PETA Plans An Adult Site

[CaptainHaplo]

Originally Posted by Castout

In fantasy or playing your fantasy is PERFECTLY fine but NOT in REALITY.

Their campaigning is not a private matter but it is a campaign in public thus has its effect that it is propagating degrading image of women as merely sexual pet for men and that they are just another animal, all under the disguise it is promoting environmental protection and animal rights.(Does animal have rights? They never demanded it, anyway. Surely not to mean a free hand to cause them unnecessary suffering but that's because as an enlightened being we shouldn't)

Greenpeace all the way when it comes to environmental and animal protection.

PETA is when Hugh Hefner goes green which is not far.....if you know what I mean.

Wait a second here.... if PETA creates a site that meets the definition of explicit sexual content, then they have to secure it from minors. So its not "in public" - aka accessible to all.

As for making women into sexual pets, you do realize that the PETA subjects of photography and participants in whatever acts they portray are willing subjects, don't you?

One of my girls was accepted @ suicidegirl. She voluntarily sent a set of shots in. When she decides she is ready for a shoot, she will let them know. Everything is voluntary. No one forcing her. In fact, part of my role is to play the "devil's advocate" and insure she is making choices she has clearly thought through, choices that will not harm her (physically, emotionally, professionally, etc). It is something that can be a positive experience for her - if framed correctly.

Look, many here will tell you I am as "right wing" as they come. But your talking about a site where adults will be screened should they want to enter. That is a mandatory thing for an adult site. So the people perusing the site will be doing so by choice. The models will be "performing" out of choice.

You may disagree on a moral stance, but your talking about consenting adults that have the right to do this. As for the whole "but it objectifies women" arguement - your opening up a can of worms there.

Women throughout history have been objectified as sexual objects. Yet women themselves have often been their own worst enemy in this. Who here doesn't know of the office romance that happened so someone could get a promotion, or the wife who witholds herself physically as "punishment" to her husband for some percieved wrong? Sexuality has been a weapon in the gender wars throughout history, and thus sex itself has become an "object" to be gained.

Want to stop the objectification of women? Stop trying to sissyfy men and instead teach them that control starts with self. A man who can control himself has no need to objectify a woman.

[the_tyrant]

Originally Posted by CaptainHaplo

One of my girls was accepted @ suicidegirl. She voluntarily sent a set of shots in. When she decides she is ready for a shoot, she will let them know. Everything is voluntary. No one forcing her. In fact, part of my role is to play the "devil's advocate" and insure she is making choices she has clearly thought through, choices that will not harm her (physically, emotionally, professionally, etc). It is something that can be a positive experience for her - if framed correctly.

Look, many here will tell you I am as "right wing" as they come. But your talking about a site where adults will be screened should they want to enter. That is a mandatory thing for an adult site. So the people perusing the site will be doing so by choice. The models will be "performing" out of choice.

My girls?
Bro, you work in the porn industry?

[CaptainHaplo]

LOL no I don't work in the porn industry.

I simply am not willing to limit myself in my interpersonal relationships. Each person who grows close enough to me for me to consider having a relationship with - knows up front that they are not the only person in my life that I care about. If they go in with that knowledge to start, then I am being honest with them about who I am, and they can decide whether or not it works for them.

It is not "standard" in today's world. In normal society, people of both sexes cheat constantly. They compound the problem by the dishonesty they use when they hide it from their spouse or significant other.

By being honest up front, sure I "scare" away many who would love to be under my guidance otherwise - but I am rather discerning in what I want as well, so this also serves to weed out those that would not work in my "family". Its not about sex. Thats easy to get. Its about relationships, sharing who you are with the people that you choose to care about.

If more people would be honest about what they want and expect in relationships - instead of hiding things out of fear - a lot more relationships would last.....

[Penguin]

Originally Posted by Castout

They are campaigning basically that women are just another kind of animal. A pet that should be exploited sexually than anything else.

You are aware that the peta campaigns with naked women are something else than the planned porn site?
The campaign where they put naked women in cages was against animal exploitation, putting a human into a cage should illustrate the living conditions that caged animals have. The nakedness of the girls should draw attention rather than objectify a woman - any sexual connotation was certainly not their primary target in those campaigns. The nudity should illustrate vunerability, as the women have no "protecting shell" around them.

Originally Posted by CaptainHaplo

[...]
Want to stop the objectification of women? Stop trying to sissyfy men and instead teach them that control starts with self.

I agree with most of the statements you made above, didn't want to quote it all, though I am not sure what you mean with the sissyfying of men. Do you mean it in the sense that many men don't dare to flirt/make a move towards women (anymore)?

Originally Posted by CaptainHaplo

A man who can control himself has no need to objectify a woman.

Yep! This is what escpecially pees me off about cultures who want to hide their women under cloth for "their protection".
I see it as an insult towards males, like "You males are a bunch of primitive animals who you can't control yourselves, that's why we must hide anything that can arouse you." - something which makes rape look like a natural instinct.

[Castout]

Originally Posted by CaptainHaplo

Want to stop the objectification of women? Stop trying to sissyfy men and instead teach them that control starts with self. A man who can control himself has no need to objectify a woman.

A man who likes the thoughts of women as sexual object and sexual object only are probably insecure man himself, lacking confidence that he is worthy of a spouse love. This is probably due to past bad relationship with his own mother which left him hurt and angry and he's taking that anger to any women.

No one is trying to sissify men btw. What are you talking about.

