Moderators: TapeOpJohn, TapeOpLarry
*looks up from Masamune Shirow poster book*subatomic pieces wrote:if you guys are really turned on by that ad, I'd suggest getting out of the basement/house/studio/internet every once in a while. Actually interacting with real humans may be the only thing that can cure you of your "hot for cartoons" disease. That ad has so much Photoshop work done that it makes me question whether or not a model was even needed for the ad.
That was my point exactly. That a sexist interpretation of the ad comes FROM our environment, NOT from the ad alone. Ex: a friend of mine recently said "I gotta go help my fiancee clean up HER apartment". Now if the ad were reversed or his fiancee said to someone "my apartment's a wreck, my hubby to be hasn't cleaned in awhile" it would not evoke "sexism!" from many people. That's all I'm saying... And in regard to the negro comment, it's a little different because saying "MY negro" implies ownership (and not many use "negro" except in slaves days and "nigger" in rap/hip-hop) instead of saying "my friend" or whatever. Whereas "MY girlfriend" doesn't imply the same ownership. People ALWAYS say "my" girlfriend/boyfriend and "girlfriend" is not in itself a word of loaded connotation like "negro" has from it's background.ballpein wrote:You might have an argument here, except you ignore the fact that we live in a context of sexism. It is absolutely not paranoia to call the ad sexist, any more than it would be paranoia to call the ad racist if it said something about "your negro" cleaning the studio.BusyBoxSt7 wrote:not a PC ad but..
PC sees w/ paranoia. it's interesting to note that one has to jump to the conclusion of subservience. The ad only states that the girlfriend does the cleaning. It does not state why, whose idea it was, or whether the guy even cares either way. Someone who wants to find sexism (or who has been treated that way) sees what they have a sneaking suspicion of.
I agree with that. But, I also would suggest that often what people see in advertisements or media serves to set the tone for how they interact with others. Seeing an ad like this, might make someone feel that sexist attitudes are appopriate in some places, like a recording studio. Discussions like this serve to illustrate that they are not.BusyBoxSt7 wrote:Also, it's really more important how we all TREAT each other in real life than advertisements, hypothetical situations, forum banter, etc. of course.
Just making convo, not riled up or anything. Peace.
Actually, if you are taking our 'fooling about' as seriously as your post would make it seem then perhaps you sir are the one that should get out of the; and I quote, "basement/house/studio/internet" every once in a while. I am, in actuality, not in my basement/house/studio/dungeon/internet/ torture chamber/mic closet nor any other fun-to-be place, in fact I am out and about interacting with clients as we speak. Also, to put your questioning mind at ease; no, a 'live' model was not necessary to create the afore-referenced image although, whether or not said image began as an image of a 'live model' or was created with any one of a number of human-form rendering programs is difficult to say. However, if I or any other person chooses to ogle the female human form depicted by that image, it would be of no concern to the moral 'majority' or anyone else. In fact, a little drool every-so-often is good for my laptop's keyboard. It helps wash off the lotion from the lap-dances!subatomic pieces wrote:if you guys are really turned on by that ad, I'd suggest getting out of the basement/house/studio/internet every once in a while. Actually interacting with real humans may be the only thing that can cure you of your "hot for cartoons" disease. That ad has so much Photoshop work done that it makes me question whether or not a model was even needed for the ad.
RefD wrote:*looks up from Masamune Shirow poster book*subatomic pieces wrote:if you guys are really turned on by that ad, I'd suggest getting out of the basement/house/studio/internet every once in a while. Actually interacting with real humans may be the only thing that can cure you of your "hot for cartoons" disease. That ad has so much Photoshop work done that it makes me question whether or not a model was even needed for the ad.
huh?
