Comments on: I just noticed a text ad for Suicide Girls

I just noticed a text ad for Suicide Girls

me3dia — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 09:15:36 -0800

I just noticed a text ad for Suicide Girls, a porn site (albeit nicely designed one with a blog), on the front page. What's the policy on porn ads? Should there be one, and if so are we being too puritanical?

By: Dean King

Dean King — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 09:20:06 -0800

read previous discussion here

By: alan

alan — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 09:20:11 -0800

Covered here when the ad first showed up, (but there's no reason the discussion couldn't continue here).

By: mcwetboy

mcwetboy — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 09:20:13 -0800

Previously discussed here.

By: me3dia

me3dia — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 09:23:49 -0800

OK, I guess I missed that. Question answered -- Matt, go ahead and delete me.

By: eyeballkid

eyeballkid — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 09:24:14 -0800

wow, in triplicate.

By: bunnyfire

bunnyfire — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 09:32:55 -0800

I still wish Matt wouldn't advertise porn on his site.

By: evanizer

evanizer — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 09:41:28 -0800

I want to push for some intelligent gay porn site to buy a text ad, like for instance the great Nightcharm [not worksafe, but neither is suicide chicks or whatever it's called].

Just for balance.

By: FreezBoy

FreezBoy — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 09:47:33 -0800

I agree, evanizer. Let's pool our money and tip the p0rn balance.

By: eyeballkid

eyeballkid — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 10:09:31 -0800

I still wish Matt wouldn't advertise porn on his site.

His choice. Personally, I don't have a problem with it. It's not a graphic ad. It involves actually clicking past the ad and the site's intro before there is any nudity.

By: bunnyfire

bunnyfire — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 10:38:08 -0800

well, I wonder how the other women on Metafilter feel about it. I know how it offends me on several levels-not just the "religious" one.

By: ook

ook — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 10:51:31 -0800

<stepping into it>If we got rid of everything that might possibly offend someone, the world would be a very tiny place.<stepping out of it>

By: bingo

bingo — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 10:56:42 -0800

evanizer, you know, SG is actually fairly bisexual in orientation; they even claim that the majority of their subscribers are female. I'm not sure what your qualifications are for "intelligent porn," but I'm betting that if you actually checked it out, you'd think that SG qualifies.

bunnyfire, you can easily satisfy your curiosity by clicking any one of the links made above to the previous thread, where various MeFi women did comment.

ABC recently did a show on porn that includes some stuff on SG in particular.

By: xammerboy

xammerboy — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 11:00:19 -0800

This was already discussed, and answered. But... I advise those who are already "offended" to visit the site. Its not your regular porn site, and you won't see anything until you pay. I am in any way affiliated with, or a regular visitor of, this site! But I think they're harmless.

By: xammerboy

xammerboy — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 11:00:44 -0800

That should read I am "NOT".

By: zpousman

zpousman — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 11:13:49 -0800

I know that metafilter is in need of even more jargon, but I think what happened at the top of this thread should be heretofor known as a "triple double"

By: jessamyn

jessamyn — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 11:15:46 -0800

well, I wonder how the other women on Metafilter feel about it.

I am a woman on MetaFilter. I like porn. I like the Suicide Girls website. I do not consider Suicide Girls necessarily just a subset of the "porn" genre. I also think that, realistically considering that we can't make bad porn not exist, having good porn like SG is a step in the right direction. The ads are fine with me, I like them.

By: meep

meep — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 11:18:30 -0800

As a woman, and a religious woman at that (Roman Catholic)... I don't care. It looks like they're adults, so they're responsible for any misbehavior. What the site is about is pretty evident on the entry page.

Actually, I'm more offended by the bad coding of the site - it's such a mess on my Netscape, and some of the pics for links aren't even loading. Heck, those off-pink keywords on the entry page are pissing me off too. Were they supposed to be invisible? As a female, I'm pissed off that something that's trying to sell itself as professional is so shoddily done. Dammit, they did it on a Mac, =I'm= on a Mac, and I can't even make any sense of their second page! The outrage!

By: Voyageman

Voyageman — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 11:26:09 -0800

I think Suicide Girls even made it to Ted Koppel's Nightline. How porno can they be?

By: bunnyfire

bunnyfire — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 11:26:19 -0800

and what's with the name of the site, anyhow? "Suicide Girls"? Pardon me if that just kinda curdles my stomach even more.... What's death got to do with it?

By: RunsWithBandageScissors

RunsWithBandageScissors — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 11:27:21 -0800

I am also female! I consider it a privilege to come to Matt's site. Whatever he wants to do is fine by me. Like already stated, you have to click on it to see anything anyway. Normally wouldn't even comment on it since it is a SECOND POST but someone asked what the women of metafilter thought, so here it is. Oh--and before anyone asks, I am religious and heterosexual.

By: rusty

rusty — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 11:30:41 -0800

meep: It's a beautifully designed site, for browsers that support modern standards. Netscape does not. Try IE 5 or a recent version of Mozilla.

By: eyeballkid

eyeballkid — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 11:31:58 -0800

zpousman: "triple double" it is then!

By: crunchland

crunchland — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 11:36:05 -0800

I'm offended that people still use Netscape.

By: iconomy

iconomy — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 11:36:32 -0800

heretofor known as a "triple double"

I agree, and I think style points should be awarded. I like alan's presentation, but points have to be deducted for the unnecessary comma (god, that's the third time in less than 24 hours that I've mentioned commas). Dean King was going for the minimalist look (no caps or punctuation), which I can appreciate. Overall I have to say I prefer mcwetboy's presentation, though. Brief, yet well linked, and with such thriftiness of text! Very impressive triple double.

PS - Oh yes - the ad. I'm female and I thought the site was well done, what I saw of it. I never felt qualified to comment on it since this is not my site and I'm a guest here - I can leave anytime I like. I don't think Matt really gives a damn about my opinion on this, since he's already made up his mind and he neglected to consult me beforehand, as he is wont to do. If he ever visited a site of mine and then objected to my content I would have to tell him to go play in some nice, heavy traffic. So I have to afford him the same niceties and considerations that I expect myself (upon preview, I should just say I second what runswithbandagescissors said).

By: MiguelCardoso

MiguelCardoso — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 11:40:27 -0800

No, zpousman and eyeballkid - that's too clear and we can't have that. What it it is a STDPN: a simultaneous triple double post notification. And you could add NC(for non-confrontational)if you really wanted to unleash Matt's wrath. ;)

By: kirkaracha

kirkaracha — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 11:43:33 -0800

Netscape does not.

Netscape 4 has poor support for modern standards, but Netscape 6 is much better. If the site looks bad in Netscape 6, they've done a bad job. If it looks bad in Netscape 4, they've probably decided the workarounds and hacks aren't worth it.

By: iconomy

iconomy — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 11:45:40 -0800

Smurfy, isn't it?

By: MiguelCardoso

MiguelCardoso — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 11:46:33 -0800

Crikey, iconomy's female. I know this is old-fashioned of me, but I'm sorry if my banter with you has been too chummy for comfort. And calling you "Ike", too! I'll be more deferential from now on. Thanks for not pointing it out. ;)

*retreats in shame, choking on hankerchief*

By: mathowie

mathowie — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 11:48:44 -0800

bunnyfire, read my responses in the old thread (first one is here) to hear the considerations I made in deciding to take this ad.

