On Wed, 20 Oct 1999, Brendan/Coolian wrote:
> Besides, define 'adult'.
Well, I believe we already have a working definition, since we have
'adult' themes like we have 'SF' themes, etc..
If you like, we can define the particular pictures *I* am going off about
right now, we can say something a long the lines of 'gratuitous inclusion
of pictures that clearly mark the subject as a sexual object, esspecially
in a theme that is not sexual i.e. "adult" ' -- note that that definition
does not define the subject as female, though I have yet to see a theme's
screenshot that includes a male as the sexual subject/object
> Oh Lord...Like a 'feminist' banner has to be something lesbian-centric, or
> something man-bashing? Wasn't feminism going for something like equal
> treatment, instead of 'proving we can be as lame as men'?
Actually, I was just trying to come up with something to explain what I
was thinking -- a NOW (as in the circle with the letters - /N/O/W/ )
insignia didn't strike me as good just because A. how many people would
automatically recognize it and B. it's just not nearly provocative enough.
It just happened to be the lesbian avengers jpeg I have somewhere (at
home, though, not at work) because that's what I could think of on short
notice that was both recognizable and provocative :)
And I fail to see how that was male bashing.
Naked/sexually charged (hm..I'm not sure what to call that -- it's *very*
possible to have nudity that is not sexual, and just because a picture is
not sexually explicit does not mean it's not meant to be sexual) pictures
are definetly provocative and recognizeable.
> Do it, show us how cool you can be.
we'll see..I lack time in large ways
Not to mention I just finally got X recompiled on my box, and I'm working
with some serious hardware limitations right now...
Vinnie
--
Reality is a formality, an agreed upon set of lies -- J.D. Catron
Obligatory pathetic website at http://george.he.net/~drachen
************
[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxchix.org
