- Joined
- Nov 24, 2008
- Messages
- 11,998
- Reputation score
- 431
Re: Images of Wonder Truth and Fear...
Aren't Australians supposed to be irreverent?
Aren't Australians supposed to be irreverent?
Images of Wonder Truth and Fear...
- Thread starter Unknown Squid
- Start date
Host
Lurker
- Joined
- Mar 28, 2009
- Messages
- 1,765
- Reputation score
- 135
Re: Images of Wonder Truth and Fear...
Supposed to be, indeed. In some areas we could serve to be considerably moreso, but I'm not going to start whining about nanny-states when we (at least seem) to be ahead of most of the other English speaking countries I can name when it comes to surveilling our own people. ...Let alone in the images thread.
EDIT: I'm not sure how assuming the statement to be based on clothes really helps the interpretation of the joke much. If we're talking equipped in the direct sense, then we're comparing unlike things (skill vs. possession) again. If he's inferring from dress that the reporter has the skills of a prostitute... that's essentially just a more significantly sexist insult than the original interpretation. Unless you're operating under the belief that the primary skill for successful prostitution is direct physical attractiveness? That would make the comparison difficult, since physical attractiveness is only partially due to learned skills, but...
Incubus! We can't form a conclusion on incomplete information. Go, get me some relevant data regarding the primary skill affecting success in prostitution! One-thousand test-case samples should be a decent enough basis for our purposes.
Of less importance; "You're female, and thus a whore" as you said earlier is essentially impossible to extrapolate as a legitimate interpretation of the man's closing words. Rather than a definitive quantifier, it should be 'have the ability to be'. And 'female' is debatable... it isn't specified in the statement, which could well be applied to any other human above the age of consent.
Supposed to be, indeed. In some areas we could serve to be considerably moreso, but I'm not going to start whining about nanny-states when we (at least seem) to be ahead of most of the other English speaking countries I can name when it comes to surveilling our own people. ...Let alone in the images thread.
EDIT: I'm not sure how assuming the statement to be based on clothes really helps the interpretation of the joke much. If we're talking equipped in the direct sense, then we're comparing unlike things (skill vs. possession) again. If he's inferring from dress that the reporter has the skills of a prostitute... that's essentially just a more significantly sexist insult than the original interpretation. Unless you're operating under the belief that the primary skill for successful prostitution is direct physical attractiveness? That would make the comparison difficult, since physical attractiveness is only partially due to learned skills, but...
Incubus! We can't form a conclusion on incomplete information. Go, get me some relevant data regarding the primary skill affecting success in prostitution! One-thousand test-case samples should be a decent enough basis for our purposes.
Of less importance; "You're female, and thus a whore" as you said earlier is essentially impossible to extrapolate as a legitimate interpretation of the man's closing words. Rather than a definitive quantifier, it should be 'have the ability to be'. And 'female' is debatable... it isn't specified in the statement, which could well be applied to any other human above the age of consent.
Last edited:
Unnatural Kiwi
Sex Demon
- Joined
- May 6, 2011
- Messages
- 290
- Reputation score
- 41
Re: Images of Wonder Truth and Fear...
I simply took it as they (as in both sides) both have the possibiliy to be such things, but that doesn't make it so.
*sigh* I apologize if I ruffled your feathers with that. I wasn't aware it was fake. Hell, I don't even know of those others you mentioned. Plus, the gun = violent killer drama bothers me, so her making a big fuss about it helped that line along.
I simply took it as they (as in both sides) both have the possibiliy to be such things, but that doesn't make it so.
Last edited:
OP
Unknown Squid
Aurani's Wife
- Joined
- Nov 10, 2008
- Messages
- 3,256
- Reputation score
- 314
Re: Images of Wonder Truth and Fear...
You guys make things too complicated. It's nothing to do with clothes or anything like that.
He (the fictitious general) never called or implied the interviewer to be a prostitute. He specifically said the opposite, even. Which is kinda the whole point.
The simple gist behind it is that possessing the 'equipment' (regardless of the time it is held for or where it comes from) to do a certain thing or commit an act, does not automatically mean that you do so, or become that kind of person.
The same intended message could have been put across with something along the lines of...
"Well, you're equipped to be be a road rage hit and run murderer/crazed strangler/knife maniac, but you're not one, are you?"
or any other similar thing, that a person could be said to be potentially capable of. Knife maniac might be a much closer comparison even, but using the comparison of being technically equipped for prostitution, yet not being one, has a lot more punch, for the very reason it's being discussed here.