The summary: I did consult several women before considering whether or not to accept the ad, the ad copy was rewritten to make it perfectly clear what you would see after clicking on it, and since it's on the "good" side of the softcore porn site universe (being pro-girl, having a positive attitude about sex (it's fun and not something bad or dirty), the photos aren't super exploitative, etc) it is worth highlighting.

Also, if you disagree, you never have to click on the link, and I'll still continue to benefit from their support of the site.

By: iconomy

iconomy — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 11:55:32 -0800

I like Ike.

Hmm I think that was a presidential slogan in the '50's. If it wasn't it damn well should have been! Miguel, you can get chummy anytime. Deferential is not all it's cracked up to be. What charms me the most about your previous comment is that you actually have a handkerchief!

By: evanizer

evanizer — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 12:03:11 -0800

"evanizer, you know, SG is actually fairly bisexual in orientation; they even claim that the majority of their subscribers are female. I'm not sure what your qualifications are for "intelligent porn," but I'm betting that if you actually checked it out, you'd think that SG qualifies."

OK, what I mean is I WANT PICTURES OF NAKED BOYS when I click on a pr0n site. Dandy that the goth princesses are 'bi' (like every goth princess I ever knew in high school claimed she was), but I want a site with NAKED LADS, if for no other reason than to prove that MeFi is an equal opportunity objectifier. Plus I like looking at NAKED FELLAS, OK?

;-P

By: iceberg273

iceberg273 — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 12:06:31 -0800

What's death got to do with it?

What's death got to do, got to do with it?
What's death, but a second hand emotion?

What's death got to do, got to do with it?
Who needs a heart when a heart can be broken?

By: ook

ook — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 12:06:41 -0800

Crunchland: I'm offended that you're offended.

By: Sapphireblue

Sapphireblue — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 12:07:17 -0800

I'm a woman, and I think SuicideGirls is great. Kickass, even. Probably that's just my new crush talking though.

Personally, I'm far more put off by proselytizing creationist Christians than by a bunch of coyly nude women decked out in Manic Panic and piercings---but isn't it nice that Matt runs his lovely site in such a way that there is something for all of us?

I never fail to be irked beyond reason by the ridiculous ease of the jump whereby people go from "I don't like x" to "I think x should not be allowed."

By: Dean King

Dean King — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 12:07:27 -0800

and what's with the name of the site, anyhow? "Suicide Girls"? Pardon me if that just kinda curdles my stomach even more....
they named it that just for you

By: bingo

bingo — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 12:11:44 -0800

bunnyfire: "suicide" is a reference to the goth subculture. Setting aside the fact that we wouldn't have to have sex if we didn't also have to die, the whole sex/death eroticism thing has been explored in over a hundred years of vampire-related fiction, a strong influence on goth culture. You can read about goth in relation to Christianity here. Also good is Sarah Vowell's NPR goth excursion, which you can listen to here.

By: ltracey

ltracey — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 12:12:27 -0800

Huzzah, Sapphireblue.

Sisters are doin' it for themselves.

(sorry. I had an 80s moment.)

By: croutonsupafreak

croutonsupafreak — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 12:17:49 -0800

There's a cool article in this week's Portland Tribune that gives some background on Suicide Girls, with views from people both behind the scenes and on display. It's work friendly and informative for anyone who'd like to learn more without clicking something not work appropriate or contributing to the rankings of a site they might not support.

I haven't actually looked at the site yet (ahem, work), but from what I read in the article you can peg me as a woman who's comfortable with the Suicide Girls. They seem cool, actually.

By: insomnyuk

insomnyuk — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 12:20:29 -0800

I dunno, the whole thing kind of weirds me out, but it's totally Matt's prerogative, and it wouldn't drive me away from MeFi.

And what the hell does 'coyly nude' mean? How is full frontal nudity 'coy'? Fill me in, I must be missing something

By: internal

internal — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 12:22:08 -0800

So now when I hear Ice-Cube rap "messed around and got a triple-double" I will forever think of MetaFilter...

By: bingo

bingo — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 12:27:28 -0800

And what the hell does 'coyly nude' mean? How is full frontal nudity 'coy'? Fill me in, I must be missing something

Yes, what you're missing is the content of the site. Very little of it is full-frontal nudity, either.

By: Dean King

Dean King — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 12:33:25 -0800

btw, I'd like my next triple double with super-size fries (combo #3)

By: jessamyn

jessamyn — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 12:44:19 -0800

what the hell does 'coyly nude' mean

to the best of my knowledge, it means you are not guaranteed a nipple or a bush in every shot.

"I surf Suicide Girls so you don't have to!"

By: me3dia

me3dia — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 12:49:14 -0800

Just to clarify my perspective on this, I really have little problem with the site being advertised. I was mainly curious as to the policy, and had I seen the earlier thread I wouldn't have posted my question.

I'm now slightly embarrassed to have my name on this thread.

By: bunnyfire

bunnyfire — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 12:52:33 -0800

Well, Matt, it's really the first thing I've ever seen you do I didn't approve of.
(considering my history, that is saying something.)
But, it's your sandbox. Just be glad I'm not your mother. ;-)

By: bittennails

bittennails — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 12:57:25 -0800

aayyaiyaiyaiyai.......

By: UncleFes

UncleFes — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 13:08:44 -0800

I like my pr0n a wee bit filthier than this :(

Although I might be somewhat mollified if someone in the know sent me a hack u/p :)

By: MiguelCardoso

MiguelCardoso — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 13:10:10 -0800

I'm now slightly embarrassed to have my name on this thread.

Don't be, me3dia. It's historic. It's a triple-double that not only withstood the initial onslaught but was authenticated by a comment from mathowie himself. So it's the first porn-oriented surviving triple-notificated and owner-authorized double post on MeTa...ever! ;)

By: fishfucker

fishfucker — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 13:10:37 -0800

plus they have really cool clothes. which i will buy when i manage to defeat (or at least mildly cripple) the credit card monsters.

suicide girls, that is.

By: UncleFes

UncleFes — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 13:13:35 -0800

So it's the first porn-oriented surviving triple-notificated and owner-authorized double post on MeTa...ever!

I think I'm going to have a Halle Berry moment.

It passed.

By: me3dia

me3dia — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 13:13:41 -0800

Thanks Miguel, I'll take that to heart, dubious honor that it is.

I am surprised it survived, though, especially after that triple-double. I thought it was a goner, obviously.

By: rich

rich — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 13:17:37 -0800

Wow there are a lot of chicks here.

(duck)(cover)(grin)

Um, hey - what is it about porn that is bad, anyway?

(other than that bad porn funded by drugs and pimps and bad people) What if the people making the porn really, really enjoy it? And aren't/haven't ever been forced into it?

If my wife takes naked pictures of herself and gives them to me, are they porn?

Is (good) porn celebrating the human body and it's natural sexuallity, or is it promoting promiscuity through sexually charged images?

By: goneill

goneill — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 13:18:50 -0800

Personally, I'm far more put off by proselytizing creationist Christians

Saphire Blue
I love you
you speak for me
too!

By: eyeballkid

eyeballkid — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 13:30:06 -0800

Porn is evil! Sinners!

By: eyeballkid

eyeballkid — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 13:31:22 -0800

(of course, I kid)

By: bunnyfire

bunnyfire — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 13:34:08 -0800

Rich, your wife and you can take all the pics you want of each other- it ain't porn till you put em on a website and let the rest of us have a peep.