It is true these women volunteered but as you said some women do not know better and willingly jump at the chance to make some money at the cost of their self worth. Or they could be pressed economically into volunteering.
Some of these women are victim of programming. That is men's programming that they are merely a sexual being that exists to please the male gender. Stupid women magazine with questionable journalism quality and culture and industry that are shaped by men in position of power are but a few causes.
Gender equality would erase this in the long run but even in 21st century like it or not it is still largely a man's world that we live in.

I'm not saying women are the same as men because they are not by nature. And should not be the same. I'm saying that equal education, social, economic and political opportunities will make women position to be stronger in society and bring more benefits and balance to this now largely man's world which is often ego centric. And ego is always a foolish thing. I even believe women would make better leaders because they are more sensitive and objective. I even believe that mankind will see less war with women taking most top positions.

That is until men can reach their enlightenment and become free of the ego centric man that most of us men are. Until that day women make much better leader.

I also believe for every stupid women there's a big chance there's a stupid man behind it. And for every stupid women there's 10 more stupid men.

[CaptainHaplo]

Castout - I can't speak to where you are from, but men in the US have been under attack for being men for decades. The end result is "sissyfication" - men who are not recognizable as such, but hold more in common with women than they do with their counterparts of the recent past.

Let me give you a few examples of what I mean....

Less than a half century ago, the stars in Hollywood were men like Kirk Douglas and John Wayne. Nowadays its guys that walk with a swish - like Johnny Depp and Leo DiCaprio..... Can you seriously say you don't see a difference in the amount of T guys like The Duke had vs "Romeo"?

Its fashionable for "men" to wear makeup. I am talking straight men, not homosexuals. "guyliner"... "guyliner"?!?!? Are you kidding me? Had someone ever suggested that John Wayne wear eyeliner and they would have been nursing a sore jaw as they picked themselves up off the floor.

Today's modern "man" is supposed to be "in touch with his feminine side". Bull chips! Men aren't supposed to hunt - oh the barbarity! If your accosted and mugged, your supposed to meekly surrender and then call the cops, not belt your attacker in his teeth and let him wake up with your foot on his neck while you wait on the cops. Violence, after all, never solves anything - so we are told. If that were true, then the first war between men would never have ended..... but I digress.

Purses for men. Yes - its a purse. The guy is supposed to wear it on his shoulder just like a chick does with her handbag. But because its a "man" bag its supposed to be cool. Good luck with that....

A good number of "men" today couldn't change a flat tire on their car, much less the brakes.

Go to a US walmart and look at how many hair styling products there are for men. Then again - I guess they need something to carry around in their "man bags".... Probably has enough room in there to get a hair dryer in too....

Many salons are advertising mani/pedi's for men.

Sissyfication - trying to turn men into quasi-women.

Socially - its happening in the US. Guess they have to take out the real men somehow - couldn't do it with physical war - so its the war of gender now.

[Castout]

Originally Posted by CaptainHaplo

Castout - I can't speak to where you are from, but men in the US have been under attack for being men for decades. The end result is "sissyfication" - men who are not recognizable as such, but hold more in common with women than they do with their counterparts of the recent past.

Let me give you a few examples of what I mean....

Less than a half century ago, the stars in Hollywood were men like Kirk Douglas and John Wayne. Nowadays its guys that walk with a swish - like Johnny Depp and Leo DiCaprio..... Can you seriously say you don't see a difference in the amount of T guys like The Duke had vs "Romeo"?

Its fashionable for "men" to wear makeup. I am talking straight men, not homosexuals. "guyliner"... "guyliner"?!?!? Are you kidding me? Had someone ever suggested that John Wayne wear eyeliner and they would have been nursing a sore jaw as they picked themselves up off the floor.

Today's modern "man" is supposed to be "in touch with his feminine side". Bull chips! Men aren't supposed to hunt - oh the barbarity! If your accosted and mugged, your supposed to meekly surrender and then call the cops, not belt your attacker in his teeth and let him wake up with your foot on his neck while you wait on the cops. Violence, after all, never solves anything - so we are told. If that were true, then the first war between men would never have ended..... but I digress.

Purses for men. Yes - its a purse. The guy is supposed to wear it on his shoulder just like a chick does with her handbag. But because its a "man" bag its supposed to be cool. Good luck with that....

A good number of "men" today couldn't change a flat tire on their car, much less the brakes.

Go to a US walmart and look at how many hair styling products there are for men. Then again - I guess they need something to carry around in their "man bags".... Probably has enough room in there to get a hair dryer in too....

Many salons are advertising mani/pedi's for men.

Sissyfication - trying to turn men into quasi-women.

Socially - its happening in the US. Guess they have to take out the real men somehow - couldn't do it with physical war - so its the war of gender now.

Ah I see your point. Many men have become a bit more feminine nowadays. That's true. But no one is making them such.

In my honest opinion men could need a little more sensitivity and being less ego centric. Not saying having to do away with ego altogether but basically stop doing foolish things for the sake of ego. By foolish I mean justifying wrongdoing simply because it brought pleasure and [false] pride.
Men need to be smarter and wisen up and to actually start behaving like a mature person instead a 16 year old brat at the age of 30-50.

On the other hand some women nowadays do need to learn how to be a women imo.

Each has a distinct role in society and each gender could learn from the other to improve. Men could use more empathy for one while women could use stronger character.

A female Martin Luther King Jr anyone? Or a male mother Teresa?

I'm willing to bet some money that currently, generally speaking, comparable women make better low to medium level boss(leaders/managers).

[Platapus]

Originally Posted by CaptainHaplo

Purses for men. Yes - its a purse. The guy is supposed to wear it on his shoulder just like a chick does with her handbag. But because its a "man" bag its supposed to be cool. Good luck with that....

If you see a guy carrying a purse or wearing a fannypack, odds are he is carrying.