Calender Controversy

sligopark · 22-01-2011 12:10am

shinikins wrote: »

No, not "PC anatomically correct" at all, i just happen to know what i'm talking about. I'm beginning to think you don't however. There are many tribes in sub-Saharan Africa and South America that don't see breasts as "objects of sexualisation" upper body nudity is the norm in their daily life, in fact its the buttocks that are the objects of lust.

are they selling animal shelter calenders?

sligopark · 22-01-2011 12:13am

ISDW wrote: »

OK, I'll rephrase it, do you think that women find man boobs attractive? Or even gay men?

what a way to phrase something toward an answer in your favour - if not a politican consider it.

the fact is that most adolescent men find tits sexually attractive and identify them as sexual organs (as do the majority of women) - deny it all you will in an attempt to justify this calender but if that is the argument - it is becoming more than a joke

sligopark · 22-01-2011 12:14am

ISDW wrote: »

OK, I'll rephrase it, do you think that women find man boobs attractive? Or even gay men?

ah sure then why not dogs sucking off fat chaps tits?

Discodog · 22-01-2011 11:19am

sligopark wrote: »

the fact is that most adolescent men find tits sexually attractive and identify them as sexual organs

That pleasure is not just reserved for adolescents. Boobies may not be defined as sexual organs but they definitely give sexual pleasure to the owner & their partner. We also perceive them as sexual in the sense that society here is still not comfortable with having them on view.

But breastfeeding is not a sexual act. If their were no puppy & she was just bearing all, a la page 3, then it would be a sexual image. I have never seen "glamour" photos of women breastfeeding because the majority would not consider it sexual. The model is not showing her nipple & there is no more breast on view than you might see in a revealing dress.

Last night a program called The 50 Funniest Moments of 2010, on Channel 4, showed a video of a woman breastfeeding a calf in India.

http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/296833

Whilst some may see it as humorous & some a little "wrong", I can't imagine many finding it sexually arousing. Even though it is far more explicit than the puppy image.

ISDW · 22-01-2011 11:26am

sligopark wrote: »

what a way to phrase something toward an answer in your favour - if not a politican consider it.

the fact is that most adolescent men find tits sexually attractive and identify them as sexual organs (as do the majority of women) - deny it all you will in an attempt to justify this calender but if that is the argument - it is becoming more than a joke

I just don't see how you can keep arguing against biological fact, the fact that men find women's breasts sexually attractive in our culture is not being argued against, its the fact that you keep calling them sexual organs. How on earth am I trying to justify this calender? Have you not read my other posts? I do not like this calender, I will not buy it, I disgree with that image being used.

I rephrased it so that you could give an intelligent answer rather than a flippant one - yeah I'm gay. Actually I think you'd make a pretty good politician, trying to say black is white, and refusing to concede that maybe someone else could possibly be right.:)

sligopark · 22-01-2011 11:17pm

ISDW wrote: »

I rephrased it so that you could give an intelligent answer rather than a flippant one - yeah I'm gay.

flippant - I answered your post. I am gay. Whats flippant about that. Just because I am gay doesn't mean I can't find the wrong in a calender supposed to garner money for dog rescue where a pup is pictured hanging off a model's tits and can't comment it is hardly homely material nor would encourage folk to adopt a dog.

gonna leave this now after your post which seems to point that I am some sort of nut focused on page three tits.

the calender was wrong. full stop. you agree you say lets leave it at this where as adults we agree to disagree on the points as to why.

ISDW · 22-01-2011 11:34pm

sligopark wrote: »

flippant - I answered your post. I am gay. Whats flippant about that. Just because I am gay doesn't mean I can't find the wrong in a calender supposed to garner money for dog rescue where a pup is pictured hanging off a model's tits and can't comment it is hardly homely material nor would encourage folk to adopt a dog.

gonna leave this now after your post which seems to point that I am some sort of nut focused on page three tits.

the calender was wrong. full stop. you agree you say lets leave it at this where as adults we agree to disagree on the points as to why.

Well you learn something new everyday, I've never met a straight woman or a gay man who finds man boobs attractive. You actually answered eh yes I am gay, so yes, it was a flippant answer.

It is you who keeps mentioning women's breasts as a form of titulation, not me so I haven't implied anything at all about you being some sort of nut

sligopark · 23-01-2011 12:09am

ISDW wrote: »

Well you learn something new everyday, I've never met a straight woman or a gay man who finds man boobs attractive. You actually answered eh yes I am gay, so yes, it was a flippant answer.

It is you who keeps mentioning women's breasts as a form of titulation, not me so I haven't implied anything at all about you being some sort of nut

just because I am gay do not put my postings down to flippancy - I answered your question at the time - would you like me to now post up what turns folk on besides young lady's tits?

ISDW if you want an argument - find a pub down the country beside you or someone to assess your rescue rather than ridiculing me or my opinion to which I am entitled (I disagree with the calender picture - and with you agree) and picking apart my posts/opinion on the basis that I am gay.

I would rather not use a word rythming with 'truck' followed with 'off' and 'prick' - this forum deserves more.

Whispered · 23-01-2011 12:36am

You're practically telling a poster to f**k off and saying "oh you disagree because I'm gay". Seriously, ISDW said nothing of the sort and it appears you're looking for something to be insulted about.

It would be really nice if people could have a conversation about this calendar without you confusing the issue (again).

sligopark · 23-01-2011 1:03am

sorry whispered - it has got to the point for me because of ISDW posts that I have refrained from using inappropirate language.

Being Gay perhaps I am sharp on any insult thrown my way but never the matter this forum is about animals - the calender pic was inappropriate and ISDW agreed. Then the posts began about my posting I was gay being flippant. It wasn't and my reply although strong I believe was appropriate.

Now postings are going off topic no doubt the thread will be locked - this said I would hope no one believes that either ISDW or myself do not have animal rescue high in our minds.

That we disagree about a calender pic one way or another shouldn't matter.

Whispered · 23-01-2011 1:16am

I can understand that SP, but I think you have picked ISDW up wrong. And while you may have "refrained" from using bad language, you certainly left nobody under any illusions as to what you meant. You being gay or not is not really here or there when it comes to this discussion, and it is really you making an issue of it. Maybe, for the sake of the thread, you can edit out your last comment as it seems like a total over reaction to a preceived insult that I think is not really there.

You saw earlier how your posts on gay men adopting, and comparing breast feeding to a sexual thing causing the thread to be closed. I think you're dangerously close to doing it again.

sligopark · 23-01-2011 1:35am

Hi Whispered

No I won't be editing any of my posts - they were deserved and in response to other posts.

If pulled by a moderator I will accept a warning, infraction or ban but I am entitled to my opinion as much as disco doggies and or ISDW. Give it a break as a back seat moderator.

We have seen some stupidity on this thread trying to say sexing up a calender was ok and having pups hanging off models tits was all good as long as it got in some money and screw those 'country paddys who adopt from shelters, the calender was aimed at more sophiscated folk.'

Then other posters come on trying to justify it saying tits aren't sexual organs either culturally, anatomically or physiologically - what a f_cking joke.

FYI heres a link for those who upped others earlier...
http://oxytocinaccelerator.com/oxytocin-and-breast-orgasm

Who cares if the thread is closed or not since it appears ordinary folk aren't interested either in buying sh1t like this calender or getting into a twist with those willing to justify it.

Whispered get off the fence - you'll get splinters in the crack.

Whispered · 23-01-2011 1:43am

Swearing at a poster (even in a sneaky way) is deserved? Says a lot about you tbh. Also I posted towards you with nothing but respect and you decide to be ignorant towards me. Again, says a lot about you.

The posters who have posted on the thread in a logical way care about it being closed, as do the posters who PM'd mods to have it reopened after your posting utter rubbish had it closed earlier.

If you think my asking you to please allow people post on the thread without you making issues out of nothing (again) is back seat modding, please report it.

You're making yourself look slightly silly and very ignorant tbh.

sligopark · 23-01-2011 2:02am

Whispered wrote: »

You're making yourself look slightly silly and very ignorant tbh.

Thanks for the blame for the previous closure not me but the subject matter - and as for above better this than some whimpering snivelling PC idiot with a calender pushing ordinary Irish folk out of adopting dogs for the sake of art and cash.

Whispered wrote: »

If you think my asking you to please allow people post on the thread without you making issues out of nothing (again) is back seat modding, please report it.

It is back seat modding and I am not that sort of sneaky a$$hole

Whispered it is you who is continuing this with your back seat moderation.

I answered ISDW and agreed to disagree - then you jump onboard with some sort of PC liberal bullsh1t that I shouldn't speak up for myself - get over yourself and let this thread die and the forum get back to animal issues/welfare without anymore dischord, stupidity or back seat moderation from yourself.

Whispered · 23-01-2011 2:12am

Lol, swearing at a poster is hardly agreeing to disagree.

There was a discussion in the feedback thread about why this thread was originally closed. Have you read it?

Why should the thread die because you don't want to talk about it anymore. You appear to be getting very upset over this (or do you swear and insult generally even when in a good mood?).

So who exactly is a

whimpering snivelling PC idiot

I do think every poster here should speak up for themselves, the purpose of my original post was to point out that I genuinely think that you picked up another poster completly wrong and that you were feeling insulted when I think no insult was intended, it was in fact intended to be friendly towards you. But again, you pick up wrong and respond with ignorance, swearing and agression.

Hopefully, instead causing the thread to be locked again, we can continue to discuss the calendar (those of us who want to discuss it I mean) instead of discussing you.

Cherry Blossom · 23-01-2011 2:12am

SP, I suspect you are deliberately trying to get this thread closed now at this stage

.

Whispered · 23-01-2011 2:15am

adrenalinjunkie wrote: »

SP, I suspect you are deliberately trying to get this thread closed now at this stage .

