Random, Random 2.0

All the other crazy stuff we talk about. Politics, Science, News, the Kitchen, other hobbies.
User avatar
Deuce Canada
Posts: 4531
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2020 5:52 am
Location: An unparallel universe
Has thanked: 336 times
Been thanked: 977 times

Re: Random, Random 2.0

#316

Post by Deuce »

I'm quite content with the manner in which I observe the world. And I know many individuals who observe it similarly - and they're good, insightful, and intelligent people.

If you're content with your perspective, that's fine with me.
R.I.P. Amal...

“The opposite of courage is not cowardice - it’s conformity. Even a dead fish can go with the flow.”- Jim Hightower
User avatar
mmmm8
Posts: 1342
Joined: Sat Dec 26, 2020 8:21 pm
Location: NYC
Has thanked: 829 times
Been thanked: 855 times

Re: Random, Random 2.0

#317

Post by mmmm8 »

Hmm... whatsoever in history would make young women seek validation for their looks more often than men do? Must be their own individual faults! They're just asking for it!

/s
JTContinental United States of America
Posts: 2375
Joined: Fri Dec 11, 2020 7:23 pm
Location: Seattle
Has thanked: 759 times
Been thanked: 980 times

Re: Random, Random 2.0

#318

Post by JTContinental »

And that's fine. I'm not looking to change anyone's mind here, or make directed personal attacks. But as a member of the moderating staff (especially during suicide pools), I'm going to call out boorish behavior if I see it.
User avatar
Deuce Canada
Posts: 4531
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2020 5:52 am
Location: An unparallel universe
Has thanked: 336 times
Been thanked: 977 times

Re: Random, Random 2.0

#319

Post by Deuce »

Yeah, you go ahead and do that.
If you need to state that a perspective that's not consistent with yours is not acceptable, and then put on your 'moderating' hat (a not-so veiled 'warning' that my perspective will not be tolerated ,even though it's accurate and was expressed without insults or anything similar) - if you need to do that to make yourself feel better, go ahead, I suppose.

I, personally, prefer to speak in realities rather than in 'political correctness'.
'Politically correct' people are, ironically and hypocritically, very often the most intolerant people of all.
R.I.P. Amal...

“The opposite of courage is not cowardice - it’s conformity. Even a dead fish can go with the flow.”- Jim Hightower
User avatar
Deuce Canada
Posts: 4531
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2020 5:52 am
Location: An unparallel universe
Has thanked: 336 times
Been thanked: 977 times

Re: Random, Random 2.0

#320

Post by Deuce »

JTContinental wrote: Thu Jun 03, 2021 10:50 pm Also, women do not wear clothing for men, and they surely can dress how they want without the expectation that they will be sexualized. If they are, that isn't their problem...
I just saw that you added this ^ in an edit.

I believe it's very safe and accurate to say that far more males than females purchase the SI swimsuit issue.
And that these types of photos posted on 'social media' seek to attract male attention and approval with comments such as the ones I gave examples of - and that they do indeed attract far more comments from males than from fellow females.
But if you still wish to believe that they don't do it to get male attention, you're free to believe that.
R.I.P. Amal...

“The opposite of courage is not cowardice - it’s conformity. Even a dead fish can go with the flow.”- Jim Hightower
JTContinental United States of America
Posts: 2375
Joined: Fri Dec 11, 2020 7:23 pm
Location: Seattle
Has thanked: 759 times
Been thanked: 980 times

Re: Random, Random 2.0

#321

Post by JTContinental »

Deuce wrote: Thu Jun 03, 2021 11:14 pm Yeah, you go ahead and do that.
If you need to state that a perspective that's not consistent with yours is not acceptable, and then put on your 'moderating' hat (a not-so veiled 'warning' that my perspective will not be tolerated ,even though it's accurate and was expressed without insults or anything similar) - if you need to do that to make yourself feel better, go ahead, I suppose.

I, personally, prefer to speak in realities rather than in 'political correctness'.
'Politically correct' people are, ironically and hypocritically, very often the most intolerant people of all.
Enough
User avatar
Deuce Canada
Posts: 4531
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2020 5:52 am
Location: An unparallel universe
Has thanked: 336 times
Been thanked: 977 times

Re: Random, Random 2.0

#322

Post by Deuce »

JTContinental wrote: Thu Jun 03, 2021 11:31 pm
Deuce wrote: Thu Jun 03, 2021 11:14 pm Yeah, you go ahead and do that.
If you need to state that a perspective that's not consistent with yours is not acceptable, and then put on your 'moderating' hat (a not-so veiled 'warning' that my perspective will not be tolerated ,even though it's accurate and was expressed without insults or anything similar) - if you need to do that to make yourself feel better, go ahead, I suppose.

