The Fight for the Padded Room (NSFW)

[splat]

Seems to me, when it comes to nude photos, all the uproar could be avoided if people saw the human form as natural and beautiful as well as "ho-hum everybody's got one". But what do I know? I suppose that would involve a higher plane of consciousness on everyone's part and that may be asking too much.

I love KQ and I've never even seen her nekkid so, yes, affinity for women here can be non-sexual. Even if I don't have her consent to love her any more than I have the consent of nekkid women whose pics have been posted. Jeeezuz, did some of you say up all night on this shit? The catch-up has been brutal reading thru this crap.

[KQ]

Come on, KQ.

It's no big deal. Post them up.

If it's ok for others, why isnt it ok for you?

One can think it is "no big deal" (again simply speaking to the naked human form) and not feel the desire to share their naked form. .That does not make them a hypocrite. They are simply not a participant. It is much the same as a non-drinker not condemning others who choose to drink.

[willywhit]

Stop being the exact kind of asshole you are complaining about.

zackly....
How can a man look at another man's hairy ass and say "I gotta have me some of THAT!" - Andrew Dice Clay"

with all due respect to my gay friends. The fairer sex gets me all fired up in the loins, can't help it

[MagnificentUnicorn]

Wild guess she doesn't care about your feigned respect.

Just maybe, she's not interested in taking and posting naked pictures of herself. Not everyone feels the need to feed the narcissistic supply.

[KQ]

Just maybe, she's not interested in taking and posting naked pictures of herself. Not everyone feels the need to feed the narcissistic supply.

Hell, I've never even taken a selfie.

[mtngirl79]

One can think it is "no big deal" (again simply speaking to the naked human form) and not feel the desire to share their naked form. .That does not make them a hypocrite. They are simply not a participate. It is much the same as a non-drinker not condemning others who choose to drink.

Not when the "non participant" is supporting the unwilling and unknowing participation of others.

You are saying, hey, it's a human body, no big deal if you have consent or not.. hey it's just a human body if you have to explain pictures to your boss or kids or parents.

No big deal for you, but I don't want to participate.

[splat]

Are you fucking kidding? Sure, if we lived in a world like that. We dont. We live in a land of slut shaming and judgement and victim blaming.

It's real hohum to have to explain your sex life to your boss or your parents or in-laws or teenage children...

Really?

I guess if you post threads about your std's, that explaining is on you and is your fault. Your struggles are of your own doing.
Your issues are confused with a sense of morality as a cover.

[Danno]

I'm still trying to figure out what's really driving the defense in here. Maybe it's an intense hatred of mtngirl or maybe it really is the topic at hand, just seems an interesting hill to die on either way.

I think it's both. And a healthy dislike of change. And it's the fact that she out of the blue chose to erect the hill, and say "you either concede the hill or die on it". As I noted before, she comes in here and tilts at windmills over and over, complaining about how evil men are and how evil the men in this place are, and this week she did it again, except she found an angle that has more traction.

And some of us resent the way she constantly characterizes us. See this post for explanation. FFS, she said I'm as bad as Harvey Weinstein because of my posts in here. And yet she doesn't know a damn thing about me or how I treat people, it's just because I have the audacity to have a different opinion than her about what to do, even if we both agree that pictures posted without consent is bad (note that I am not even one of those who say that as soon as you let someone take the picture, tough luck it is on you).

[Viva]

Stop being the exact kind of asshole you are complaining about.

Coming from you, this really means something.

Sent from my XT1650 using TGR Forums mobile app

[Danno]

I think most people agree with her stance on the victimization of women but she internalizes it all and lacks the ability to be objective about it because she believes that she's a victim, rightly so in the case of her father and CSW. For the most part she's preaching to the choir and doesn't realize that her approach to these issues isn't compatible with a reasonable dialogue. Of course there are those here that aggravate this problem and that is how we arrived where we now stand.

agree.

[MagnificentUnicorn]

Not when the "non participant" is supporting the unwilling and unknowing participation of others.

You are saying, hey, it's a human body, no big deal if you have consent or not.. hey it's just a human body if you have to explain pictures to your boss or kids or parents.

No big deal for you, but I don't want to participate.

I don't recall her saying that at all. She's talking about the perception of nudity in society and the implication, conflating what she posts because of your dislike and jealousy of her is disingenuous.

[KQ]

Not when the "non participant" is supporting the unwilling and unknowing participation of others.

You are saying, hey, it's a human body, no big deal if you have consent or not.. hey it's just a human body if you have to explain pictures to your boss or kids or parents.

No big deal for you, but I don't want to participate.

I have stated multiple time I am only talking about how people perceive the human form. I am speaking to nothing else.