By: evanizer

evanizer — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 13:35:51 -0800

This is all fine and dandy but WHERE ARE THE NAKED BOYS???

By: dong_resin

dong_resin — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 13:38:46 -0800

That suicide girls thing is okay, I guess, but I like more car batteries and duct tape in my porn.

By: dong_resin

dong_resin — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 13:39:21 -0800

That suicide girls thing is okay, I guess, but I like more car batteries and duct tape in my porn.

By: bunnyfire

bunnyfire — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 13:39:28 -0800

And while I am at it I am going to feel just fine about having the minority opinion that sexuality is just peachy in the marriage bed but belongs there and nowhere else.

I am secure in my belief regarding the awesomeness and sacredness of sexuality. I am mightily tempted to let go an immense raspberry in the direction of the rest of you but that wouldn't be very Christian of me so I won't. Just don't stick me in the prude box cause i don't fit there either.

By: anapestic

anapestic — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 13:40:18 -0800

This is all fine and dandy but WHERE ARE THE NAKED BOYS???

Oh quit whining and do something about it. I'm sure you could make some bucks from a Men of MetaFilter calendar. Maybe you can get Matt to be Mr. July.

By: mcwetboy

mcwetboy — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 13:49:20 -0800

rich: Is (good) porn celebrating the human body and its natural sexuality, or is it promoting promiscuity through sexually charged images?

Yes. And your point is?

iconomy: Overall I have to say I prefer mcwetboy's presentation, though. Brief, yet well linked, and with such thriftiness of text! Very impressive triple double.

Aw shucks. :) Is this where I do a Halle Berry? (Too bad I didn't see the Oscars for source material.) 62 comments on a thread that I thought was gonna get axed; yow.

By: mcwetboy

mcwetboy — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 13:50:40 -0800

(Well, so much for trying internal links without full URLS.)

By: RunsWithBandageScissors

RunsWithBandageScissors — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 13:53:52 -0800

Anapestic--sounds "Smurfilicious". I'd buy one . . . Maybe Matt could package with the t-shirts??

By: UncleFes

UncleFes — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 13:53:56 -0800

30 minutes in the prude box for evanizer for conduct unbe-coming a horn-dog.

10 minutes in there with him for bunnyfire for using the words "sexuality" and "peachy" in the same sentence without being facetious.

By: UncleFes

UncleFes — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 13:57:22 -0800

Q: What's the most noticeable aspect of the prude box?

A: The way the back door slams shut.

Bwa!

OK, I'll stop.

By: rodii

rodii — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 14:23:38 -0800

I am mightily tempted to let go an immense raspberry in the direction of the rest of you but that wouldn't be very Christian of me so I won't.

Are we still in bunnyfire's grace period or can I say "PLEASE JUST SHUT UP" yet?

By: eyeballkid

eyeballkid — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 14:27:47 -0800

rodii: i don't believe a grace period was needed.

By: bunnyfire

bunnyfire — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 14:35:13 -0800

Well, rodii, just for you, hon: :-p

By: mr_crash_davis

mr_crash_davis — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 14:38:47 -0800

"sexuality is just peachy in the marriage bed but belongs there and nowhere else."

So, does this mean the living-room sofa is out-of-bounds, or what?

By: daveadams

daveadams — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 14:39:24 -0800

I am mightily tempted to let go an immense raspberry in the direction of the rest of you but that wouldn't be very Christian of me so I won't.

Isn't this sentence the verbal equivalent of "an immense raspberry"?

By: Danelope

Danelope — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 14:39:46 -0800

So, if Jesus is with us always, does that mean that Jesus is hanging out with the Suicide Girls during their photo shoots?

By: goneill

goneill — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 14:40:52 -0800

no danelope, women are dirty.

By: Danelope

Danelope — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 14:41:48 -0800

But it says "always"...

By: xena

xena — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 14:41:48 -0800

Hey bunny: I don't understand why you felt the need to defend yourself when nothing untoward has been said. This has been a very polite, somewhat sedate discussion. Just curious.

Oh, yeah - put me down as another meta female who doesn't see anything wrong with the suicide girls.

By: Karl

Karl — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 14:49:39 -0800

Hey bunny: I don't understand why you felt the need to defend yourself when nothing untoward has been said.

If you're familiar with her track record, you'll understand. Here we go again....

By: patrickje

patrickje — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 14:50:12 -0800

goneill:
Dirty ....and... evil, let's not forget evil.

By: bunnyfire

bunnyfire — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 14:50:27 -0800

Xena, just a combination of preemptive strike and feeling rather full of beans today... the problem with this medium of communication is nobody can see the big grin on my face as I am typing....and today I am grinning quite a bit.
I am rather used to having a minority viewpoint at the 'filter. The majority is not quite as used to it, but they will be.

By: FreezBoy

FreezBoy — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 14:54:32 -0800

Maybe you can get Matt to be Mr. July.
anapestic - Matt strikes me as more of a Mr. September. You know, in like a Back to School motif. I think it's the glasses.

By: jcterminal

jcterminal — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 14:56:09 -0800

bunnyfire, no offense, but lighten the fuck up.

if you don't like it, don't get involved.

the problem's with you, not them.

they're just having a good time. nothing wrong with that.

By: jcterminal

jcterminal — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 14:56:37 -0800

bunnyfire, no offense, but lighten the fuck up.

if you don't like it, don't get involved.

the problem's with you, not them.

they're just having a good time. nothing wrong with that.

By: iceberg273

iceberg273 — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 14:57:57 -0800

Don't make him say it again.

By: Neale

Neale — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 14:58:00 -0800

I am rather used to having a minority viewpoint at the 'filter. The majority is not quite as used to it, but they will be.

What, after you ram it down their throat thread after thread after thread?

By: jcterminal

jcterminal — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 14:58:16 -0800

i really don't feel guilty about that double post. i think it might have needed to be said twice.

By: BlueTrain

BlueTrain — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 14:59:17 -0800

oddly enough, jcterminal, I believe that your hiccup was quite appropriate.

By: goneill

goneill — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 15:03:20 -0800

divine intervention.

By: Ufez Jones

Ufez Jones — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 15:03:25 -0800

"sexuality is just peachy in the marriage bed but belongs there and nowhere else."

So, does this mean the living-room sofa is out-of-bounds, or what?

crash gets my vote for comment o' the day.

By: headspace

headspace — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 15:07:04 -0800

I'm a woman, and I don't have a problem with it. Ask me again if somebody decides to advertise for hardcore teenaged bondage sluts and donkeys.

In fact, the only problem I have right now is wondering about the etiquette of buying a tasteful ad for Nightcharm. Y'know, just for parity. *cough*

By: owillis

owillis — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 15:14:51 -0800

hardcore teenaged bondage sluts and donkeys

Damn. Back to the drawing board for me I suppose...

By: scribblative

scribblative — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 15:22:17 -0800

Q: What's the most noticeable aspect of the prude box?

A: The way the back door slams shut.

can't... stop... laughing...

By: Zosia Blue

Zosia Blue — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 15:25:11 -0800

I'll just add to the rest of the voices of women who don't have a problem with Suicide Girls. In fact, as Matt said in the earlier thread, these type of pictures are quite refreshing as opposed to the Playboy-esque-make-upped to-death-fake-tan-blonde wonders that are normally on typical porn sites.

And I'm a sucker for geek girls, myself.

By: adampsyche

adampsyche — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 15:35:39 -0800

don't argue back, bunny. you made your point. play nice.

By: Danf

Danf — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 15:58:53 -0800

Gosh I think this is Matt's subtle way of getting us to click on the text ads. Up to now, I've never even given then any notice.

Having said that and having done some fast purusing, there is a wholesomeness to their enterprise that I find cute.

By: Sapphireblue

Sapphireblue — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 16:24:44 -0800

quite refreshing as opposed to the Playboy-esque-make-upped to-death-fake-tan-blonde wonders that are normally on typical porn sites.

Yeah, there's that. But what really makes this "not porn" for me is that---as far as I can tell---not one of the Hot Girl On Girl Action pix features inch-and-a-half-long fingernails on the Fantasy Lesbians.

*cough*

By: NortonDC

NortonDC — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 16:45:45 -0800

You know, bunnyfire, we're really not interested in how your obnoxiousness makes you feel.

By: maudlin

maudlin — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 16:54:44 -0800

The Suicide Girls site seems pretty mild to me (as far as pictures of nekkid women go: no, I wouldn't browse the site at work). Just in case we don't have quorum yet, I'll add that as a woman, I'm not offended by the presence of this ad at MetaFilter.

inch-and-a-half-long fingernails on the Fantasy Lesbians

OK, now I'm officially squicked.

By: mr_crash_davis

mr_crash_davis — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 16:58:16 -0800

" 'Squick' is also used as a synonym for 'being pushed beyond ones limits' in a.s.b. Therefore you'll sometimes experience people using the word (i.e.: "That article really squicked me") "

*cough*

By: daveadams

daveadams — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 16:58:43 -0800

I am rather used to having a minority viewpoint at the 'filter. The majority is not quite as used to it, but they will be.

I'd say most users on Metafilter are quite used to your point of view.

By: stavrosthewonderchicken

stavrosthewonderchicken — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 17:02:39 -0800

I'm sure you could make some bucks from a Men of MetaFilter calendar. Maybe you can get Matt to be Mr. July.

*Fires up photoshop. Pauses. Thinks better of it.*

By: maudlin

maudlin — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 17:08:26 -0800

On the etymology of "squicked": I don't remember reading a.s.b much, but I did follow rec.arts.bodyart for quite a while and that's where I picked it up. The r.a.b FAQ defines it as "To gross out, feel revulsion". (And I'm not going to quote the rest of the definition because I'd be meta-squicking myself).

By: j.edwards

j.edwards — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 17:16:14 -0800

As a public service, I would not recommend searching too far into the etymology of "squicking." You need to know what it is like you need a hole in the head.

By: adampsyche

adampsyche — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 17:22:08 -0800

I'm sure you could make some bucks from a Men of MetaFilter calendar.

Here's year one.

By: eyeballkid

eyeballkid — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 17:33:56 -0800

god i'm hot

By: gleuschk

gleuschk — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 17:39:39 -0800

You need to know what it is like you need a hole in the head

Goes around, comes around.

By: heather

heather — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 17:47:41 -0800

i'm with jessamyn and michelle!

when did every naked body become porn? we'll be covering more statues before we know it. bah!

By: insomnyuk

insomnyuk — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 17:57:22 -0800

I'm sure you could make some bucks from a Men of MetaFilter calendar.

I call December

By: Marquis

Marquis — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 18:25:51 -0800

when did every naked body become porn?

Why isn't Suicide Girls "porn"? The dictionary says pornography is "Sexually explicit pictures, writing, or other material whose primary purpose is to cause sexual arousal." Not all of this is sexually explicit, but either is Playboy. The only difference I see between something like Suicide Girls and something like Playboy is that the former has got a well-designed site, has somehow captured some cachet of 'hip', and that doesn't airbrush its models. Is airbrushing the only thing that divides objectifying, exploitative pornography from lovely erotic photographs of empowered women?

Of course, the "porn" thing is a matter of semantics. I imagine most people here agree that Suicide Girls is pornography, even if they think it's "good" pornography. My questions stand, however - what makes this good pornography, measured against something like Playboy? I agree that the ilk of Hustler and Spread Sirens has a negative impact, but even more softcore pornography tends to be painted with much the same brush.

By: bjgeiger

bjgeiger — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 18:45:57 -0800

Add me to list of women here not offended by SG. Not much does any more, you get old you get over it.

By: crunchland

crunchland — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 19:15:02 -0800

I have to say that I think bunnyfire is way too easy a target, guys, especially considering she practically painted a bulls-eye on herself up there. I mean, I enjoy a good tar and feathering as much as the next guy, but I wonder if there's any possibility you could save your slings and arrows for something a bit more sporting?

By: maudlin

maudlin — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 19:19:42 -0800

The disparaging comments I've seen here so far on the kind of porn featuring tanned, clawed, ultra-blonde, and implanted women seem to reflect aesthetic offense more than moral indignation.

Now the line between tacky and offensive can get blurred sometimes. Here in Ontario, a lawyer was rebuked by a female judge for dressing improperly in court. The photo in this story is a bit small, but I think most people would find her clothes perfectly appropriate for court. But when I saw this lawyer interviewed on TV this weekend, what struck me about her was her resemblance to a couple of other Canadian women: Marlen Cowpland and Pamela Anderson. (Hey, you know what Pam looks like, so I won't throw in a gratuitous link to a hot JPEG).

What the lawyer, Marlen, Pam and many standard porn models share is a look that features teased blonde hair and the combination of pale pink or beige lipstick combined with a much darker lip-liner. This is a look generally not chosen by most middle class professional women or by goth-punk girls.

This might be one reason why the Ontario judge reacted reacted poorly (and very inappropriately, I must emphasize) to the lawyer's physical appearance. I suspect that exactly the same clothing on an attractive young brunette with sedate hair and monotone lipstick would not have drawn her attention or wrath.

(And just because you've been so patient to read this much, here's a really nice pic of Pam. Her hair looks much more relaxed, her makeup is unobtrusive, and the black leather dress is flattering. She really is very pretty when she doesn't use all of her usual props).

By: stoneegg21

stoneegg21 — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 19:30:44 -0800

I think the site is not only not offensive, but pretty sexy. I've always had a thing for punks/goths and I very much enjoyed getting to see this. And yes, I'm female.

It's nice getting to see people who look like they aren't ashamed of their bodies even when they're doing something that most people might find embarressing. I've always thought it took courage to look unusual or be unusual, and they're wonderful examples.

And yes, this is indeed porn. Now the question is: Is there anything wrong with porn? I don't think so, so long as it's not illegal. However, wrong or not, I don't like all types of porn, and this is high-quality stuff.

By: Opus Dark

Opus Dark — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 19:33:21 -0800

And the best thing is, it won't stain your socks.

By: rodii

rodii — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 20:01:44 -0800

I enjoy a good tar and feathering as much as the next guy, but I wonder if there's any possibility you could save your slings and arrows for something a bit more sporting?

Settle?

By: jonmc

jonmc — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 20:16:06 -0800

I enjoy a good tar and feathering as much as the next guy, but I wonder if there's any possibility you could save your slings and arrows for something a bit more sporting?

rodii:Settle?

I'll get the tar, you start plucking....

By: bingo

bingo — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 20:48:27 -0800

My questions stand, however - what makes this good pornography, measured against something like Playboy?