I, personally, prefer to speak in realities rather than in 'political correctness'.
'Politically correct' people are, ironically and hypocritically, very often the most intolerant people of all.
Enough
Agreed.
I have a racquet to string...
R.I.P. Amal...

“The opposite of courage is not cowardice - it’s conformity. Even a dead fish can go with the flow.”- Jim Hightower
User avatar
the Moz Canada
Posts: 605
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2020 6:40 pm
Location: Toronto ON
Has thanked: 346 times
Been thanked: 176 times

Re: Random, Random 2.0

#323

Post by the Moz »

Male athletes do post pictures of themselves on social media all the time. But thanks to gender role stereotyping and the aforementioned sexualization, a male athlete posting a picture of themself in jeans & a t-shirt isn't sexualized at the rate a woman in jeans & a t-shirt is. Yes women's attire skews heavily to showing skin. But how nice of society's men - and too many women actively condoning this outdated thinking - to label and define women's body parts to their own end. To further my point, please note how a large number of countries in the world 'view' a shirtless male versus a shirtless female. My totally, completely, 100% unscientific layman's view is that it is far more prevalent to see female tennis dresses described as pretty or sexy. Not sure I've come across the shorts and wife beater jersey that basketball players wear described in the same vein even though similar amounts of head, neck, shoulders, arms and legs are showing.

I don't spend any time thinking about what Genie is really asking for in terms of comments pertaining to the content of her social media posts. I don't think a female's off-court social media posts have anything to do with conducting a post tennis match press conference. It is a press conference to comment & critique the game you just played and the various nuances that go into competing in cette game and the sport overall. If a 'journalist' wants to compliment Genie's figure from her Twitter post, do it on her Twitter feed. And lastly, I absolutely, 100% fail to see what the point of that twat at the AO asking Genie to twirl while making comments at the net following her winning a professional tennis match. If you are aware of any of the Big3 being asked that, then I welcome the enlightenment.

In terms of your third point; I am at a complete loss for an effective response. I will say I find myself pondering on occasion why you fairly frequently respond to my - and others - opinion posts by attacking them and picking them apart. They are just my opinions, just like you post yours. And I think we both competently present our arguments for the opinions we're spewing. But I certainly don't attack your opinions with the passion you do. Perhaps you could find yourself an occasion to ponder that Deuce.
:shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock:
:shock: :shock: :shock: :shock:
:shock: :shock: :shock:
User avatar
Suliso Latvia
Posts: 4404
Joined: Fri Dec 11, 2020 2:30 pm
Location: Basel, Switzerland
Has thanked: 274 times
Been thanked: 1453 times

Re: Random, Random 2.0

#324

Post by Suliso »

This is a very weird conversation... Surely we can agree that it's unprofessional to ask questions like these in a public setting to anyone really, but female tennis players in particular.

As for us here perhaps we shouldn't pour oil into the fire and come this close to personal attacks. Not in the spirit of this community really.
User avatar
the Moz Canada
Posts: 605
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2020 6:40 pm
Location: Toronto ON
Has thanked: 346 times
Been thanked: 176 times

Re: Random, Random 2.0

#325

Post by the Moz »

To the first point above: Clearly we can't agree. But that's okay. It's all part of a healthy exchange.

To the second point above: I agree. And I'd add responding to an opinion post with a baiting comment/question that is designed to rattle in some way and doesn't reference anything to do with the original opinion post is not in the spirit of this community really.
:shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock:
:shock: :shock: :shock: :shock:
:shock: :shock: :shock:
User avatar
Deuce Canada
Posts: 4531
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2020 5:52 am
Location: An unparallel universe
Has thanked: 336 times
Been thanked: 977 times

Re: Random, Random 2.0

#326

Post by Deuce »

‘Political correctness’ is out of control to the point where you cannot question anyone’s opinion or perspective without being accused of ‘attacking’ someone today.
The entire premise of ‘political correctness’ is that no-one should utter an opinion or perspective, for fear of being accused of ‘offending’ or ‘attacking’ someone.
Such twisting and manipulation - it’s sad...
P.C.’s philosophy is that everyone should pretend to be completely neutral, with no opinion, in any and every subject. This is the antithesis of freedom, and also of true tolerance.

