| Author |
|
Jo Harvatt
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: July 06 2006
Posts: 1523
|
| Posted: November 24 2006 at 4:02pm | IP Logged | 1
|
|
|
Just an observation.
Must be terribly inconvenient.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Tom Tryon
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: April 26 2004
Posts: 634
|
| Posted: November 24 2006 at 4:04pm | IP Logged | 2
|
|
|
We are visual.
You are aural.
To-may-to, to-mah-to.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Tom Tryon
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: April 26 2004
Posts: 634
|
| Posted: November 24 2006 at 4:07pm | IP Logged | 3
|
|
|
Holy moley! I crossed the 500 mark. I didn't notice til 508. Jo, will you share a flute of cyber champagne in celebration?
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Kevin Hagerman
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: April 15 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 18183
|
| Posted: November 24 2006 at 4:18pm | IP Logged | 4
|
|
|
Jay - I haven't read Battlefield Earth. That was slightly stolen from Tom Lehrer. And apparently even less original than I had thought!
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
John Mietus
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: April 16 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 9697
|
| Posted: November 24 2006 at 5:09pm | IP Logged | 5
|
|
|
Lehrer's preceded Hubbard's, Kevin, so you're okay.
And Jo, are you really so naive that you didn't know men are more visually
oriented in our sexuality?
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Roger A Ott II
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: April 29 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 5371
|
| Posted: November 24 2006 at 9:54pm | IP Logged | 6
|
|
|
I'm pretty sure the word "voyeur" was created with men in mind...
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
| www
|
| |
Al Cook
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: December 21 2004
Posts: 12735
|
| Posted: November 25 2006 at 7:26am | IP Logged | 7
|
|
|
I get the impression that Jo thinks that whenever some guy appraises
anyone (or any drawing, for that matter) as "hot" or "arousing" we
automatically have an erection.
If she really does think that way, then I find that very sad. Or silly. But if
she said that knowing full well how ridiculous it is, then I missed the
humour and feel that's she's doing a real disservice to both sexes,
particularly her own. "Man, women just don't get it, do they?"
And I'm also proud to say that I find Valerie, Veronica, Betty Rubble,
Jessica Rabbit, and Michelle Pfiffer's charactery Mindy (from that episode
with Homer falling for her) all hot and arousing.
Nothing wrong with visual sexuality in my book!
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Stéphane Garrelie
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: August 05 2005
Location: France
Posts: 4260
|
| Posted: November 25 2006 at 8:17am | IP Logged | 8
|
|
|
Hmmm.. It looks that my "Comment the Covers" thread wasn't a good idea... Yet with the two covers i choose (crime does not pay, october 1970 & Dynamic Comics #11, sept 1944 -and not 1942 as i first wrote), the reasons of the deleting looks obvious.... and not totaly unexpected. Would it be Ok with less controversial covers?
The idea was mainly to have a thread were the posters can comment covers from various eras of comics. the most recents being from before 1980, excepted if they came from small compagnies, or special divisions of a big one like DC's Impact comics. Impact Comics's The Fly would be OK but not 80's Marvel's Spider-Man. Vertigo too would be too big and too recent.
I began with shocking covers, but the "shocking" factor isn't at all the central idea.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Joakim Jahlmar
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: October 10 2005
Location: Sweden
Posts: 6080
|
| Posted: November 25 2006 at 10:19am | IP Logged | 9
|
|
|
Jo Harvatt wrote (regarding hot Marge):
"I find it incredible that men can be sexually aroused by a line drawing
(lol)"
We're men, Jo. Just about anything can turn us on, so why not a line drawing. ;)
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
| www
|
| |
Jo Harvatt
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: July 06 2006
Posts: 1523
|
| Posted: November 25 2006 at 1:35pm | IP Logged | 10
|
|
|
Yes, Tom! I never pass on champagne although I do prefer the real thing.
And yes, I know men are (allegedly) more visual blah blah - and I can understand that, as regards real life or film or even a photograph - I enjoy looking at a nicely turned out chap as much as anyone, but to date I don't like line drawings 'in that way', no not even Aubrey Beardsley's.
Where will it end - no wonder the Victorians covered their piano legs
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Jo Harvatt
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: July 06 2006
Posts: 1523
|
| Posted: November 25 2006 at 1:39pm | IP Logged | 11
|
|
|
And Al, I do not even speculate as to what goes on in a chap's trouser region, that is between him and his tailor - I just assume that when guys talk about such and such a thing or person looking 'hot' they mean sexually stimulating or desirable, because that is what I would mean by such an expression.
Edited by Jo Harvatt on November 25 2006 at 1:40pm
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Kevin Hagerman
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: April 15 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 18183
|
| Posted: November 25 2006 at 1:58pm | IP Logged | 12
|
|
|
For the record, those ancient fertility sculptures of the impossibly voluptuous women do NOTHING for me.
Meh.
Edited by Kevin Hagerman on November 25 2006 at 2:00pm
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Topic Closed)
