Again, there is absolutely nothing hypocritical with my support for sex workers and distaste for using sexual language when describing women in a non-sexual context.
You still seem to be misunderstanding context. If you were commenting on her beauty in a recent playboy video that is fine. When she is on a show talking politics that is not fine. The former context is sexual the latter is not and by conflating them you are reducing her to only her job.
Oh man, the DNC is jizzing itself over Valerie Plane running for office. A real badass CIA agent, that’s what the voters want! Plus she has Jewish ancestors so we def don’t have to worry about her history of anti-Semitic tweets. She has a very fast car!
https://twitter.com/vote4robgill/status/1171094808259190784?s=21
Even the DNC can’t be that dumb.
She shouldn’t be smiling
Couldn’t agree more.
In the extremely specific context of it being Pamela Anderson-- A woman whose entire career rested on her being a sex symbol-- I think calling a woman ‘fuckable’ is less bad than it sounds. Ditto for Melania Trump actually. I mean she’s married to the Donald, so clearly she’s not really in a position to be offended.
That being said, yeah it’s wrong and shouldn’t happen. I just think the mitigating factors make it a misdemeanor.
New Mexico’s voters are hyped to relitigate the Plame scandal. Plus, maybe she’s waterboarded some people!
Yeah, you’re right overall in this post.
But not commenting on her beauty I still think is a bridge too far, and what I was arguing against. But maybe I’m wrong. I disagree with your sex work take and the manner in which you lobby for it, so I’m conflating issues prbly and taking issue with the arguer instead of the argument - I get that.
I do push back a bit on men aren’t allowed to be men. I think it can go a bit far. And again, some of these guys with progressive takes love rap music (as do I) so it just seems like people really pick and choose when they want to apply their morality at their leisure. (I made a jab at suzzer over the Chiefs at the beginning of this.)
Idk if I’d consider “fuckable” dehumanizing in and of itself because I have never seen a “fuckable” non human but ymmv
Right, this is where I came down on the context matters take that was coming back at me.
Should’ve gone the Bachman route and focused on his gay conversion business.
I can’t guarantee anything but I’m guessing if SUB’s original post said
clovis wouldn’t have mentioned anything, just like he said nothing about calling Meghan McCain a ■■■■■
I agree it’s subtle. Neither SUB or dogerish are raging misogynists. But the subtle edges is both where interesting discussion comes from and how the overall sexist infrastructure is supported.
Now this is actually interesting and is me being hypocritical because you are absolutely right. I wouldn’t have even though it’s the same thing in the end. Had it been a compliment about her looks I probably wouldn’t have commented, which is also bad.
I’ve got some misogynist in me, I guess.
I do love women tho, I’ve befriended and kept in contact with more on 2p2 than just about anyone. (I know how this sounds.) I think we can get a bit paternalistic even in thinking we need to be their knights instead of it still be okay to be a man and liking being a man.
It’s like they’re the noble savages. They can be literal whores but we must treat them as virgins.
It’s tough to empathize with the other side without losing who you are. I’m fine no longer really identifying as a white man, dropping the man part is harder.
Argggggggggggg
I posted that already clovis.
There’s a lot of truth to that, but no offense I feel like you have a very black and white view of things. For instance in the Epstein thread you seemed to have a really hard time understanding how disbelieving credible stories by the government (the Moon Landing, 9/11, etc etc) is pretty different than calling bullshit on stuff that just seriously makes no sense (the highest profile VIP prisoner in the federal system killing himself at a facility that hasn’t had a suicide since the 90’s).
Reality is built on shades of grey. Which is a good thing because computers are pretty good at binary situations and I don’t want to be automated out of existence any time soon.
Almost everything under the sun is on some kind of spectrum rather than a ‘this or that’ dichotomy. So something can be right in some senses and wrong in others and very rarely is anything purely one or the other.
There’s a decent chance that Pamela Anderson specifically would feel pretty gratified to be considered fuckable in her early 50’s in the same way that a retired star pro athlete would feel flattered if someone said they thought they could still play at the highest levels in their early 50’s.
.
Palin family seems to be doing great.
Clovis, am I going to get in trouble for calling them trailer trash?