I responded to an opinion by expressing my opposing opinion. Where in the world is the ‘attack’? Calling this an ‘attack’ is highly manipulative, and designed to intimidate me into never posting an opinion or perspective which I think certain people would not agree with; it is a message that opposing opinions will not be tolerated. I won't be intimidated. If that's the way this DISCUSSION Board is going to go, then I would want no further part of it.
Following my expression of opinion, a few people called my opinion unacceptable, "gross", etc.. And these are the people who preach ‘tolerance’! It’s quite clear that I’m the one whose perspective is being ‘attacked’ here. And I’m fine with that. I just wish it was done more straightforwardly and honestly.

I always find it incredibly ironic - and somewhat humorous, as well as sad - that the people who are the loudest to claim that we should all be ‘more tolerant’ of other people’s opinions are always the first ones to lambaste any opinion or perspective which is not consistent with theirs, and then twist things around in knots in insulting and accusing the other of ‘attacking’ them, calling their perspective 'gross', etc.

It’s so incredibly manipulative.
R.I.P. Amal...

“The opposite of courage is not cowardice - it’s conformity. Even a dead fish can go with the flow.”- Jim Hightower
JTContinental United States of America
Posts: 2375
Joined: Fri Dec 11, 2020 7:23 pm
Location: Seattle
Has thanked: 759 times
Been thanked: 980 times

Re: Random, Random 2.0

#327

Post by JTContinental »

Maybe we should move the last couple of pages to Random, Random? I didn't mean to derail the thread--TMQ regrets the error.
User avatar
Deuce Canada
Posts: 4531
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2020 5:52 am
Location: An unparallel universe
Has thanked: 336 times
Been thanked: 977 times

Re: Random, Random 2.0

#328

Post by Deuce »

Yahoo mail is my home page - so when I sign out of one of my yahoo mail accounts, I automatically get taken to yahoo’s home page.
So I decided to do a rudimentary ‘experiment’ - in scrolling down the list of ‘headlines’ on the yahoo home page, I counted the number of headlines which were directly related to the appearance of a female in particular or females in general - and I did the same with males.
Out of approximately 25 headlines, I counted 7 headlines focussing on the appearance of females, and zero focussing on the appearance of males. I feel, based on my experience in and observation of life, that this is a very typical reflection and breakdown of content in North American society - that far more attention is paid to female appearance than to male appearance. And while males are certainly largely responsible for this - there would be no supply if there were no demand - females are equally responsible for this, as they supply the supply. And, for the most part, they do it very voluntarily. And this has been the case throughout history - for hundreds, if not thousands, of years.

Of the 7 headlines focussing on female appearance, 5 were drawing attention to revealing skin in a ‘sexy’ manner (‘sexy bikinis’, etc.) while the other two were about shorts and a dress, respectively.

Someone mentioned about how topless males and topless females are viewed around the world. Fine - let’s go there. The breasts of the female human have been viewed as being sexually enticing organs by both males and females for hundreds of years throughout history. Today, this is perhaps slightly more the case in North America and in other cultures where it is deemed generally unacceptable for females to walk around in public settings topless - but the breasts of the female human are certainly viewed in a sexually-related context in European countries, as well, where female toplessness is more common.
Women are extremely aware of the sexuality related to their breasts - this is precisely the reason that many women show ‘just the right amount’ of cleavage... They do this to get the attention of the human male. Sexual attraction is, of course, historically and biologically related to ensuring the continuation of the species. The sexualization of female breasts is also why some women have plastic surgery to alter their breasts... and why some women select braziers which accentuate their breasts. It is all part of trying to attract the male of the species, and has been so for hundreds, if not thousands, of years. Right or wrong, that is how it is... that is how we (both males and females) are bred.
Do any of you honestly believe that it is feasible to change these centuries-old instincts in a day? Or in a week? Or in a year? Or even in a decade? No way. But that is exactly what some are trying to do.