You're picking a pretty tame foil for comparison there...in fact, the Suicide Girls did some kind of event with Playboy recently, to be broadcast on PlayboyTV at some as-yet-undisclosed time. Discussion on the SG boards here. If you're a member, you can see a photo set of them hanging out together on their "playboy weekend," whatever that means, but I can't find the page.

I'm sure you could make some bucks from a Men of MetaFilter calendar.

What about the all-too-obvious corollary?

By: bingo

bingo — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 20:54:40 -0800

I am rather used to having a minority viewpoint at the 'filter. The majority is not quite as used to it...

Isn't this impossible? I mean, is she saying the majority isn't used to being the minority, but it will be? Or is she saying, the majority isn't used to her being the minority, but it will be? Either way, it's applesauce.

By: jonmc

jonmc — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 20:55:05 -0800

Christ-on-a-Harley, two 100+ threads on the same goth porn site ad! God, it's not like there's a shortage of this kind of material out there. I can think of several "alternative porn" sites and news groups without even trying. I dig naked people as much as anyone, and I never thought I'd hear myself say this, but can we talk about something besides porn, please?

By: aaron

aaron — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 21:00:54 -0800

It's nice getting to see people who look like they aren't ashamed of their bodies even when they're doing something that most people might find embarressing. I've always thought it took courage to look unusual or be unusual, and they're wonderful examples.

Why is it some sort of amazing leap for personkind when women who already fit the societal standard for near-physical perfection suddenly get the "courage" to take their clothes off? I'm fine with them doing it, but the reason most people would "find it embarrassing" is because they've had it banged into their skulls every day since puberty that they are too physically unacceptable to show off any of their bodies in public. VERY few of these SG women look like they've ever had that bigotry thrown at them.

By: SpecialK

SpecialK — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 21:01:10 -0800

As an interesting side note, I'm starting to see SuicideGirls stickers all over Portland, OR.

And the internet is really about two things: Porn, and Kittens.

By: Marquis

Marquis — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 21:10:30 -0800

and Wil Wheaton.

By: maudlin

maudlin — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 21:12:43 -0800

And the internet is really about two things: Porn, and Kittens.

Ah. Right.

Plenty of pussy here! Meet our trio of sweet young things with darting pink tongues. Pet them! Pet them NOW!

By: dogmatic

dogmatic — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 21:13:01 -0800

Well, Matt, it's really the first thing I've ever seen you do I didn't approve of.
(considering my history, that is saying something.)
But, it's your sandbox. Just be glad I'm not your mother. ;-)

bunnyfire--
Ya know, this is exatly the type of thing that makes people disapprove of your religion, your ethics, whatever. The general concensus is that personal choice is just that -- and how dare you slap your personal choice on others. Whether you are grinning or not, the fact that you are using your own value system to publicly denigrate others is pretty disgusting. Just because you think bodies should be married before naked is no good reason for you to look down on those who masturbate to pale girls in pleather. It stinks of a moral highground that no one wishes to be near, making this a place uncomfortable for all of us.

In other words . . . I don't tell you and your husband to have dangerous kinky sex with couples you met on the 'net; therefore, please refrain from insisting that I, and everyone else on MetaFilter, would be better off if we kept our dicks in our pants till marriage.

Thanks.

By: jonmc

jonmc — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 21:24:55 -0800

dogmatic - We all have been known to be voice personal beliefs and philosophies here, and bunnyfire has as much right to speak her mind as any of us.And while I don't agree with her on a whole lot, I do thinks she's courageous for voicing her beliefs where she is as she said "the minority opinion." You want to disagree with her, fine, but there's not need to be crude about it.

By: mathowie

mathowie — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 21:25:15 -0800

Why is it some sort of amazing leap for personkind when women who already fit the societal standard for near-physical perfection suddenly get the "courage" to take their clothes off?

Dude, aaron, before you turn this into another "damn the fat people" thread, the girls on the site are far from "societal standards for near-physical perfection."

There are tatoos, big ugly ones in some cases, and peircings, big ugly ones in many cases. There are a few women with raging underarm hair (which I usually find revolting, I still have some growing to do I suppose), there is cellulite and there are tummies on these women. Most every woman on the site fits some sort of societal outcast image, and their physical bodies reflect that. There is an air of confidence and self-esteem despite any of the physical appearances, and I think that's what people are really responding to when calling this stuff alterna-sexy.

Aaron, whatever your size is, if you started posing nude somewhere with a "fuck you" attitude that exuded into the images, making everyone that saw them damn sure you were comfortable with yourself, I'm sure we'd be impressed and say the same thing about what a refreshing viewpoint it is to buck the embarrasing situations and just go with it.

Oh and one small thing for bunnyfire: isn't there something in the bible about turning the other cheek? If you don't agree with these heathens flaunting their bodies, not sitting like ladies, and letting anyone see their naughty bits, start turning a cheek and let them be, and everyone else that supports them be. Thanks.

By: dogmatic

dogmatic — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 21:47:19 -0800

dogmatic - We all have been known to be voice personal beliefs and philosophies here, and bunnyfire has as much right to speak her mind as any of us.

It's one thing to speak your mind -- it's another to force your value system on others. Had she merely disagreed, I wouldn't have said anything. However, it's pretty clear that bunnyfire disagrees not with the opinions of others, but with the way others choose to live their lives.

My argument is simply that it's not really her place to do so, even if she were Matt's -- or anyone else's -- mother. No one's telling her to live by our standards, as far as I can tell . . . She is free to screw, marry, or divorce at will depending on her own fancy. I merely wish to have the same respect given to my own personal decisions, and the decisions of others. It's not her place to tell me whether or not I should screw or look at naughty pictures, married or not.

By: stoneegg21

stoneegg21 — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 22:02:22 -0800

Matt-Thank you, that was exactly what I was trying to say. While many of those women don't weigh much compared to, say, me...they weigh more than most models, and they do have stomaches and such. They look pretty normal. They don't seem to care about it, which is refreshing.

One thing I did kinda to ask is, has anyone other than me ever noticed the "porn" look? It's kind of an expression many people in this sort of stuff have. They look like they're trying to be sexy, but they just look bored or rather expressionless. From the expressions on at least some of these girls, they are indeed trying to be sexy. But they seem to think it's all kind of silly and for play, something enjoyable, not a pain they have to put up with.

By: stoneegg21

stoneegg21 — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 22:04:44 -0800

This is rather ironic. At the very top of the page, bunnyfire commented that she wondered if other women were offended and how they felt. So far the only one who's been offended is her, unless I missed someone.

By: evanizer

evanizer — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 22:08:30 -0800

Aaron, whatever your size is, if you started posing nude somewhere with a "fuck you" attitude that exuded into the images, making everyone that saw them damn sure you were comfortable with yourself, I'm sure we'd be impressed

So far, Neale is the only Mefilterarian I know of brave enough to bare his body on the net. C'mon everybody! Let's start NudeFilter!

By: Ufez Jones

Ufez Jones — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 22:08:45 -0800

I enjoy a good tar and feathering as much as the next guy, but I wonder if there's any possibility you could save your slings and arrows for something a bit more sporting?

rodii:Settle?

I'll get the tar, you start plucking....

If there's a MeFi god, this will happen, and soon. Thank you both.
that is all, for now.

