Like a lot of people in the US of A, I am taking a long weekend. Posting may be a little light for a bit. So here’s an open thread for everyone else taking a long weekend. Or not. Use this thread for anything that’s not personal. Like misogyny, politics, kitties, you know the drill. (Though kitties are welcome in all threads, of course.)
I am hoping my long weekend turns out a bit better than that of the people in the Australian movie of that name from 1978, which I keep meaning to see. Apparently their little beach vacation doesn’t go so well, and they are attacked by … nature? At one point, I believe, they face off against an enraged dugong. (No, really.) The movie was recently remade, but apparently the remake wasn’t as good.
Stay tuned for more reviews of movies I haven’t seen and that I’m just giving vague impressions of based on things I’ve heard somewhere.
RE: CassandraSays
I HATE the bikini armor argument. At least Frazetta had the excuse of putting EVERYONE in loincloths.
But then again, I’m a comic book fan who likes superheroes. The number of absurd mental gymnastics to justify all that fanservice (with a side of “MALE SUPERHEROES ARE EQUALLY OBJECTIFIED”) has just tired me out.
Plus, boobmail channels weapons right to the center of your chest and if you fall focuses all that force onto your sternum. NO THANK YOU.
Especially the “well you just hate sex, and men’s sexuality, you prude”. No, dude, it’s just that I am capable of empathizing with female characters, which leads to things like realizing that a. shit she must be cold, s. metal armor on bare skin in the snow? that’s not going to be fun either, and c. I’m pretty sure she’d rather have some armor that actually works.
So, again, the dudes are objecting to being forced to acknowledge the fact that women are people and not just ambulatory fuck-toys.
I can’t stop grinding my teeth over this thread. It’s first-class tone-trolling, baiting women to respond and then (regardless of what they say) going “See? That’s exactly the sort of thing I’m talking about!”
Has anyone pointed out to that guy that the fact that he’s admitting that his issue with Christian feminist arguments is a purely emotional response that keeps happening even when intellectually he knows they’re right is not exactly great evidence that men are supposed to be in charge because they’re just naturally better designed for it. Someone capable of good leadership would be able to take a step back, give himself time to calm down, and not let his emotions overrule his brain.
RE: CassandraSays
Yeah, the ‘men’s sexuality’ argument is horseshit. I’m male, I have a sexuality, and yet somehow, all those poor widdle straight boys get all knotted up over the idea of MY sexuality being represented in their sandbox. (Or, well, what they THINK my sexuality is like. I’ve nothing against Tom of Finland, but godDAMN do I wish he hadn’t been the Jack Kirby of gay porn art.)
Seriously, sometimes I wonder if those guys ever feel patronized, the sheer amount of pandering they get. But seeing how much they whine at even the slightest hint of their binky being taken away, I doubt it.
RE: katz
No way am I touching that thread.
The one commenter who said abusers are “demonically inspired” damn near made my head explode.
That post is ridiculous.
I didn’t even get to the comments, I got halfway through the initial post, snorted in laughter as the blogger undercut his own argument, and decided not to bother.
O_o
… g-giant hands ….
RE: Falconer
Sure, that too. But mostly inflated pecs, enormous nipples, Brobdignagian dick. God, I wish that guy hadn’t inspired every subsequent gay generation of artists.
Ah, I remember moments like that.
“Okay, you take… 2d8 damage”
“What? I’m wearing a full plate!”
“Yes. Magnificently crafted armor that is, too. That’s completely undamaged. You still take 2d8 blunt force trauma from trying to stop a giants club with your chest.”
—
Also there’s nothing wrong with bikini armor. It’s a fantastic piece of armor for telling rogues exactly where to stab the person wearing it.
—
@That linked thread.
… Is there a prize available for obvious statements about your own fallible reasoning? Good thing no one asks for sources. Maybe the come back could be that this ain’t no dissertation committee.
Utterly off topic, but today’s thing I really didn’t need to start doing? Kirigami. Which is Bad Bad Beans because I already like it more than origami and leave me near paper and I’ll start folding it. But I can do that teeny tiny sized, this…not so much.
I am SO using that in a sentence today.
Sounds like the Jack Kirby of gay porn art is actually the Rob Liefeld of gay porn art.
I shouldn’t think there’s too many examples of Escher women in his work, though.
@Argenti: I looked up kirigami and the illo on Wikipedia looks like someone’s been making gaming dice with business cards. Neat!
Found this via the SFWA controversy…the fuck?
http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00DENSMK0
Cassandra: the fuck is that?
I’m hoping it’s a misguided attempt at satire?
The description makes it sound awful. I’ll go ahead and guess the author knows nothing of Islam or bisexual women. Of course the lead character is bi. OF COURSE. Ugh.
Oh, and not “ugh, bisexuals,” but “ugh, a dude writing a bisexual woman.”
Read his bio and it gets even more weird, which is why I’m thinking that he might have been shooting for satire. He may be one of those people who’s capable of being reasonable on one issue and then turns into a screaming rage-monkey when confronted by another issue that you’d think he would also be reasonable about.
RE: katz
As long as you say this in the most overdramatic Polonius voice ever, I see no problem with that.
RE: Falconer
It’s not even that he’s an incompetent artist. His art style is just viscerally unappealing to me. Not as bad as Robert Crumb, but close.
I dunno, guys, I think my gay is broken. Think if I return it, they’ll issue me a new one?
That last one is a gay version of an Escher Girl. It’s gone beyond exaggerated into arghmakeitstop.
That is the stupidest author bio I’ve ever seen outside of epic self-published ego trips. Note, I have nothing against professional, competent authors who self-publish. I have read and enjoyed many such a book.
There is a niche, however, of books that should never be unleashed upon the public. And this one, which is NOT self-published, seems to be one of them.
(By the way, the googling the publisher brought up some really weird stuff, too.)
They all have such pretty faces (and moustaches, yay!) but urgh, the musclebound look repels me* on real men, so it doesn’t do much artwork-wise, even when it’s realistic. Plus, look at many of the pics and it’s just too much of the same, same, same.
*Yeah I know I’m not in Tom of Finland’s target audience. 🙂
I’m just going…there were editors involved in the decision to publish that book. Someone was commissioned to provide a cover illustration. The publisher presumably has at least one marketing person. How is it that nobody in the chain of hands this idea passed through stopped and said “maybe this isn’t such a good idea for a book”.