General Discussion

LostOne4Ever

(9,732 posts)

133. I completely agree that there are indeed people like that

Thu Jun 4, 2015, 02:45 AM

Jun 2015

Last edited Thu Jun 4, 2015, 04:21 AM - Edit history (1)

[font style="font-family:'Georgia','Baskerville Old Face','Helvetica',fantasy;" size=4 color=teal]And then there are those who fight to oppose them.

One of the better liberal feminist sites I came across has article after article rejecting those who try and cover their transphobia with pseudo-progressivism.

Here are a few of their articles:[/font]

http://everydayfeminism.com/2014/02/trans-inclusive-feminist-movement/

http://everydayfeminism.com/2014/01/transmisogyny/

http://everydayfeminism.com/2014/11/misconceptions-trans-ally-understand/

[font style="font-family:'Georgia','Baskerville Old Face','Helvetica',fantasy;" size=4 color=teal]I don't agree with everything on their site, but I have found a lot of great articles on issues transgender people face, including the transphobia of MWMF.

And again, my comment was to the false equivalency between the SI cover and the VF cover. This feels like we are getting offtopic. I made no comment about Ms Cox. She is a transwoman, the woman/women from the SI cover have not disclosed themselves as being trans to my knowledge, so again I don't feel that is in anyway a fair comparison.[/font]

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

133 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

How is the current cover of Vanity Fair any different than the swimsuit edition of SI? [View all] TerrapinFlyer Jun 2015 OP

I don't think there's anything wrong with anyone choosing to display their body on a magazine cover Warren DeMontague Jun 2015 #1

Hmmm... This could get good Gman Jun 2015 #2

Of course there's nothing wrong with either. People just don't get that. Nt Logical Jun 2015 #3

Let's see the answers. RiffRandell Jun 2015 #4

so you're not sure what the difference is between Caitlyn Jenner's magazine cover geek tragedy Jun 2015 #37

We subscribe to 2 out of 3 you mentioned and Penthouse isn't one. RiffRandell Jun 2015 #59

you apparently missed the entire point of the Caitlyn Jenner cover geek tragedy Jun 2015 #60

I don't consider VF or SI regardless of the swimsuit issue RiffRandell Jun 2015 #63

the OP was flamebait wallowing in false equivalencies geek tragedy Jun 2015 #67

What a rude post. RiffRandell Jun 2015 #69

Some people are control freaks AgingAmerican Jun 2015 #70

and that's, basically, the bottom line. Warren DeMontague Jun 2015 #88

"it had no point other than to "nyah nyah nyah" at feminists" TerrapinFlyer Jun 2015 #114

No, there is no hypocrisy, that is the point. geek tragedy Jun 2015 #115

Referring SI as a T&A magazine shows your ignorance in advertising and marketing TerrapinFlyer Jun 2015 #116

Yeah, the SI swimsuit cover with three models pointing their ass cheeks geek tragedy Jun 2015 #117

So you are the judge for what is art?????? TerrapinFlyer Jun 2015 #120

You're free to insist your precious skin mags are 'art' and equal to geek tragedy Jun 2015 #124

"precious skin mags"... yeah. It is very clear where your mind is at. TerrapinFlyer Jun 2015 #127

This message was self-deleted by its author geek tragedy Jun 2015 #128

Why cant art and social consciousness be about sex and sexuality? Warren DeMontague Jun 2015 #121

They can be and often are. geek tragedy Jun 2015 #122

I wouldnt know Warren DeMontague Jun 2015 #123

"itchy fingers" Warren DeMontague Jun 2015 #112

Well I think ornotna Jun 2015 #5

I don't see the similarity fishwax Jun 2015 #6

Well, they are both massively Photoshopped Kelvin Mace Jun 2015 #7

This post was alerted on. I cannot imagine why. guillaumeb Jun 2015 #8

I can. Warren DeMontague Jun 2015 #15

You don't need much of an imagination either Major Nikon Jun 2015 #19

Predictable ProudToBeBlueInRhody Jun 2015 #20

The polite thing to do is post the results Capt. Obvious Jun 2015 #30

Done. guillaumeb Jun 2015 #82

The amount of skin revealed is quite different. WinkyDink Jun 2015 #9

Some people got really mad about Laverne Cox posing nearly nude for Allure, too. Warren DeMontague Jun 2015 #10

I have the context for you... CTyankee Jun 2015 #68

My point is, if Caitlyn Jenner, Laverne Cox, or anyone else chooses to take some or all of their Warren DeMontague Jun 2015 #85

what is difficult is that we are talking about both aesthetic issues and political issues. CTyankee Jun 2015 #90

I would also like to ask you again about the context of the ancient Indian art you posted. CTyankee Jun 2015 #92

A lot of ancient cultures didn't have the distinction between sexuality and the sacred, that we do. Warren DeMontague Jun 2015 #95

I have absolutely no distinction between sexuality and the sacred. CTyankee Jun 2015 #96

Meaning is subjective, isn't it? Warren DeMontague Jun 2015 #97

"deeply felt lust" is not the question to me. CTyankee Jun 2015 #99

I think one of the biggest objections to the definition of "art" as it stands today Warren DeMontague Jun 2015 #100

and it is ever thus. Look at the history of art and you see how this is played out. CTyankee Jun 2015 #103

Absolutely. Warren DeMontague Jun 2015 #104

I am fascinated by the implications of Pollack's "Full Fathom Five" and Johns "Flag". CTyankee Jun 2015 #107

Sure, and Magritte is getting at something pretty fundamental with that "pipe" that is not a pipe. Warren DeMontague Jun 2015 #108

"How is the current cover of Vanity Fair any different than the swimsuit edition of SI?" Snobblevitch Jun 2015 #11

Good answer Person 2713 Jun 2015 #58

Jenner is an actual sports figure JI7 Jun 2015 #12

And Vanity Fair is anything but a Sports Magazine. Warren DeMontague Jun 2015 #14

Nothing is wrong with either of them. peecoolyour Jun 2015 #13

Didn't the SI swimsuit model look as if she was about to rub one out? WorseBeforeBetter Jun 2015 #16

The big DU battle over the SI cover took place with the '14 issue IIRC Warren DeMontague Jun 2015 #18

Followed by the Kate Upton zero-G video -- it was just too much for DU. aikoaiko Jun 2015 #32

Fond memory! Nt Logical Jun 2015 #40

Ah, right, Thong-gate. Or whatever it was called. (n/t) WorseBeforeBetter Jun 2015 #110

Just looked at both covers. LuvLoogie Jun 2015 #17

This article might clarify a bit ismnotwasm Jun 2015 #21

Why do you bring this up? cui bono Jun 2015 #22

"The SI issues will cause men to jerk off". Nailed it, right there. Nye Bevan Jun 2015 #25

Not me pintobean Jun 2015 #33

Apparently now masturbation is another cultural crisis. Warren DeMontague Jun 2015 #98

LOL snooper2 Jun 2015 #44

Was the SI cover featuring a transwoman/transwomen? LostOne4Ever Jun 2015 #23

^^^^^ This. Iggo Jun 2015 #26

+1000000000000000 nailed it. Thread over. nt geek tragedy Jun 2015 #38

Well said! City Lights Jun 2015 #42

+1,000,000 cui bono Jun 2015 #74

Thank you Warpy Jun 2015 #77

much better questions than the OP Kali Jun 2015 #78

Then why did the same anti-nudity, pro-censorship people bodyshame Laverne Cox? Warren DeMontague Jun 2015 #101

"I think being proud of ones' sex, sexuality, and sexiness is an unqualified good ...." prayin4rain Jun 2015 #105

I think as far as the '14 SI issue went, the 3 women on the beach looked pretty happy to be there. Warren DeMontague Jun 2015 #106

Agreed and I have a new annoyance busting mental mantra, thanks! haha n/t prayin4rain Jun 2015 #109

I remember this song from the kids' CDs I used to have playing constantly Warren DeMontague Jun 2015 #111

Awesomeness prayin4rain Jun 2015 #113

Anyone who does that is wrong LostOne4Ever Jun 2015 #118

In the Ms. Cox photoshoot, she's pretty much entirely nude. Warren DeMontague Jun 2015 #119

I completely agree that there are indeed people like that LostOne4Ever Jun 2015 #133

This was already discussed in that thread. prayin4rain Jun 2015 #24

Every magazine portrays the cover model as a commodity. Orrex Jun 2015 #27

Most fashion magazine covers try to commodify the idea that prayin4rain Jun 2015 #41