I kinda agree with Gary--you may be hanging on a bit too tightly sir.>Mojave_Gary< wrote:Actually, if you are taking our 'fooling about' as seriously as your post would make it seem then perhaps you sir are the one that should get out of the; and I quote, "basement/house/studio/internet" every once in a while.subatomic pieces wrote:if you guys are really turned on by that ad, I'd suggest getting out of the basement/house/studio/internet every once in a while. Actually interacting with real humans may be the only thing that can cure you of your "hot for cartoons" disease. That ad has so much Photoshop work done that it makes me question whether or not a model was even needed for the ad.
she also vacuums my "man cave"...and by that i mean music room!jv wrote:Does your wife clean your Big Knob?RefD wrote:thanks to a Mackie ad in Tape Op i have a Big Knob.
i really do, actually.
*will produce photographic evidence upon request*
(sorry, I couldn't resist)
Larry, thanks for the sensible, discreet explanation. Nicely politick.TapeOpLarry wrote:We get the ads last minute in most cases and they are inserted in the print process. ....hoagie wrote:"And kind of surprised that the ad even made it into Tape Op (May/June 08, p. 45) in the first place."
Hey... I just find it curious to be turned on by something that's obviously not real.dwlb wrote:I kinda agree with Gary--you may be hanging on a bit too tightly sir.>Mojave_Gary< wrote:Actually, if you are taking our 'fooling about' as seriously as your post would make it seem then perhaps you sir are the one that should get out of the; and I quote, "basement/house/studio/internet" every once in a while.subatomic pieces wrote:if you guys are really turned on by that ad, I'd suggest getting out of the basement/house/studio/internet every once in a while. Actually interacting with real humans may be the only thing that can cure you of your "hot for cartoons" disease. That ad has so much Photoshop work done that it makes me question whether or not a model was even needed for the ad.
Aside from the 1% of women in the adult entertainment industry who reach super-star status (Jenna Jameson, Traci Lords, etc.), most females in the porn biz are exposed to a lot of severe bullshit in the form of STDs, drugs, and abuse. At least animed porn is a "victimless" crime because no one is likely to get AIDS while creating it.subatomic pieces wrote:dwlb wrote:I kinda agree with Gary--you may be hanging on a bit too tightly sir.>Mojave_Gary< wrote:Actually, if you are taking our 'fooling about' as seriously as your post would make it seem then perhaps you sir are the one that should get out of the; and I quote, "basement/house/studio/internet" every once in a while.subatomic pieces wrote:if you guys are really turned on by that ad, I'd suggest getting out of the basement/house/studio/internet every once in a while. Actually interacting with real humans may be the only thing that can cure you of your "hot for cartoons" disease. That ad has so much Photoshop work done that it makes me question whether or not a model was even needed for the ad.
I guess I knew that cartoon porn existed. And, I'm not saying that people shouldn't be into it. They've got just as much right to be into it as I do pointing and laughing at them for getting off to cartoons.
It does concern me a bit, though, for my little niece to be growing up in a world where the standard of beauty is some ridiculous cartoon image that can not possibly be achieved through natural means or fitness.
And, sorry for coming off a little "holier than thou"... but, I have to admit, I do consider myself a little more evolved than dudes who jerk off to cartoons.
Oh, geex, the "my little niece" argument. Dude.subatomic pieces wrote:Hey... I just find it curious to be turned on by something that's obviously not real.dwlb wrote:I kinda agree with Gary--you may be hanging on a bit too tightly sir.>Mojave_Gary< wrote:Actually, if you are taking our 'fooling about' as seriously as your post would make it seem then perhaps you sir are the one that should get out of the; and I quote, "basement/house/studio/internet" every once in a while.subatomic pieces wrote:if you guys are really turned on by that ad, I'd suggest getting out of the basement/house/studio/internet every once in a while. Actually interacting with real humans may be the only thing that can cure you of your "hot for cartoons" disease. That ad has so much Photoshop work done that it makes me question whether or not a model was even needed for the ad.
I guess I knew that cartoon porn existed. And, I'm not saying that people shouldn't be into it. They've got just as much right to be into it as I do pointing and laughing at them for getting off to cartoons.
It does concern me a bit, though, for my little niece to be growing up in a world where the standard of beauty is some ridiculous cartoon image that can not possibly be achieved through natural means or fitness.
And, sorry for coming off a little "holier than thou"... but, I have to admit, I do consider myself a little more evolved than dudes who jerk off to cartoons.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 42 guests