Meanwhile, many, many females - I would say the majority - are very much perpetuating the objectification and sexualization of the female body. What percentage of post-pubescent females do you believe do not enjoy being viewed as ‘sexy’? If we are to be completely honest, I’d say considerably less than 10%. The other 90% view being seen as ‘sexy’ as a compliment. And many of them work precisely toward that end.
As for those who post bikini photos, etc. on ‘social media’ and other very public forums - what on Earth can the possible reason be that they do this other than to seek positive attention to their bodies? Seriously - what other possible reason is there for a female to post bikini photos in any public place? If she is doing it simply ‘to make herself feel good’, then she would simply stand in front of a mirror at home in her bikini. The fact that she posts photos revealing 95% of her body in a public forum (or several public forums) for hundreds of thousands of people to see renders it extremely obvious that she is seeking public validation and approval of her body. And when she receives many comments from males complimenting her on being ‘hot’, ‘sexy’, etc., she does not stop posting the bikini photos, etc. in disgust - the comments of her being ‘hot’ and ‘sexy’, etc. entice and encourage her to post more and more such photos - in order to receive more and more such comments from males. Like it or dislike it - but see it for what it is, please.
A woman who posts bikini photos in a public forum and then complains because the comments are about her body is the equivalent of me going to a tennis court dressed in my tennis shirt, tennis shorts, tennis shoes, and carrying a tennis racquet, and complaining about anyone who assumes I’m a tennis player!

This perspective of mine, by the way, is coming from many years of experience in fighting against the sexual exploitation of females in North American culture. Judge me all you want - for judging, or assessing, is part of basic human nature. But judge me accurately and fairly, and based on relevant facts, and not on assumptions or conjecture or your own personal bias or agenda. I have never been accused by any female who has known me of being a ‘male chauvinist’, or as being anti-female in any way - quite the opposite, in fact. I worked with prostitutes for several years - 98% of them female -, in a capacity of helping them to get out of that disgusting, dangerous, and hugely exploitative ‘field’ (I doubt very much that anyone in this forum has as much experience or knowledge as I in the domain of prostitution). I told them all that doing what they are doing is the precise opposite of ‘empowering’ - because they are catering to horny men, and just giving these men what they want from them, which is purely physical/sexual - and in the process, their intellectual, emotional, and psychological qualities are completely ignored and are rendered entirely irrelevant in the bargain. They are, quite literally, just pieces of meat - they are seen and treated this way by the ‘clients’ - and that is very inherently degrading, and will stifle the healthy development of anyone’s self-esteem.
I have had many an argument with males who’ve claimed that female prostitutes are simply fulfilling the difficult to control male sexual desire, which they say is the way things should be. I have strongly disagreed with this premise.
Add to that the fact that they are working for another man - the pimp (usually a man) - who controls their every move and takes their money on top of that.
How anyone can see prostitution as anything but the ultimate sexual exploitation is baffling to me.

So that’s where I’m coming from - from a perspective of viewing and valuing women as being much more than a pretty ass in a bikini, or an intriguing cleavage. I view women as complete human beings - as intellectual, emotional, and psychological beings. When male friends have asked me if I think a particular woman is beautiful, I’ve always replied by saying “I have no idea - I’d have to get to know her somewhat before I can determine that.” Because beauty to me is not merely skin deep. It is so to many - and unfortunately most - males, it seems. But to me, a beautiful woman must be intellectually and emotionally attractive to me. I’m not saying that physical appearance is completely irrelevant to me - it is not. But emotional and intellectual attractiveness are more important to me than is what would typically be labeled as physical attractiveness.
R.I.P. Amal...

“The opposite of courage is not cowardice - it’s conformity. Even a dead fish can go with the flow.”- Jim Hightower
User avatar
ponchi101 Venezuela
Site Admin
Posts: 14722
Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2020 4:40 pm
Location: New Macondo
Has thanked: 3857 times
Been thanked: 5567 times
Contact:

Re: Random, Random 2.0

#329

Post by ponchi101 »