By: MiguelCardoso

MiguelCardoso — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 22:11:58 -0800

There are a few women with raging underarm hair (which I usually find revolting, I still have some growing to do I suppose

Matt, believe this old man: the revulsion with underarm hair(never mind the raging variety) gets worse and worse. That's why I stopped having German and Swedish girlfriends around the age of 21). Heck - truth be told, I was even put off by your "usually". What sort of exceptions are you talking about?

please refrain from insisting that I, and everyone else on MetaFilter, would be better off if we kept our dicks in our pants till marriage.

Dogmatic and all the others: please learn to read Bunnyfirese. She's just teasing. She's just joining in, like those little girls who say "Gross!" but enjoy playing with boys. It's fun! There's nothing prescriptive in what she writes. Stop pretending she's some old nanny just so you show just how cool, modern and tolerant you are. You're the ones who keep telling her off and wagging your fingers. You're the Grandma Moses. Comparatively, she's a veritable April playmate.

By: aaron

aaron — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 22:16:28 -0800

Dude, aaron, before you turn this into another "damn the fat people" thread...

No, I said my piece. I'm done. My point is merely that for the most part these women have intentionally outcast themselves, and they really haven't even done that so much as intentionally placed themselves into societal subgenres. (It's obvious from this thread and the prior one that there are tons of people who are very much into the overuse of tattoos and piercings, and underarm hair ... well, two minutes with a Norelco can change that anytime she wishes.)

I'll take your word for it about the cellulite and tummies; the tattoos-and-piercings look isn't really my thing, so I'm not going to pay to look at the site in-depth. But the few freebies I've seen showed girls that were indeed near-"perfection", albeit with the tattoos and such. In any case, I think most people are perfectly willing to accept a tiny tummy or a little cellulite. The site basically IS Playboy/Penthouse for those into the tattoo thing, nothing more. Which is fine; I'm just saying I don't see this as some major leap towards true acceptance of a wide range of female body types. At best, it's the tiniest step.

Okay, now I'm done.

By: BlueTrain

BlueTrain — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 22:18:10 -0800

It's one thing to speak your mind -- it's another to force your value system on others. Had she merely disagreed, I wouldn't have said anything. However, it's pretty clear that bunnyfire disagrees not with the opinions of others, but with the way others choose to live their lives.

dogmatic, so apparently it's okay to to tell others that atheism is "correct", but Christianity is off-limits? The hypocrisy here reeks.

By: bingo

bingo — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 22:26:38 -0800

The site basically IS Playboy/Penthouse for those into the tattoo thing, nothing more.

Really, though, it's not. The attitude is different, the photography is different, the viewer's connection, such as it is, to the girls, and the girls' connection to the site, and to each other, is different...of course, this has all been discussed on both threads in more detail, and you claim to have read them, so...

By: aaron

aaron — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 22:37:09 -0800

I have read them. I simply disagree. I mean, I know their approach is different than Playboy/Penthouse, but I think that's just part and parcel of being into that subgenre. The end result is still the same, though, esp. WRT its effect on female "empowerment" or however you want to put it: It's just porn. And again, I'm fine with it. All I'm saying is I don't think it should put up on a pedestal as being something more than it is.

By: eyeballkid

eyeballkid — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 22:55:40 -0800

There's a card trick that you can do over very long distances that basically goes like this:

Magician: "Pick a card"
Person picks card from deck.
Magician: "Have you memorized the card?"
Person: "Yes"
Magician: "Now slide the card back into the deck"
Person: "Anywhere?"
Magician: "Yes, anywhere you want."
Person buries card in deck.
Magician: "Alright. Now, what was your card?"
Person: "The three of spades."
Magician: "You're right."

This thread, and the other about this whole finding the suicide girls attractive argument, reminds me of that trick. It doesn't matter what anyone else sees. It's what you see.

By: raysmj

raysmj — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 23:07:13 -0800

It's Groundhog Day here, only with softcore alternative porn/erotica.

By: bingo

bingo — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 23:24:50 -0800

aaron, but you also have admitted to not actually looking at the site beyond the free guest pages. Are you sure you have any remote clue what you're talking about?

You also say "the whole effect on female empowerment or however you want to put it" like that's some irrelevant, imaginary idea, but in fact to some people that's the whole issue.

By: bingo

bingo — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 23:29:42 -0800

eyeballkid: I don't think so. The card is still either the three of spades, or it's not. The fact that someone is making a sucker game out of it doesn't change the deck.

By: eyeballkid

eyeballkid — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 23:49:36 -0800

is the card the three of spades? who's to know? only one person saw it.

By: Tarrama

Tarrama — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 23:49:52 -0800

I am still recovering from clicking on the proctologist's nightmare link I saw on metafilter the other day... someone's idea of an April Fools Joke, I think. The SucideGirls ad explains what you are going to see, which gives me a choice and if helps pay for the site thats an added bonus.

By: stavrosthewonderchicken

stavrosthewonderchicken — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 23:53:22 -0800

So far, Neale is the only Mefilterarian I know of brave enough to bare his body on the net.

I am Ron Jeremy.

By: stavrosthewonderchicken

stavrosthewonderchicken — Wed, 03 Apr 2002 23:55:36 -0800

...no, not really.

By: jessamyn

jessamyn — Thu, 04 Apr 2002 00:06:03 -0800

Neale is the only Mefilterarian I know of brave enough to bare his body on the net

nonsense, that's all I'm saying.

By: Frasermoo

Frasermoo — Thu, 04 Apr 2002 00:06:09 -0800

cripes, I came in a bit late on this one. dangnammit.

aaron, you slay me - No, I said my piece. I'm done. My point is ....

Q - What's the difference between sex for love and sex for money?

A - Sex for love is more expensive.

By: MiguelCardoso

MiguelCardoso — Thu, 04 Apr 2002 00:06:16 -0800

Ok, StWC - deny this!*

*Disgusting stuff, everyone else...

By: Ufez Jones

Ufez Jones — Thu, 04 Apr 2002 00:14:26 -0800

Miguelito, you never cease to amaze with your random ass links. Just when you seem puritanical, you pull this shit out of your ass (pun intended)

By: dogmatic

dogmatic — Thu, 04 Apr 2002 02:43:57 -0800

dogmatic, so apparently it's okay to to tell others that atheism is "correct", but Christianity is off-limits?

BlueTrain --

You should look back at the comment you linked to. It's not me. In fact, the only thing I posted in that thread was this, which said Christianity was neither wrong nor right -- just that it assumed pagan rituals and holidays to attract pagan converts. If you'd like to offer a more historically accurate or better-reasoned explanation, I'd love to see it.

I'd also love to see the last thread where I blatantly attacked Christianity. I've blatantly attacked fat people and bad posts and the Religious Right for killing sex ed classes and the Bush administration for just being dumb . . . I admit to being not a very nice guy at all.

But looking through my posts I'm at a loss to find a single attack on Christianity as a religion. I may have attacked its influence on public policy or misunderstandings of the gospels -- which I tried to answer by-the-(good-)book -- but the religion itself? I don't seem to recall that, sir.

By: crunchland

crunchland — Thu, 04 Apr 2002 02:56:12 -0800

I think that the $10 the Suicide Girls paid for their textad has gotten them more exposure than anything else they could have done. I think I need to start taking some nudie shots with my pencam or something.

By: stavrosthewonderchicken

stavrosthewonderchicken — Thu, 04 Apr 2002 03:55:42 -0800

"The man has shared bodily fluids with history."

'nuff said.

By: aaron

aaron — Thu, 04 Apr 2002 05:49:58 -0800

aaron, but you also have admitted to not actually looking at the site beyond the free guest pages. Are you sure you have any remote clue what you're talking about?

So Suicide Girls is an entire lie? The free pages bear no relation whatsoever to the content behind the curtain? Somehow, I doubt that.

Glad I exist to entertain you, Frasermoo.

By: anapestic

anapestic — Thu, 04 Apr 2002 06:23:03 -0800

So far, Neale is the only Mefilterarian I know of brave enough to bare his body on the net. C'mon everybody! Let's start NudeFilter!

I'm pretty sure that if you look around enough in the Bradlands (something about a day in the life of a weblogger) that you'll find a shot of Mr. Graham entering the shower. Of course, it's possible that he used a double, but probably not.

Not that I seek this sort of thing out, mind you.

By: bunnyfire

bunnyfire — Thu, 04 Apr 2002 06:45:45 -0800

Matt, I promised not to make your life a living hell, so I put further comments on my weblog...I'm really not trying to tell the rest of you how to live your lives, but I do really serve a living God, and it behooves *ME* to pay attention to how HE views these matters.

I still love the rest of you though.....do you mind putting down the tar? And those feathers....not my idea of a fashion statement.....thank you....

(Miguel....my dear evil twin....sometimes I do think you have lost your mind....I will help you look for it if you want me to.....)

By: crunchland

crunchland — Thu, 04 Apr 2002 06:52:37 -0800

Aw, jeez. Now you're just asking for it, bunny.

By: Karl

Karl — Thu, 04 Apr 2002 07:26:29 -0800

it behooves *ME* to pay attention to how HE views these matters.

I don't know Bunnyfire, for me, it's personal ideologies like this that are historically at the root of all conflict and judgement and intolerance and war and oppression and suffering in the world for the last two thousand years....

Or am I exaggerating?

By: Kafkaesque

Kafkaesque — Thu, 04 Apr 2002 07:31:09 -0800

Alright. Let me see an ontological proof for the existence of God despite the continued popularity of boy bands. I'll need that on my desk by 8am, madame lapin de feu.

And, you know, if you get a chance, can you ask Jesus to do something about my tax debt? Brother's got clout.

By: bunnyfire

bunnyfire — Thu, 04 Apr 2002 07:34:43 -0800

*puts on Joan of Arc (C) brand running shoes, runs like heck from thread, making mental note to stay out of metatalk for a day or two at least...*

By: Dean King

Dean King — Thu, 04 Apr 2002 07:45:10 -0800

honestly, bf, I think you should confine yourself to the blue pages from now on. you seem to be well-liked over there. matt banned you from metafilter for a month, but he also suggested that you stay out of metatalk for three. (personally, I wish he had just dropped your account down a mineshaft.)

I also think we should stop responding to you back here, since you're not doing much more than x-tian trolling. and now let's see if I can take my own advice...

By: adampsyche

adampsyche — Thu, 04 Apr 2002 07:45:24 -0800

*puts on Joan of Arc (C) brand running shoes, runs like heck from thread, making mental note to stay out of metatalk for a day or two at least...*

With nothing but the purest desire to be of help to you, that was the smartest thing you said/did in this thread. It isn't your beliefs that ~~got~~ get you in trouble, it is the pounding of them over and over again. Say what you have to say, and leave it at that. You may feel the need to pay attention to how the God of your understanding views these matters, but you would do well to take into consideration the grace and mercy He has shown you and those who vouched (for lack of a better word) for your behavior on your return. Say your piece, make your views known, and accept it when others disagree.

By: iceberg273

iceberg273 — Thu, 04 Apr 2002 07:51:39 -0800

I'm really not trying to tell the rest of you how to live your lives, but I do really serve a living God, and it behooves *ME* to pay attention to how HE views these matters.

Well, exactly. *You* should pay attention to how God views things, because you have chosen to enter into His service. However, it is also imporant to remember His counsel on interactions with those who do not believe as you do. For instance, this is probably an occasion where being as wise as a serpent and harmless as a dove (Matt 10:16) would have come in handy.

You did the right thing by discussing this on your weblog, but a lot of ink was needlessly spilled first.

Remember: we are only given so many words to use before we die. After they run out, we

By: Avogadro

Avogadro — Thu, 04 Apr 2002 07:58:35 -0800

After they run out, we...

NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

ICY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[crane shot of AVOGADRO holding ICEBERG273]

I hardly knew ye, yet I loved you like a brother. *sniff*

By: iceberg273

iceberg273 — Thu, 04 Apr 2002 08:07:53 -0800

*opens eyes*
*hands Avo a Kleenex*

Sorry about that. Apparently there was some sort of mix up in accounting.

By: Frasermoo

Frasermoo — Thu, 04 Apr 2002 08:14:47 -0800

uh, has anyone got a username and password for Suicide Girls...?

can I borrow your Kleenex iceberg please.

By: pardonyou?

pardonyou? — Thu, 04 Apr 2002 08:27:22 -0800

Frasermoo, you need a Kleenex after the preview? How about some self-control, man!

By: jonmc

jonmc — Thu, 04 Apr 2002 08:29:00 -0800

Neale is the only Mefilterarian I know of brave enough to bare his body on the net

nonsense, that's all I'm saying.

jessamyn? shatter my image of you, why dontcha...although I could make the same statement, and I ain't sayin' a word.

By: dong_resin

dong_resin — Thu, 04 Apr 2002 08:56:33 -0800

I had a real hot nude spread in cadaver monthly, until they figured out that I'm merely Scottish.

By: Kafkaesque

Kafkaesque — Thu, 04 Apr 2002 09:19:00 -0800

Clan MacManic.

By: goneill

goneill — Thu, 04 Apr 2002 09:31:01 -0800

dong_resin i love you.

By: Sapphireblue

Sapphireblue — Thu, 04 Apr 2002 09:51:09 -0800

goneill: how fickle your heart *snif*

By: bingo

bingo — Thu, 04 Apr 2002 09:51:11 -0800

eyeballkid: is the card the three of spades? who's to know? only one person saw it.

That one person knows. And if he lies, that doesn't change what the card was.

aaron: So Suicide Girls is an entire lie? The free pages bear no relation whatsoever to the content behind the curtain? Somehow, I doubt that.

They do bear a relation, but they don't tell the whole story, and in fact, the preview pics resemble "mainstream" porn more than most of those you get when you pay. At any rate, since you keep totally mischaracterizing the site, I'm looking for ways to justify your misunderstanding without being personally insulting.

By: goneill

goneill — Thu, 04 Apr 2002 10:05:45 -0800

god - i'm really losing it - i told two different people i loved them in the same thread I think that I just really miss cold chef. Sorry guys.

By: MiguelCardoso

MiguelCardoso — Thu, 04 Apr 2002 10:40:02 -0800

Miss ColdChef - now there's a centerfold.

By: chrisroberts

chrisroberts — Thu, 04 Apr 2002 11:33:08 -0800

dean king was able to say what i have been thinking for awhile.

thank you

By: aaron

aaron — Thu, 04 Apr 2002 12:07:59 -0800

Fine bingo. If someone wants to loan me their SG password so I can go in and look for 10 minutes or so, I'll gladly retract my statements on the matter, and they can change their password and that'll be the end of that.

And there's always a way to argue a point without being personally insulting, FWIW.