It draws on the taboo of sexism or misogyny, to deliver a point, without technically, actually being sexist or misogynistic. It's using a "by your logic then" argument, to have the fictional interviewer call herself a prostitute, and be forced to argue with her own logic. One of those "brutally fair" kind of things. Implying the interviewer to actually be or seem like a prostitute in any way other than using her own words, would undermine the General's entire point. The element of personal jab delivered alongside it seems justified to me, given that the interviewer made the first shot in implying the General and his students to be "violent killers".
Whether the general would have compared a male interviewer to a jigalo or not, would be debatable, but that would only reflect on the character of the fictitious general, not the actual message.
You guys make things too complicated. It's nothing to do with clothes or anything like that.
He (the fictitious general) never called or implied the interviewer to be a prostitute. He specifically said the opposite, even. Which is kinda the whole point.
The simple gist behind it is that possessing the 'equipment' (regardless of the time it is held for or where it comes from) to do a certain thing or commit an act, does not automatically mean that you do so, or become that kind of person.
The same intended message could have been put across with something along the lines of...
"Well, you're equipped to be be a road rage hit and run murderer/crazed strangler/knife maniac, but you're not one, are you?"
or any other similar thing, that a person could be said to be potentially capable of. Knife maniac might be a much closer comparison even, but using the comparison of being technically equipped for prostitution, yet not being one, has a lot more punch, for the very reason it's being discussed here.
It draws on the taboo of sexism or misogyny, to deliver a point, without technically, actually being sexist or misogynistic. It's using a "by your logic then" argument, to have the fictional interviewer call herself a prostitute, and be forced to argue with her own logic. One of those "brutally fair" kind of things. Implying the interviewer to actually be or seem like a prostitute in any way other than using her own words, would undermine the General's entire point. The element of personal jab delivered alongside it seems justified to me, given that the interviewer made the first shot in implying the General and his students to be "violent killers".
Whether the general would have compared a male interviewer to a jigalo or not, would be debatable, but that would only reflect on the character of the fictitious general, not the actual message.
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2008
- Messages
- 6,983
- Reputation score
- 434
Re: Images of Wonder Truth and Fear...
Peter Cosgrove was an actual person, and an actual general in Australia. So while the Welsh and American versions both used fake personas, the Australian version put the words up to an actual person, who never said such things.
Regardless of what he meant, it's a fake story, meant for some humour. It was a crass joke, trying to get across some basic political theory, and sorry Squid but the joke is a bit sexist, as I doubt that it would never ever come up with a male reporter equivalent. Calling giving a person a rifle the equivalent of being born with a vagina is not on equal footing. Ever.
Peter Cosgrove was an actual person, and an actual general in Australia. So while the Welsh and American versions both used fake personas, the Australian version put the words up to an actual person, who never said such things.
Regardless of what he meant, it's a fake story, meant for some humour. It was a crass joke, trying to get across some basic political theory, and sorry Squid but the joke is a bit sexist, as I doubt that it would never ever come up with a male reporter equivalent. Calling giving a person a rifle the equivalent of being born with a vagina is not on equal footing. Ever.
- Joined
- Nov 24, 2008
- Messages
- 11,998
- Reputation score
- 431
Re: Images of Wonder Truth and Fear...
So you think being a prostitute is on equal footing with being a murderer?
So you think being a prostitute is on equal footing with being a murderer?
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2008
- Messages
- 6,983
- Reputation score
- 434
Re: Images of Wonder Truth and Fear...
No. And again, this was fake. A joke established for the punchline alone.
No. And again, this was fake. A joke established for the punchline alone.
OP
Unknown Squid
Aurani's Wife
- Joined
- Nov 10, 2008
- Messages
- 3,256
- Reputation score
- 314
Re: Images of Wonder Truth and Fear...
Didn't know the person was a real guy (other than the photo of course). Pretty bad putting words in someone's mouth if that's the case. It is a particular hate of mine, being misrepresented.
And I was only arguing on the way the message put itself across, since even as a joke and whether intended for or containing humour, it clearly has that extra intent behind it. Punchlines carry political nudges probably as often as not.
Hmm.
(Excuse me for persisting and feel free to ignore if you like, but I'm fussy about being thorough with anything I start.)
As for being sexist, will admit, yes, kind of, but not in any way I feel should be able to offend someone that didn't buy into the interviewers flawed logic.
You could say that the gender part of it is taken advantage of for effect, but that's all it is really. A convenient shock line for getting the point across harder, along with hitting the individual (not the gender) on a slightly more personal level. The speaker themself may or may not have any misogynistic undertones behind saying it, but the line itself isn't objectively sexist.
Compare the examples of if a woman had said the same line to another woman (far less likely, but entirely possible, can't be discounted). Exact same words, that would be passed off as one woman making a jab at the other. Wouldn't be called sexist. The only part that's lost would be the audience assuming it's said with misogynistic intent (The interviewer would still be hit the same however, if not harder). So claiming that a man saying it inherently makes it sexist, seems like assumption on his intent, and doesn't seem right to me.
