something so painful? And then there's the bit about Pakistan and rape victims still being treated like they committed adultery - yeah, blame the victim a little more why don't ya.

Afghan women seek death by fire

Increasing numbers of Afghan women are committing suicide by setting fire to themselves to escape difficult lives, according to NGOs based in the country.

Marjan, 13, has burns across much of her body

They say women forced into marriage or suffering chronic abuse are killing themselves out of desperation.

Although estimates are difficult to make, one group says cases of self-immolation in the capital have doubled since last year.
Read more... )
In other news:

Pakistan's national assembly has voted to amend the country's strict Sharia laws on rape and adultery.

Until now rape cases were dealt with in Sharia courts. Victims had to have four male witnesses to the crime - if not they faced prosecution for adultery.
Read more... )

Women are the only ones who are really persecuted for sex outside of marriage in whatever story I hear coming out of this area of the world. And anyone raping a woman can claim it was consensual and get away with it. Unless four other men witnessed the rape and call it rape. Sheesh.


May. 25th, 2006 12:04 pm
semiotic_pirate: (penguin spy)
[ profile] portia Found this by going to Google and typing in asshole and then clicking I'm Feeling Lucky.

That is just fucking AWESOME!
semiotic_pirate: (STFU!)
A Startling New Lesson in the Power of Imagery
Published: February 8, 2006

Correction Appended

They're callous and feeble cartoons, cooked up as a provocation by a conservative newspaper exploiting the general Muslim prohibition on images of the Prophet Muhammad to score cheap points about freedom of expression.

But drawings are drawings, so a question arises. Have any modern works of art provoked as much chaos and violence as the Danish caricatures that first ran in September in the newspaper Jyllands-Posten?

The story goes back a bit further, to a Danish children's author looking to write a book about the life of Muhammad, in the spirit of religious tolerance, and finding no illustrator because all the artists he approached said they were afraid. In response, the newspaper commissioned these cartoons, a dozen of them, by various satirists. And like all pictures calculated to be noticed by offending somebody, the caricaturist's stock in trade and the oldest trick in the book of modern art, they would have disappeared into deserved oblivion had not their targets risen to the bait.

The newspaper was banking on the fact that unlike the West — where Max Ernst's painting of Mary spanking the infant Jesus didn't raise an eyebrow when recently shown at the Metropolitan Museum — the Muslim world has no tradition of, or tolerance for, religious irony in its art.
Read more... )
So I am supposed to assume that the Danish paper did this on purpose, for their own amusement... To stir the pot, to get a rise out of an already upset with the world's view of itself people? What the hell were they thinking? Did they think that by doing this they would do something akin to breaking down the Berlin Wall? Did they think that by doing this (and it being repeated over and over by other newspapers) that the Islamic people would be less offended? That they would become inured to it all? Well, that is how the modernists have inured the rest of us - keep shocking and the shock begins to wane, must find something else, some other target... Of course, the western world has had a lot longer, being slowly secularized over time so that the pinpricks of, the assaults of the modernist art world no longer sting.

I find it interesting that they make a specific point to let us know that the Syrians are constantly making fun of, printing poisonous racist crap, the Jewish people. Of course, I will get the reply that racist remarks aren't quite as provoking as religious attacks. I guess it all depends on how sensitive the people being attacked are about the subject. However, religion has brought about the worst of the bloodbaths that our world has witnessed - even if some of them are also linked with economic and political gain...
semiotic_pirate: (speak your mind)
*steps up onto the soap box*

First reported here
here and then here,

Now being dissected here,

and reported (officially) here.

Of course it is happening. Of course, in this digital age, soldiers are taking photographs of the carnage that previously we would never have seen and putting it out there for all to see. Proudly putting it out there is what it looks like. Detached from the reality of what they are showing, the horror of it. Desensitized by both training and circumstances... what are they becoming and how are we going to reintigrate their current mindset back into our society? Where is the humanity?


This is why, when I was in NYC and saw some of the original abuse photos on display I had such a visceral reaction. I was a soldier once. I was a Military Police Officer. My unit (while I was in training, I won't try and say I was there and knew what happened) went to Iraq the first time around in Desert Shield/Storm and they were running a POW camp for the many Iraqis who turned themselves in during the famous leaflet releases. It horrifies me still (what happened with England and all that's come since) because I would like to think that I would not have been doing the same thing, but how do I really know? How does anyone know how they will actually react until they are put in the situation themselves?

I recently finished reading Thud! by Terry Pratchett where Commander Vimes defeats the demon of the Summoning Dark that was lurking within him because he had a self-created policeman in his head, to keep him from doing the things that would make him (in his own eyes) into an animal (someone who mistreats prisoners, who uses his/her power for their own good and not for the good of the people, etc...). In the final pages, there is an internal confrontation between the two inside Vimes' head as the Summoning Dark tries to encourage him to kill those who had not only caused the deaths of his city's citizens but threatened to harm his own family during a deliberate attack on them:

cut )

It was because of this inner policeman (which earlier in the book he had thought was present in each person's mind to one degree or another) that whenever he was tempted throughout the book to do something horrible, tempted to do something that would be the quick and dirty way of getting something done by breaking his own laws (internal or external) in order to get either satisfaction or his job done, he was able to pull back and do it in a different way, one that agreed with the internal policeman's way of thinking, and still get the job done. With his sense of humanity intact. And he did this for his own personal ethical code, he did it for family, honor, and duty. Because somebody has to do it, and damn it if they don't do it right.

Do we become no better than the enemy in order to defeat the enemy? Would it have worked in LOTR if those in the Fellowship of the Ring, and all those who supported them were to have used Sauron's own tactics against him?

*steps down off of the soap box*

semiotic_pirate: (PirateWildKate)
The following excerpt was posted on a community I follow and participate in (feminist) and I just thought I would share it (and my comment made on the post) with everyone who so dutifully reads my blog. The bold is the person who posted the stuff to the community, the italics is the stuff (s)he found elsewhere, regular script is my comment.

Side Note: Just went to see The Incredibles again... I love being able to go to the movies for free!! And no, pJammer, I didn't write the number down, sorry. However, check out their official site for lots of kewl downloadable stuff!


Read more... )
semiotic_pirate: (Default)
Many thanks to [ profile] puf_almighty for showing us all the light. The following post seems to me to be good advice. There will always be forward thinkers, those unafraid to step into the future boldly... and those that must be dragged kicking and screaming into it, or rather, cajoled and convinced that change for the better is best for society as a whole so won't you be my neighbor? Heh. Seriously, good post Puff.

Read more... )


semiotic_pirate: (Default)

April 2017

2 345 6 7 8


RSS Atom

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Sep. 24th, 2017 12:16 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios