I THINK I'M GOING TO GRIPE!

[caamora]

A cheesesteak!?

Well, that is the picture of the front cover which is folded over so you cannot see anything from the waist down unless you open the magazine.

Yes, this is what she was getting all worked up about.

[lucimay]

Usually the groups pushing this agenda are NOW and the feminist organizations.

can this be true (i do not keep up with these organizations so i'm really asking) can these women's organizations really have nothing better to do (like attempting to get women to vote as a BLOCK)...can they really think of nothing else to busy themselves with? that's shameful if it's true. just ridiculous.

caam...sorry you had to deal with such a turd in your workplace. phew. talk about a hostile work enviroment.

[Loredoctor]

I can't stand feminism.

[lucimay]

that probably means you don't know enough about it. don't believe everything you read about women, Loremaster.

[Loredoctor]

Well, I think these days it has gotten out of hand. It has its merits, but that it's being used by many women as a tool: I've seen plenty of women get to high positions in companies/government, but when a man is denied a top position it's his failings in some way, yet when some women are denied a top job they pull out the 'sexist management' argument. There's also alot of men bashing.

[Cail]

I'm inclined to agree with Loremaster. I'm all for equal pay for equal work, but groups like NOW are shrill extremists (who were awfully quiet when Bubba Clinton was getting serviced by an intern) who marginalize the equality message.

[lucimay]

I'm inclined to agree with Loremaster. I'm all for equal pay for equal work, but groups like NOW are shrill extremists (who were awfully quiet when Bubba Clinton was getting serviced by an intern) who marginalize the equality message.

you'll get no argument from me on shrill extremists. but i'm not very well informed on these organizations, as i said. i sort of just go about my business and advocate unity and gender loyalty in my own little personal ways. but i think women's organizations could take some marketing advice from old Phyllis Schlafley, dammit.

[sgt.null]

i'm defending the prude at work, but Sienna Miller is topless somewhere in the magazine. the cover is nice though. Scarlett is beautiful.

if the prude is really upset she can choose not to read the magazine.

[Avatar]

I totally agree with Caam and Cail...keep your religion to yourself, or to appropriate places, (like the Watch. )

But the real issue here isn't a religious one. Not really. It is instead one that, as has been pointed out I think, deals more with controlling other people. Caam already mentioned that if she'd been personally asked, or even told that it was offensive, she would have removed it and apologised.

It's not about being offended, it's about making it an issue. An "I am better than you" issue perhaps, or perhaps a more personal one that this is suddenly a good excuse for.

If any of those risque e-mails were more...revealing than that picture, or even as revealing, then I don't think that your employers can legitimately give you grief for the magazine, which was brought under usual conditions for the workplace. *shrug*

Let us know how it turns out.

--A

[sgt.null]

and its all really about control isn't it? we need to control what people are doing in their bedrooms, what they watch, what they listen to. what books they are reading. these groups could come out and say "we don't like such-and-such" but they want to destroy what they disagree with. if you believe that God is all-powerful, how will some woman's breast in a magazine conflict with that.

maybe caamora should point out to the prude that we are all naked under our clothes.

[Avatar]

...they want to destroy what they disagree with...

Exactly Sgt. Because they and only they can possibly be right, so by definition, everything else must be wrong, and we don't want wrong things around, now do we?

--A

[sgt.null]

true dat.

i find it odd that so many fundamentalists hate sex so much. they either hate what God has made us, or they can't control themselves.

[Loredoctor]

true dat.

i find it odd that so many fundamentalists hate sex so much. they either hate what God has made us, or they can't control themselves.

Well said. And it is odd given that they dont attack nature. Sex has fueled the transmission of genes - of making a better species and race. To state that sex is rape, or sex is about control is ridiculous in the extreme. Though I am certain that many fundamentalists would label the reproductive processes of arachnids as somehow ideal

[Avatar]

I suppose it depends on what role they see themselves as playing.

I think it's clear that we're agreed that fundamentalism of any type is unpleasant at best.

--A

[sgt.null]

if God wanted us to hate sex, it would not feel so good. if he did not want us to eat food, it would taste horrible. water tatses refreshing, so we drink it. all things in moderation.

[Avatar]

The road of excess leads to the palace of wisdom

Take big bites. Moderation is for monks.

--A