I had a bit to say regarding whether comparing a given capability to a natural born capability, is a valid comparison or not, but feel like I'm rambling.
[Edit]
Concluded in shoutbox.
Didn't know the person was a real guy (other than the photo of course). Pretty bad putting words in someone's mouth if that's the case. It is a particular hate of mine, being misrepresented.
And I was only arguing on the way the message put itself across, since even as a joke and whether intended for or containing humour, it clearly has that extra intent behind it. Punchlines carry political nudges probably as often as not.
Hmm.
(Excuse me for persisting and feel free to ignore if you like, but I'm fussy about being thorough with anything I start.)
As for being sexist, will admit, yes, kind of, but not in any way I feel should be able to offend someone that didn't buy into the interviewers flawed logic.
You could say that the gender part of it is taken advantage of for effect, but that's all it is really. A convenient shock line for getting the point across harder, along with hitting the individual (not the gender) on a slightly more personal level. The speaker themself may or may not have any misogynistic undertones behind saying it, but the line itself isn't objectively sexist.
Compare the examples of if a woman had said the same line to another woman (far less likely, but entirely possible, can't be discounted). Exact same words, that would be passed off as one woman making a jab at the other. Wouldn't be called sexist. The only part that's lost would be the audience assuming it's said with misogynistic intent (The interviewer would still be hit the same however, if not harder). So claiming that a man saying it inherently makes it sexist, seems like assumption on his intent, and doesn't seem right to me.
I had a bit to say regarding whether comparing a given capability to a natural born capability, is a valid comparison or not, but feel like I'm rambling.
[Edit]
Concluded in shoutbox.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Nov 10, 2008
- Messages
- 11,239
- Reputation score
- 1,017
Re: Images of Wonder Truth and Fear...
Found some Disney-inspired artwork I thought I'd share
"Twisted Princesses" by Jeffrey Thomas
Wendy
Maid Marian
Esmeralda
Rapunzel
Tiana
Kidagakash
Megara
Alice
Mulan
Nala
Jane
Pocahontas
Aurora (Sleeping Beauty)
Cinderella
Jasmine
Belle
Ariel
Snow White
The Blue Fairy
Found some Disney-inspired artwork I thought I'd share
"Twisted Princesses" by Jeffrey Thomas
Wendy
Maid Marian
Esmeralda
Rapunzel
Tiana
Kidagakash
Megara
Alice
Mulan
Nala
Jane
Pocahontas
Aurora (Sleeping Beauty)
Cinderella
Jasmine
Belle
Ariel
Snow White
The Blue Fairy
TentanariX
Lurker
- Joined
- Dec 6, 2009
- Messages
- 4,878
- Reputation score
- 130
Re: Images of Wonder Truth and Fear...
Those are rather great, some of them even still manage to be fappable IMO.
Those are rather great, some of them even still manage to be fappable IMO.
Ranger Princess
Tentacle God
- Joined
- Jan 16, 2010
- Messages
- 2,030
- Reputation score
- 342
Re: Images of Wonder Truth and Fear...
Maybe even more so than the original. ^_^ But yeah I love the creativity. Thanks for sharing Toxic.
Maybe even more so than the original. ^_^ But yeah I love the creativity. Thanks for sharing Toxic.
- Joined
- Nov 10, 2008
- Messages
- 11,239
- Reputation score
- 1,017
Re: Images of Wonder Truth and Fear...
Since that was a hit, I'll post something else that I found. Avatar princesses.
Since that was a hit, I'll post something else that I found. Avatar princesses.
- Joined
- Nov 10, 2008
- Messages
- 11,239
- Reputation score
- 1,017
Re: Images of Wonder Truth and Fear...
Well hell man, I didn't draw em or anything, just thought y'all would enjoy. I mean, all I do is browse imgur.
Well hell man, I didn't draw em or anything, just thought y'all would enjoy. I mean, all I do is browse imgur.
Ranger Princess
Tentacle God
- Joined
- Jan 16, 2010
- Messages
- 2,030
- Reputation score
- 342
Re: Images of Wonder Truth and Fear...
My favorites from the twisted series are Rapunzel and Ariel. The hands coming out of the hair is really cool. The bad ass flounder also.
Speaking of which, I found this cute pic today of Wendy and Alice having a sweet little picnic with Tinkerbell and looking adorably in love.
My favorites from the twisted series are Rapunzel and Ariel. The hands coming out of the hair is really cool. The bad ass flounder also.
Speaking of which, I found this cute pic today of Wendy and Alice having a sweet little picnic with Tinkerbell and looking adorably in love.