[MagnificentUnicorn]

I don't know how this contradicts what I said if it's supposed to.

I was agreeing with you.

[mtngirl79]

I think it's both. And a healthy dislike of change. And it's the fact that she out of the blue chose to erect the hill, and say "you either concede the hill or die on it". As I noted before, she comes in here and tilts at windmills over and over, complaining about how evil men are and how evil the men in this place are, and this week she did it again, except she found an angle that has more traction.

And some of us resent the way she constantly characterizes us. See this post for explanation. FFS, she said I'm as bad as Harvey Weinstein because of my posts in here. And yet she doesn't know a damn thing about me or how I treat people, it's just because I have the audacity to have a different opinion than her about what to do, even if we both agree that pictures posted without consent is bad (note that I am not even one of those who say that as soon as you let someone take the picture, tough luck it is on you).

I did not say you were as bad as weinstien. I said this is why Weinstein got away with it for so long.

Because many men think their desire to enjoy their pictures supersedes the right of women not to be on display without their consent.

In your case, I'm baffled because I thought more highly of you.

Actually, I think some of you honestly do not understand.

[wyeaster]

Not trying to speak for their experience and the emotional toll. Just trying to speak to objective impacts and relaying what I have heard from women anecdotally who have gone through this sort of thing.

he's just being thorough and making sure you don't have any weird allegiance or agenda before you speak about something so commonplace among women you undoubtedly know many who have dealt with it and maybe even actually talked with them about it.

we musn't have any illegitimate speakers of factual thoughts!

[FLS]

On one hand, I don't want her to post herself up because that would prove me wrong.

On the other, it would be fucking awesome and I would have a ton more respect for her if she did.

Whoa. Slow your roll there. Take her out to dinner or at least buy her a drink for starters.

[wyeaster]

Following up on KQ's points: A few years ago I heard Gloria Steinem, one of history's great champions of women's rights, on NPR's Fresh Air. Steinem spoke of the distinction between erotica (which celebrates the human form and lovemaking) and pornography (which demeans the female human form and fucking). Steinem said she sometimes views erotica and enjoys it, while she abhors pornography. Her argument was lucid and persuasive.

Not all nudity is pornography. Indeed, most nudity is not pornography. Our culture's collective repression and puritanical shaming of our natural naked state enables pornographers. When we view the female form as beautiful and something to be celebrated and admired, we disarm the pornographers.

Of course, the line between erotica and pornography is a subjective one, thus there's no practicable way to construct a rule allowing the former and banning the latter.

ETA: Link to Gloria Steinem's article entitled Erotica and Pornography: A Clear and Present Difference, first published in Ms. Magazine: http://www.angelfire.com/sc3/ws301/html/steinem.html

cool story, bro. this is a ski site.

[mtngirl79]

I don't recall her saying that at all. She's talking about the perception of nudity in society and the implication, conflating what she posts because of your dislike and jealousy of her is disingenuous.

She is providing arguments in support of the creeper pictures.

[Mazderati]

No, she's not. More vitriolic hyperbole.

[mtngirl79]

I have stated multiple time I am only talking about how people perceive the human form. I am speaking to nothing else.

Ok. Where do you stand on sharing nude pictures where consent is unclear?

[TAFKALVS]

Suggestion: going forward, all Plea to Ullr images must be done with the lady in question holding/wearing a BBI Sticker or a sign card stating "Ullr be praised" with the date. That's how Reddit does it in the gonewild boards to verify authenticity, which is a similar premise.

That should essentially cover any consent issues, verify the images are real and also capture the spirit of the original plea to Ullr photo set.

[GeezerSteve]

cool story, bro. this is a ski site.

No, this is MG's windmill tilting site

[PNWbrit]

Suggestion: going forward, all Plea to Ullr images must be done with the lady in question holding/wearing a BBI Sticker or a sign card stating "Ullr be praised" with the date. That's how Reddit does it in the gonewild boards to verify authenticity, which is a similar premise.

That should essentially cover any consent issues, verify the images are real and also capture the spirit of the original plea to Ullr photo set.

Sensible solution to the consent issue.

[mtngirl79]

Suggestion: going forward, all Plea to Ullr images must be done with the lady in question holding/wearing a BBI Sticker or a sign card stating "Ullr be praised" with the date. That's how Reddit does it in the gonewild boards to verify authenticity, which is a similar premise.

I would be satisfied with this provided a photo of the subject looking at the camera or obviously holding the sign/stickers that was obviously taken at the same time/location as the others was included and if there was ever even a tiny question of photoshopping in the required sign the pictures would be removed.

[splat]

Whoa. Slow your roll there. Take her out to dinner or at least buy her a drink for starters.

Don't you know such actions are simply a prelude to rape, std's and internet photos w/o consent?