Dear all:
Yesterday the preceding posts became slightly heated and therefore were moved to this topic, as they had strayed from a discussion about tennis. And while I can't see any blatant deviation from our rules, it can be argued that the spirit of this forum was tested. There are many ways in which two people can hurl offenses to each other, both purposely or inadvertently, without using any of the words that we have designated as unacceptable here. I will leave it to those that posted on the subject to read again your own posts, as well as the replies and further comments, and consider the possibilities of who was eloquent and correct, and who did cross a line. Do not disregard the option that it might have been you who was not on the right.
We have never shied in this forum from discussing the hard issues; it was indeed the reason that I, for example, stuck around. But we have to remember that although the forum is based in America, we are not all of such nationality or even of such culture. We are a cultural mix and therefore our cultural views of some topics will not be homogenous: sex, gender, race, religion and other topics are permeated by our differences and backgrounds, and I welcome that. Add to that our disparate ages and personal social surroundings, and I hope my point can be made clearly: we are similar, we are not the same. That has to be accepted or otherwise our conversations can be fruitless.
Having said that, some points must be stressed: you do not need to write a paragraph that will be replaced by a string of "(expletive)" by our automated controls for it to be disrespectful of others. Use the Golden Rule and test yourself: how enjoyable is it to have one's comment declared "ridiculous"? "Baseless"? "Absurd"? Such replies within our stream of comments have all the diplomacy of a contusion grenade, and serve very little purpose. Those are the ones that break the spirit of the forum, without breaking the rules. I ask to pause and consider such adjectives prior to pressing the SUBMIT button as it may make your post less effective as you may be alienating the reader.
We live in an era in which, I believe, proper discourse is being affected by the need or desire to "win" the argument, not learn from it. We see it when a headline claims that somebody was "owned", or a recipient was "destroyed". It has become an intellectual contact sport when in reality there was no exchange of ideas done in a mature way. In that aspect, we are not free of such occasions, which are of no profit to anybody. But we cannot also be hijacked by a single, vociferous opinion that may not be correct, is just a reflection of a current zeitgeist.
We have lost members in the past due to posted opinions; it has happened recently. Even with all of our controls and moderation, some people have found opinions in this forum to be too much; we have all been both dumbfounded at this statement, and sorry to see some of the leave. With our limited membership, I would not like to happen again.
In short. This is not to chastise anybody. Again, no rules are being broken. But at times we can be less than stellar. Follow some simple advice: if you need to "win" every argument, you may want to go to other forums. If you need to be right all the time, ditto. If you can't deal with opposing opinions without resorting to mental gymnastics to, again, "win", you may want more competitive fields and readers.
Above all, you are not right 100% of the time, and the person replying to you is not an opponent. And s/he is reading that same sentence, and I hope s/he is understanding it too.
Let's keep that in mind when having our important conversations.
Ego figere omnia et scio supellectilem
User avatar
ti-amie United States of America
Posts: 22994
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2020 4:44 pm
Location: The Boogie Down, NY
Has thanked: 5304 times
Been thanked: 3289 times

Honorary_medal

Re: Random, Random 2.0

#330

Post by ti-amie »

Speaking of overexposure on "social media" Bernard Tomic has an "Only Fans" and I wish I was kidding. I mean it's his right but, oh well. ANYWAY here's some of the article.

Bernard Tomic officially gets NSFW on OnlyFans
by Mike Hitch
April 23, 2021

Tennis just got a bit more NSFW after Aussie star, Bernard Tomic, made his debut on adult social media site, OnlyFans.
Since going public about his relationship with reality tv star Vanessa Sierra on Instagram at the end of 2020, Bernard Tomic is now appearing in her OnlyFans content.

In a series of NSFW Insta-story posts, 28-year-old Tomic can be seen lying across Sierra’s legs and biting her bare bum while promoting a video uploaded to OnlyFans, which features the former top 20 tennis player.

“Oops I convinced Tomic to do something bad. Swipe up to see the video, sorry mum,” Sierra captioned the image while providing a link to the OnlyFans video of Tomic and Sierra.

25-year-old Sierra hit Aussie television screens back in 2019 as a contestant on Love Island, before turning her attention to OnlyFans...

A content subscription service, OnlyFans is often associated with NSFW content and blurs the line between social media and porn...

Despite enduring controversies that he deliberately failed to qualify for the Delray Beach Open in February, taking a brutal beating in Mexico during the ATP Challenger Tour in March, and eventually slipping down to 224 in the world men’s rankings, it appears Tomic, along with Sierra, is happy with this new business venture.

https://happymag.tv/bernard-tomic-onlyfans/
“Do not grow old, no matter how long you live. Never cease to stand like curious children before the Great Mystery into which we were born.” Albert Einstein
Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests