Well, technically her people (She's an alien) Don't have a cnudity taboo. Although the sole reason she wears clothes are because she knows humans are a little weirded out by nudity. But still yeah most people are kind of surprised that they found a way to put her in LESS. I must admit it is a feat of sorts!
__________________
"Smart people are very good at rationalizing unsmart ideas"- Michael Shermer (paraphrased)
congratulations DC, you're targeting the male demographic very well. Why don't they do this with the guys??? It's be even more of a feat to make them wear less!
*shot repeatedly* okay okay... so I'm a marvel girl at heart XD Honestly though I think some of DC's artists need to get girlfriends or something...... they say life influences art.
__________________
"The only thing we have to fear is.... fear itself. And spiders!!"
Hey don't get me wrong I love both Marvel and DC. It's just that DC has such potential to tell great stories with their characters and settings. Yet all they want to do is....this Oh Greg Rucka! Why have you forsaken me!?
__________________
"Smart people are very good at rationalizing unsmart ideas"- Michael Shermer (paraphrased)
Evidently the whole body builder fascination is a gay thing. I went to a party with a gay Western relative, and they had some sort of muscle man magazine lying around for guys of that persuasion.
Re: Ryan
I would not have noticed that if it were not for you...
Yeah , it was pinted out to me and I cannot unsee it! Thought I'd share that with the group.
@ Sgeos: Yes, the bodybuilder thing seems to be that way. I actually don't know too many woman who find that kind of over musculature attractive. Erin Eckhart though....whew!
__________________
"Smart people are very good at rationalizing unsmart ideas"- Michael Shermer (paraphrased)
I have met women who have told me they don't like massive muscular guys. I guess I was mildly amused when I found out body building and gyms are actually gay. It is something I have joked about. I still suspect the football team and the coach.
I think they have things down "right" in Asia where excessive masculinity is gay and pretty boys are generally straight. I know enough women who go for the whole metro pretty boy thing.
Well, I think the main this is that it is usually a good idea for gay guys to have visual queues. So that they can indentify eachother. If your straight and in a bar you can hit on a girl worse case you get rejected. For a gay dude the worse case scenario is bashing.
__________________
"Smart people are very good at rationalizing unsmart ideas"- Michael Shermer (paraphrased)
I am a strong believer that there is a time and place for everything and I'm convinced this is more important than visual cues. For example, if you hit on the wrong straight guy's girlfriend at a bar you might be looking at something very close to bashing, depending on the circumstances.
No matter what any individual is going for, there are places set up for it. It's all about selective participation.
Eeeexcept for the fact that there are people who specifically target beating the crap out of gays. It's a totally different culture that frankly, neither of understand.
@Sao: I assume you meant bars. In that case I must agree....although Bats should be avoided as well.
__________________
"Smart people are very good at rationalizing unsmart ideas"- Michael Shermer (paraphrased)
Some crazy thrill seekers are more than happy to accept drinks of unknown origin.
Re: neshta1
I will stick by my time and place theory. There is a location based gay dating iPhone app. Those four words should say it all. (Note that the people who made it had privacy and protection from gay bashers in mind.)
Also, there is an (arranged marriage?) website for polygamists looking to add extra wives to their family. The existing wives are expected to handle the negotiations with the new woman. I suspect the people who run the polygamist marriage website are way more serious about privacy than the gay dating iPhone app people, what with polygamy being illegal and all. You name it, there is a time and place for it. (Notions of "appropriate" are, of course, entirely subjective.)
I supose you are right. You seem to be a very rational person who always looks at things from an intellectual and dispassionate position. I as always jealous of that. Although I might say that your origional comment seemed to say more then what it really did, but written medium.
__________________
"Smart people are very good at rationalizing unsmart ideas"- Michael Shermer (paraphrased)
Try not to compare yourself to other people. Life is not a contest and we all have our own strengths and weaknesses. They are often exactly the same traits.
In any case, the site is called 2wives.com. The name of the site is wild, but these people are actually serious about the whole polygamy thing. I'm all for human rights and private property rights, so I'm cool with the whole polygamy thing if that is what they are going for and there are no incidental human rights violations- often not the case, although part of that is because the practice has been pushed underground.
Unfortunately, there are a lot of people out there who don't believe in consistently uphold people's rights. These people are down with the whole notion of having their own right protected, but they want to infringe on the rights of people they don't understand. Sexual orientation is just one contemporary example, albeit one that has been sensationalized.
....For your third paragraph I think you just described every conservative politician!
Well, it is wise advice to say not to compare oneself to people I wasn't really saying that. What I meant to say is that that is a trait of your that I admire.
Small comment regarding polygamy. If it were all about freedom and doing what you want then women would get to have multiple husbands. But as it stands it seems to be all about women being servants to men. I'm making sweeping generalizations and I'm sure their are polygamous couples that are more open and free. I guess I was just talking about the more fundamental religious people who practice that. I'm sure there are many women who freely choose to do that stuff but I'm also sure there are many others who are told from birth that this kind of thing is the only way to be.
I'm all up ons with the human rights thing, but some of these issues can be super tricky.
__________________
"Smart people are very good at rationalizing unsmart ideas"- Michael Shermer (paraphrased)
Actually, polyandry makes a whole lot more economic sense than polygyny.
One man + tons of wives = single income / tons of children = massive averaging down of individual standard of living. Wives and children literally end up fighting for scarce resources (sometimes even food) in a zero sum game. Man often does not have enough time for individual wives and children.
One woman + tons of husbands = multiple incomes / normal number of children = massive averaging up of individual standard of living. More money for man toys the family group gets to enjoy. More time for dad to play with man toys. Higher dad to child ratio- men generally don't care to invest in other guy's children, but they are happy to take of their own.
I don't think you'd get a lot of takers in either case, but lets compare them:
Single income household (~$50,000 a year), six wives, 36 children. One man to 42 people. He needs to work to keep them alive, so there is not much of him to go around.
Hextuple income household (~$300,000 a year), six husbands, six children. One woman to 12 people. She can definitely be a stay at home mom. Enough of her to go around, although she is going to be one busy (and probably tired) woman.
The polyandrous household, assuming all the men are working and "normal middle class incomes" is not only going to a way higher standard of living than the polygynous household, the combined income rivals that of a CEO! People dismiss polyandry as not going to happen, but people tend to actually like high material standards of living. Much to the disgust of the average upper and middle class, I think we would have a surprising number of polyandrous families if polygamy were legalized.
As far as the fundamentalist groups go... remember that the state, an institution that systematically infringes human rights and private property rights, failed them. So what did they do? They set up a parallel state. Now they get to infringe their own people's rights on their own terms. And they do. Like any "good" theocracy (sarcastic; no such thing), they do it by the book. (Theocracies can start out progressive, but they ultimately wind up behind the times because they do things by the book, whatever the book may be.)
Hahaha! So true Give us the freedom to oppress! That is so ture. Perhaps that is truly what any of these groups want to do: Have the freedom to do what they want but limit everyone else can do.
__________________
"Smart people are very good at rationalizing unsmart ideas"- Michael Shermer (paraphrased)
That is a succinct of summarizing my rambling. Freedom from oppression for me. Freedom to oppress you. Best ride in the park.
Put yourself in a "middle class mindset". Now imagine this. Some people move in across the street. One woman, six men and six children. The woman is married to all of the men, so she can't properly be called a slut or a whore. None of the men make as much money than you, but these people are now living across the street. These people are lower class than you are, but they are living in a nicer house. How does this make you feel?
Sure, but put yourself in the mindset of one of "those people". They would be disgusted. The place "should" be a flophouse, but it isn't because they are married. I have no doubt they would do things like update the fire code to try to get polygamists out of town. The powers that be are very good at passing discriminatory laws that don't use discriminatory language.
No, I totally get what you are saying and if I was one of those people I'd just fume as my stupid, feeble brain would not be devious enough to think of any schemes. But yeah I get what you are saying. People are pretty stupid like that.
__________________
"Smart people are very good at rationalizing unsmart ideas"- Michael Shermer (paraphrased)
I find hypocrisy simultaneously saddening and amusing. Things like zoning laws have the effect of keeping poor people out of sufficiently affluent neighborhoods. Also, values and intelligence are not correlated. There are some smart twisted people out there who will do whatever it takes to make the world a better place for their people.
I never said values and intellegence are coorelated. It is just sad that people are that way. I suppose the only thing one can do is try not to live like that.
__________________
"Smart people are very good at rationalizing unsmart ideas"- Michael Shermer (paraphrased)
The problem is that these kinds of have no problem oppressing other people. One day you are happy minding your own business. The next day they pass a law that makes your business a criminal offense and you are an unconvicted felon.