I'm reluctant to re-hash the various SI threads, but a different interpretation is possible. Orrex Jun 2015 #51

The promotion of the idea that women are for sex and/or male entertainment prayin4rain Jun 2015 #57

Lots to unpack there. Orrex Jun 2015 #71

So full of off topic strawmen, I can't see any point in responding. n/t prayin4rain Jun 2015 #73

It's clear that it's easier for you to see it that way. Orrex Jun 2015 #75

A good majority of your post is about the male and female prayin4rain Jun 2015 #76

Then you need to define "pornorgraphy" Orrex Jun 2015 #79

Whether it is a tiny sliver of the regular pornography prayin4rain Jun 2015 #80

Well, then it's simple Orrex Jun 2015 #89

Yep, and I don't consent to look, so get it off the grocery store prayin4rain Jun 2015 #91

You're kidding, right? Orrex Jun 2015 #93

I can't know that is there without looking. Also, my child isn't a grown up. n/t prayin4rain Jun 2015 #94

When I made that same point upthread, you called it a straw man and ignored it Orrex Jun 2015 #125

Context is not your strong suit. n/t prayin4rain Jun 2015 #129

Nor is logic yours. Orrex Jun 2015 #131

Haha, ok. n/t prayin4rain Jun 2015 #132

You have nailed it, prayin! But I have done further thinking on this... CTyankee Jun 2015 #28

One major difference between these two trios and the one on the SI issue in 2014 KitSileya Jun 2015 #46

I remember the 2014 cover. Warren DeMontague Jun 2015 #52

I know little about ancient Indian art, but is this the sacred art of the temple? CTyankee Jun 2015 #62

Ah, I see you missed it. KitSileya Jun 2015 #64

sure. Warren DeMontague Jun 2015 #84

What Bernini did in sculpture with the "Rape of Persephone" is another example of what art CTyankee Jun 2015 #86

It is so interesting....the role of context, perspective and experience prayin4rain Jun 2015 #49

Duchamp's Fountain differed from Warhol's Brillo boxes and soup cans in one important way. CTyankee Jun 2015 #61

Interesting read, thanks! n/t prayin4rain Jun 2015 #66

Thank you. +1 nt. NCTraveler Jun 2015 #48

Jon Stewart addressed this a bit last night. Erich Bloodaxe BSN Jun 2015 #29

When considering the SI cover art, please read my post #28. CTyankee Jun 2015 #31

It was done to show Jenner treestar Jun 2015 #34

It is quite an interesting photo. I think Liebovitz did a fine job of displaying CTyankee Jun 2015 #39

I was also put in mind of old swimsuit pinup graphics. The sort that would be called "erotic" KittyWampus Jun 2015 #43

Liebovitz has a cred/reputation too treestar Jun 2015 #45

Do you remember the photo she did of a naked John Lennon curling up with Yoko, CTyankee Jun 2015 #83

"just want to throw some hypocrisy in a few faces" geek tragedy Jun 2015 #35

Photoshop is evil Democat Jun 2015 #36

People can't be this stupid. NCTraveler Jun 2015 #47

It's just bait. If the OP actually wants to LEARN there are certainly enough non-dense people in seaglass Jun 2015 #50

people can get all deeply wrought out about a magazine cover showing 3 women smiling on a beach Warren DeMontague Jun 2015 #54

Unfortunately, the op really doesn't surprise me much either. nt. NCTraveler Jun 2015 #55

My comments have been limited to the question of whether the SI cover was just as much CTyankee Jun 2015 #65

People also seem to milk that scenario for all it's worth in order to continue validating their bias LanternWaste Jun 2015 #72

what do you have against dairy farmers? Warren DeMontague Jun 2015 #87

Socks can. NuclearDem Jun 2015 #81

THAT CAT IS STILL ALIVE? Warren DeMontague Jun 2015 #102

When Sports Illustrated does a cover of a 65 year old actual athlete in a one piece, call me. Bluenorthwest Jun 2015 #53

not for me I don't read or look at either magazine olddots Jun 2015 #56

If you want to sell magazines ... this is how you do it. YOHABLO Jun 2015 #126

Larry Wilmore pointed out that Caitlin Jenner was the oldest woman to ever appear on the cover of VF applegrove Jun 2015 #130