?

Log in

No account? Create an account
LJ not actually freedom hating commies after all shocker - Her Most Regal Majesty, the Queen of Snark
void where prohibited, except by law
sesquipedality
sesquipedality
LJ not actually freedom hating commies after all shocker
http://news.livejournal.com/99159.html

Hopefully it'll now be smooth sailing in the teacup until the next time.

<controversial>I only wish they'd do the same to those pro-ana assholes. But presumably dragging other people into your potentially fatal mental illness is still OK and just part of having the freedom to shout fire in a crowded building that we all love and cherish as true blue citizens of the United Cultural Empire of America.</controversial>
12 comments or Leave a comment
Comments
From: ex_lark_asc Date: May 31st, 2007 09:28 am (UTC) (Link)

Controversial?

If we're doing controversial...

I f*cking hate all those breastfeeding icons. I'm bisexual; tits are sexual to me. I also don't like kids a whole hell of a lot. You, on the other hand, are a ranting, neurotic breeder with a chip on your shoulder the size of Manhattan Island.

I do not fancy you much. You are spiritually repulsive.

So stop shoving your tits in my face.
bopeepsheep From: bopeepsheep Date: May 31st, 2007 09:45 am (UTC) (Link)

Re: Controversial?

I don't like glasses. Please don't show them in your icon, they remind me of my myopia and will traumatise me forever.

It's a hell of a lot more aesthetically pleasing to see a breast doing what breasts do than any of the Sprite-can-in-sphincter type icons.
From: ex_lark_asc Date: May 31st, 2007 11:09 am (UTC) (Link)

Re: Controversial?

Goatse.cx icons (the guy with the arsehole) are cheap gags in deliberately poor taste and intended to shock. Tit icons, depressingly, are the product of truly psychotic individuals such as the denizens of boob_nazis who frankly ought to be banned for hate speech. They're a deliberate act of civil disorder, a campaign against the current social boundaries of taste and decency with the intention of altering those boundaries entirely for the comfort of a small minority of extremely maladjusted women. Go over there and read some of it, you'll see what I mean.

That is why I remain in favour of the ban on them.
bopeepsheep From: bopeepsheep Date: May 31st, 2007 11:11 am (UTC) (Link)

Re: Controversial?

Oh dear. Do you know I'm a member already? No, because you don't know me and have already written me off as an insane breeder - oh, and now 'maladjusted', thanks - so probably wouldn't be interested in my POV.
From: ex_lark_asc Date: May 31st, 2007 11:19 am (UTC) (Link)

Re: Controversial?

I didn't know for certain, but I suspected. Now you know for certain that there are people out there who really don't appreciate that community or its goals.

Frankly I think you really are maladjusted if you condone what these appalling women are trying to do. I've never seen any community of women that disgusts me as much as boob_nazis does. I don't hate children per se - I hate the fact that they get used as pawns in these women's personal agendas. And I don't hate mothers per se either; I only hate mothers who are willing to use their children for their own ends.
bopeepsheep From: bopeepsheep Date: May 31st, 2007 11:23 am (UTC) (Link)

Re: Controversial?

What exactly do you think they are trying to do? Do you know anything of what actually happens there on a day-to-day basis? I doubt it.
angua From: angua Date: May 31st, 2007 05:37 pm (UTC) (Link)

Re: Controversial?

I learnt years ago never to argue with lark_ascending it's not worth the hassle and stress.

Go about your normal life and pretend she's sane, it's what everyone else does.
imc From: imc Date: May 31st, 2007 11:54 am (UTC) (Link)

Point of order

They're a deliberate act of civil disorder, a campaign against the current social boundaries of taste and decency with the intention of altering those boundaries entirely for the comfort of a small minority of extremely maladjusted women.

It is actually socially acceptable to breastfeed your child in public; one's right to do so is legally protected in several countries (including Scotland). The fact that people wish to do so does not make them maladjusted, and I think you'll find that women who breastfeed are not a small minority.

The icons aren't banned either; they just must not be the default. It's perfectly within LiveJournal's terms of use to post every single journal entry and comment with a breastfeeding icon attached.

Granted there are no doubt a small minority of members of boob_nazis who are out to cause trouble, but that doesn't mean the whole community is full of psychos. The same is almost certainly true of the childfree communities.
From: ex_lark_asc Date: May 31st, 2007 01:53 pm (UTC) (Link)

Re: Point of order

I think you'll find that women who breastfeed are not a small minority.

So what you're saying here is that women who currently have a youngchild which they are breastfeeding are in the majority in the UK? I doubt it. Numbers, please; what percentage of UK women have children, and how many of those mothers breastfeed? Furthermore, how many of *those* think they have a God-given right to get their knockers out whenever and wherever they please? Why does any country *need* laws to stop people harrassing breastfeeding mothers if it's a sight nobody ever finds offensive?

Secondly, I'm about as fond of the childfree lot as I am of the tit nazis. These are, after all, the people who refer to mothers as cows, and children as "crotch droppings" and "fuck trophies". I don't want kids *at all*, but that kind of dehumanisation of any group is bigotry, and I don't condone that either.

Lastly, my experience of discussion with founding members of boob_nazis is that they have no actual facts with which to construct an argument in favour of the right to breastfeed in public, and therefore resort to attempting to browbeat the world at large into agreeing with them, because obviously they are an abused minority as opposed to, say, a bunch of nutters demanding things they'll never stand a chance of getting in England. The best accusation they can find to accuse anyone who holds opinions they don't approve of is "a sense of entitlement" - whatever the hell that's supposed to mean this week. Reads like a victim complex to me.
imc From: imc Date: June 4th, 2007 05:12 pm (UTC) (Link)
So what you're saying here is that women who currently have a youngchild which they are breastfeeding are in the majority in the UK?

I don't recall saying that; it's certainly not what the sentence quoted above says.

Why does any country *need* laws to stop people harrassing breastfeeding mothers if it's a sight nobody ever finds offensive?

Why does any country need laws against racism if racism is so offensive?

I think the point is not so much that people don't ever find breastfeeding offensive as that society as represented by its elected law-makers doesn't find it offensive. (And there's no reason why it should.)
markbanang From: markbanang Date: June 1st, 2007 09:22 am (UTC) (Link)

Re: Controversial?

I don't see how the two are even vaguely comparable. You may find breastfeeding icons distasteful, but they don't hurt you, nor does a woman breastfeeding in a restaurant you might be visiting. At least if they are feeding they aren't screaming their heads off.

Pro-ana sites however, encourage women/girls to harm themselves in the name of a distorted ideal that few women can attain and few men desire.
j4 From: j4 Date: June 1st, 2007 11:47 am (UTC) (Link)

Re: Controversial?

I'm bisexual too, but I'm also an adult, and as such I've managed to move beyond the "ZOMG BREASTS!!1!" stage. Tits can be sexual, but they needn't be. It's all about context.
12 comments or Leave a comment