And I'm worse for feeding it I suppose.

magentas · 23-01-2011 2:20am

anyone got figures for how many calenders they sold or how much cash was raised?
I wouldn't buy the calender, I find it a little unsettling personally but I hope it hasn't damaged the shelters reputation or taken away from the good work they do

Whispered · 23-01-2011 2:29am

According to DD above it was about 10,000 raised. A significant amount for a rescue. I wonder how much would have been raised without the image of the lady with the pup (I have no issue with the others and think they are just a bit of quirky fun)

I wonder how many were bought because of the controversy.

Maybe they set out with that goal in mind.

I wouldn't buy it myself, I wouldn't display the march month so it would be a waste I think.

sligopark · 23-01-2011 2:32am

Whispered wrote: »

There was a discussion in the feedback thread about why this thread was originally closed. Have you read it?

Nope nor did I know of it.

Whispered wrote: »

You appear to be getting very upset over this (or do you swear and insult generally even when in a good mood?).

I am getting upset with you and your backseat moderation and your 'I am better than you and know better' when in fact you don't really and should just STFU.

adrenalinjunkie wrote: »

SP, I suspect you are deliberately trying to get this thread closed now at this stage .

And thats why whispered brought the thread to a whole new level?

TooManyDogs · 23-01-2011 2:36am

sligopark wrote: »

when in fact you don't really and should just STFU.

Well that's just a lovely way to speak to someone......

Whispered · 23-01-2011 2:38am

Lol now you're telling me to shut the f**k up? You're gas. You really shouldn't get so upset about things on the internet sligopark.

There is no "knowing better" in a thread about opinions, do you know what I mean?

Anyway, I'm not going further with this with you. Pity we can't just have a thread about a calendar without some posters getting insulted about nothing.

Mods my apologies for the off topicness!

sligopark · 23-01-2011 2:39am

TooManyDogs wrote: »

Well that's just a lovely way to speak to someone......

sometimes things need said straight so there is no mistake - its not like I am talking to my mum nor yours and this time it has worked

Whispered wrote: »

Anyway, I'm not going further with this with you.

and hey nice of you to jump in off topic too TooManyDogs

Whispered · 23-01-2011 2:51am

sligopark wrote: »

this time it has worked

You think telling someone to shut the f**k up is the way to go about getting your point across?

I really don't see why you are getting so upset. Honestly. You are taking offence to nothing and being very insulting with it. Why the hostility and anger?

If the image of the woman breastfeeding wasn't in the calendar, what would you think of it? I would hav probably bought it was it not for that image. I wonder how many people feel the same. Did it gain sales, or cost them.

magentas · 23-01-2011 3:13am

Whispered wrote: »

I would hav probably bought it was it not for that image. I wonder how many people feel the same.

+1
the rest were actually pretty cool but march was a major "turn-off" for me!:D

Hellrazer · 23-01-2011 9:33am

And another thread descends into chaos.But Im not closing it because I feel that thats what Sligopark wants after reading the last few pages.

1.I have said this in 4 or 5 threads over the last few days--Stop responding to users when you report posts.It just makes the situation worse.From here on in I will be giving red cards to users who report posts and then heckle with the user whos post they reported.

2.Sligopark--I am issuing you with a red card for the language used and the threathening behaviour towards other posters--its not on in this forum.

3.Whispered I do feel that Sligopark is right and you are back seat moderating in this thread but in the context of the thread Im only giving you a warning this time.

Now back on topic and keep it nice.

Whispered · 23-01-2011 1:40pm

Sorry you're right, I shouldn't respond.

Thanks for not closing.

ppink · 23-01-2011 2:43pm

and there was I just thinking this thread was almost dead

I have to say March pic or not I not buy this calendar. It makes zero sense to me to buy a pic of semi naked women to support an animal rescue.

Give me a before and after collection of the years work by said rescue and then I would deffo buy it. I cant imagine telling the MIL(or any of my rellies) that the semi naked women on the wall that her hubby is drooling over is representing an animal rescue:D

Discodog · 23-01-2011 6:56pm

Whispered wrote: »

According to DD above it was about 10,000 raised.

That would be the figure if they sold all 1000. I don't know anyone at ASH so I have no idea how sales have gone. But I did read that they sold some by going around the Pubs - I don't think that you could do that with a typical dog calendar !.

It also seems topical that whilst this controversy rages on in here (it's died everywhere else) we have the show Calendar Girls appearing on the Irish stage. The Women's Institute in the UK are a pretty traditional bunch but have now benefited beyond their wildest dreams by doing something that was incredibly controversial at the time.

The people that produced the ASH calendar did so with the very best of intentions. I would love to encourage others to do the same rather than focussing on the possible offence regarding one image. I hope that this episode doesn't put other fundraisers off the idea of being different & creative.

sligopark · 23-01-2011 7:53pm

Hellrazer wrote: »

And another thread descends into chaos.But Im not closing it because I feel that thats what Sligopark wants after reading the last few pages.

Not my intention at all and I don't understand why folk would think I would benefit by the thread being closed? After this post I will not return to the thread.

Hellrazer wrote: »

Sligopark--I am issuing you with a red card for the language used and the threathening behaviour towards other posters--its not on in this forum.

Agreed - no need no excuses I apologise Whispered ISDW TooManyDogs and Disco.

Calender Controversy

Comments