Alright, here’s something funny. These boys in my hall went outside in their undies to take some photos in the snow. Funny, right? They’re trying to get attention and it’s hilarious. Us ladies choose to do the same, we are wearing more clothing, and are doing the exact same poses. We are wearing as much clothing as is acceptable at the pool or the beach, at the gym, etc.
There is a serious double standard here— us girls have gotten responses like:
"What’s the point of being half naked?"
"*ahem* sluts *ahem*"
"What’s wrong with you females?"
Or worse, what my mother said. Her initial shock was apparently because she thought I was in my underwear, but when I told her I was in a swimsuit, she was suddenly happy I was having fun in college.
The idea here is that we are doing the same thing. When arguing this point with one of my hallmates, he said “But men’s bodies aren’t built the same, you don’t see girls getting pumped up over a topless guy, but how many guys do you think are gonna get all crazy over a topless girl?” Seriously? Really? Women don’t need to dress in order to avoid a reaction from men. You’re mad because you can’t control yourself? Men can pose in their undies in the snow without an issue because women aren’t going to go wild over it? Keep it in your pants, that’s your responsibility, not ours.
The double standards are killin’ me.
"Keep it in your pants, that’s your responsibility, not ours." Is literally one of the best quotes I’ve ever heard. Thank you.
Yes because relatively long boxers is comparable to thongs & frills. If all three ladies had worn longer undergarments that covered their asses like the lady on the far right tried to do, I could see your point, but odds are that wouldn’t have gotten the reaction you wanted to provoke. There are many ways to make a point on gender difference, but doing it with false equivalencies is not one of them.
Each of the males has relatively high waisted and LONG undergarments on. Add to that, No shoes and muted colors. That’s important. Whereas on the female side, you have two thongs, “fashionable” boots, and bright colors. If this picture was from the rear it would show a completely different image. Photographically, the subject of focus on the left is the people and their braving discomfort, where as on the right It is a teardown between displaying the clothing (the hat and shoes add to this), and the figures of the people involved (due to the clothing choices and posing) and their braving discomfort. The lady in the middle, for example, is rolling her shoulders forward and leaning into it ( a typical model pose to emphasize the chest). The lady on the right has her front turned outward, whereas if she was parodying the guy on the right it’d be almost profile. And again, this is ignoring the fact that from the back you’d see two full asses.
If the men had worn brightly colored banana hammocks to show off their ass, high boots, and a santa hat, you bet your ass there would have been catcalls as well.
Hell, you could have made your point perfectly fine if you just did the same picture, buy the same clothing the guys wore, no shoes, no hat, and gone topless(local laws permissable, which is a different argument);
Saying you’re wearing “more” clothing as if that gives you some moral highground because you have a hat on just draws more attention to the clothes you’re not wearing. That’s like saying someone wearing a 3 piece suit barefoot is as dressed as someone wearing socks on their hands and feet. Entirely different images.
But saying someone dressed in boots, a thong showing off their ass, and a hat on, is the same photo as someone shivering barefoot in the snow with thigh length shorts on, is just as rediculous as saying men and women are different. Equality is equality, and when fighting for it, that means you can’t arbitrary redefine things because the genders are different and pretend they’re the same now.
So over-thinking things to hell, like I do. I am either making a horrible or a fantastic mistake.
In other news, in the past 72 hours i’ve been up and back down ~10,000$, the casino is always an interesting place. Bitcoin is pretty solidly over $800/per now. Was hovering at 1.1k the past week or so.
Umm, what else… Job hunting is being rediculous. but eh, it’s expected.
MOTHER OF GOD
ARE YOU SHITTIN
I CANT BREATHE
I’m too tired for this shit
The lyrics, the sounds, all of this, perfection.
Star Wars: Episode 4 script reading, by a bunch of cartoon voice actors, that change characters constantly. Starting with bubbles as darth vader, pinky as a stormtrooper, and many more. Oh yeah and batman narrating.
Bitcoin passing $800, thanks china. Also the senate hearing.
In other news, my “all-time high” of 300 coins would have been worth $240,000, had I held on to them till today.
Also under hilarious reading, if you cannot read this http://imgur.com/a/H3zux without being offended at the satire present in it, then you may be part of the problem of sexual inequality.
'Tipu's Tiger' is an awesome, life-size beast of carved and painted wood, seen in the act of devouring a prostrate European in the costume of the 1790s. It has cast a spell over generations of admirers since 1808, when it was first displayed in the East India Company's museum. Concealed in the bodywork is a mechanical pipe-organ with several parts, all operated simultaneously by a crank-handle emerging from the tiger’s shoulder. Turning the handle pumps … bellows and controls the air-flow to simulate the growls of the tiger and cries of the victim.
Tipu Sultan, the ruler of the Kingdom of Mysore in India for whom the automaton was built, identified himself with tigers; his personal epithet was ‘The Tiger of Mysore,’ his soldiers were dressed in ‘tyger’ jackets, his personal symbol invoked a tiger’s face through clever use of calligraphy and the tiger motif is visible on his throne, and other objects in his personal possession [Source]. The death of a young Englishman named Munro carried off by a man-eating tiger in 1792 was the inspiration … Munro was the son of Sir Hector Munro, one of the East India Company’s generals. His death was seen by [Tipu] … as divine retribution against the British invaders [Source - see also documentary].
Most days I don’t mind my life, but some nights the isolation hits me, and tonight is one of those. So heya guys! We all should talk more. And hang out more.
I would eat the entire game before anybody wins.
It makes it a game of time! The longer you play and more time you take, the sooner you melt your own pieces!
What do you think of our new bed baby girl?
Very nice Daddy, you have excellent style.
They’re savages, savages, barely even human;
Savages, Savages, Killers at the core;
They’re not like you and me, which means they must be evil.
Now we sound the drums of war!
In other news… goddamnit don’t I get one DAY of rest before we move into spy vs spy for the next eleven months?