Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Another nude sports figure pointlessly objectified on a magazine cover [View all]msanthrope
(37,549 posts)155. I'm asking you, since you brought it up. I'll be happy to share my opinion of Orrex after you tell
us which of the four he represents.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
292 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
I think if people of any gender want to get naked and other people want to see those people naked
Warren DeMontague
May 2014
#21
"Most people are fundamentally selfish and entirely unwilling to examine issues...
antiquie
May 2014
#105
I've yet to hear a good answer on how it's even possible to exploit someone at $10,000 per day
Major Nikon
May 2014
#40
See, this how these conversations morph. Of course there is interest in women.
R B Garr
May 2014
#128
Sad that he goes for the pre-pubescent look. (P.S. Look closely--it's a Spanish mag, so there's no
WinkyDink
May 2014
#76
That SI cover was a long time ago. Did it take you this long (and I notice you had to go global)
Squinch
May 2014
#77
Yeah, he definitely needed to be posed in a man thong with his ass to the camera. I wonder
seaglass
May 2014
#79
I don't know who all the people are who are against it but there is some reason why
seaglass
May 2014
#206
Not sure how you found snark in my post, because there was none. But let me repeat my points:
Squinch
May 2014
#173
I read your post. Essentially you'd rather the discussion be about empathy instead.
alp227
May 2014
#242
When sexualized imagery is as constant as it is, and when it portrays only one
Squinch
May 2014
#195
I'm asking you, since you brought it up. I'll be happy to share my opinion of Orrex after you tell
msanthrope
May 2014
#155
well I say..mmmmmmmmmmmm mmmmmmmmmmmm & I wish that irrelevant person in the sheet
misterhighwasted
May 2014
#95
Apparently, we're going with "but that's DIFFERENT!!!1!!!!!" with no followup or explanation. nt
Romulox
May 2014
#100
I think you might have missed all the posts that said, "Yes, it's exactly the same kind
Squinch
May 2014
#191
I don't see ANY of the "social justice" brigade throwing a fit, so I'm calling hypocrisy. nt
Romulox
May 2014
#213
That poster honestly isn't who I had in mind. I doubt the sincerity of others on this issue. nt
Romulox
May 2014
#223
I wonder if the bank felt objectified, when those two took their big fat checks there for
Cleita
May 2014
#172
If this post is meant to somehow imply that concern over the objectification of women
Maedhros
May 2014
#184
Different. Different. DIFFERENT!!!1!1!!!. (You are also "anti-intellectual" for noticing.) nt
Romulox
May 2014
#217
They've DOMINATED this board with whining about THIS VERY issue. Now radio silence? nt
Romulox
May 2014
#214
This anti-intellectual shit stirring op is proof that they alone do not.....
NCTraveler
May 2014
#215
Thanks for pointing out the blatantly obvious to the deliberately obtuse.
Tuesday Afternoon
May 2014
#218
what makes it even more ironically hilarious is the post below this one.
Tuesday Afternoon
May 2014
#228
Diego Simeone and Athletico are about to undress and expose C.Ronaldo completely later today
Blue_Tires
May 2014
#291