By: jcterminal

jcterminal — Thu, 04 Apr 2002 13:02:01 -0800

"but I do really serve a living God, and it behooves *ME* to pay attention to how HE views these matters."

actually, i just got off the phone with our lord and saviour, and he agrees, those suicide girls are fucking bad ass.

just so you know.

By: adampsyche

adampsyche — Thu, 04 Apr 2002 13:06:50 -0800

If someone wants to loan me their SG password so I can go in and look for 10 minutes or so

I second that. If anyone wants to share thier SG password so i can go in and look for a few hours or so...

By: pardonyou?

pardonyou? — Thu, 04 Apr 2002 13:28:39 -0800

If someone wants to loan me their SG password so I can go in and look for 10 minutes or so

I second that. If anyone wants to share thier SG password so i can go in and look for a few hours or so...

No, pick me! I only need it for oh, say, 2 minutes! No! Make that 45 seconds! Wait, how about ... oh, darn. Nevermind.

By: aaron

aaron — Thu, 04 Apr 2002 15:53:27 -0800

Pervs.

By: xena

xena — Thu, 04 Apr 2002 16:06:42 -0800

Goneill: Once you're "done" with dong_resin, could you pass him this way??

By: goneill

goneill — Thu, 04 Apr 2002 16:36:40 -0800

i will never ever be done with dong resin.

By: jonmc

jonmc — Thu, 04 Apr 2002 17:05:44 -0800

Hey dong resin, now that you seem to have groupies, can I be your, like, MeFi roadie?

By: Catch

Catch — Thu, 04 Apr 2002 17:23:39 -0800

"well, I wonder how the other women on Metafilter feel about it."

Oh, dear, I'm far too late for this thread. I'd just like to be counted as a mefem who has no problem with pr0n.
I don't see why I should be assumed to. I hate when people confuse their personal tastes with what women are/want. It's so limiting and it's kinda degrading too.

By: readymade

readymade — Thu, 04 Apr 2002 18:12:36 -0800

Girlz like pr0n.

(Or at least I think the SG's are cute and amusing). For all of you Portland-ers, on their list of events, they're having a little SG cabaret at Dante's in mid-April. Girlie dancing and such.

Not that any of you would want to go or anything....

By: xena

xena — Thu, 04 Apr 2002 18:22:35 -0800

Goneill: Any chance you'd share?? I mean, you might get tired or something.

By: pikachulolita

pikachulolita — Thu, 04 Apr 2002 18:34:12 -0800

i will never ever be done with dong resin.
you know, to someone who doesn't pay attention to usernames, that could be an incredibly disturbing sentence.

By: goneill

goneill — Thu, 04 Apr 2002 19:23:58 -0800

1. he is a hard man to deal with xena, he forces this kind of relentless monogamy on me. goneill, goneill, never ever leave me, etc. - if he'll give up on me, i'll send him your way.

2. uh yeah - that's why i wrote it.

By: evanizer

evanizer — Thu, 04 Apr 2002 20:35:31 -0800

goneill, since you're all into dong_resin, you probably don't need mlang anymore. Can I have him? Please?

He's cute, right?

By: Zora Neale Hurston

Zora Neale Hurston — Thu, 04 Apr 2002 20:46:37 -0800

So far, Neale is the only Mefilterarian I know of brave enough to bare his body on the net. C'mon everybody! Let's start NudeFilter!

Oy, I knew that would come back to haunt me. Wont someone repost ben brown's penis to take the focus away from my butt?

By: goneill

goneill — Thu, 04 Apr 2002 21:04:03 -0800

yeah, i mean - he's alright... (and quite likely gay)

By: dong_resin

dong_resin — Thu, 04 Apr 2002 21:27:58 -0800

Ladies, ladies....
My pimp hand is strong.

That's right, ladies, Daddy Dong is in th' house.
I brung da' cheez-wiz, a melon baller and some fine-grit sand paper.
I gots the Toto's greatest hitz, not MP3s, baby, no, but the 8-track., uhhh-huh, and I gots the toilet brush. The long one.

Let's get it on, angry disaffected loner style.
Aaah-yeah.

Jon, you're just gonna hafta put up you wit' dem Kuro5in style ho's, homeslice.
I be mackn' up this muthathumper tight.

By: ebarker

ebarker — Thu, 04 Apr 2002 21:31:37 -0800

"Oh stewardess, I speak jive."

By: dong_resin

dong_resin — Thu, 04 Apr 2002 21:41:58 -0800

You know wha' they say: See a broad to get that bodiac lay'er down, an' smack 'em, n' yack 'em.

By: stavrosthewonderchicken

stavrosthewonderchicken — Thu, 04 Apr 2002 22:36:53 -0800

Hold me.

By: jessamyn

jessamyn — Fri, 05 Apr 2002 00:21:07 -0800

This dong resin guy, is he new?

By: mlang

mlang — Fri, 05 Apr 2002 00:51:46 -0800

i'm all yours, evanizer. i didn't believe she would cheat until i saw it with my own eyes: goneill in a booth at the espnzone...dong resin all over her. ewwwww!

besides, girls are dirty, evil, and their private parts smell bad.

*voice deepens, becomes warmer, richer in tone...and increases in volume considerably*

but don't worry, ladies. now there's a product that safely and gently cleanses away moisture, wetness and odor, without the need to rinse. i am proud to introduce vagisil cleansing foam, the first and ONLY intimate cleansing foam on the market. but most important of all, its slim design allows for on the go cleansing convenience and all day freshness.

*voice returns to normal*

at least, that's what the television commercials seem to stress: the new product is unique because it fits in a purse or handbag, offering portable vaginal cleaning. women of america: you are confined to the home no longer! be free!

(now if only they would come up with a portable product that eliminates dong resin.)

By: Zora Neale Hurston

Zora Neale Hurston — Fri, 05 Apr 2002 02:08:53 -0800

I'm using vaginal cleansing foam right now.

My god. I just sank to a new low.

* hangs head in shame *

By: bingo

bingo — Fri, 05 Apr 2002 02:50:56 -0800

aaron: And there's always a way to argue a point without being personally insulting, FWIW.

Easy for you to say. You don't have to respond to your own comments.

By: Frasermoo

Frasermoo — Fri, 05 Apr 2002 03:02:37 -0800

ooooh handbag.

By: stavrosthewonderchicken

stavrosthewonderchicken — Fri, 05 Apr 2002 04:24:36 -0800

By: stavrosthewonderchicken

stavrosthewonderchicken — Fri, 05 Apr 2002 04:26:56 -0800

(*is secretly pleased that Zora N.H. has finally descended to his level*)

By: stavrosthewonderchicken

stavrosthewonderchicken — Fri, 05 Apr 2002 04:29:11 -0800

I note in passing that this thread is a bizarro-world 900th anniversary of ol' 1142, kinda.

By: jcterminal

jcterminal — Fri, 05 Apr 2002 04:44:30 -0800

thank god no one brought up that whole genital foam thing, my monitor doesn't need a coffee bath....

yummm.... coffee bath.

grab a sponge dong_, i'm coming home.

By: UncleFes

UncleFes — Fri, 05 Apr 2002 06:53:51 -0800

I be mackn' up this muthathumper tight.

Dong_resin's real name? Herbert Kornfeld. You be sussed, homie!

By: Danf

Danf — Fri, 05 Apr 2002 07:05:17 -0800

Matt, believe this old man: the revulsion with underarm hair(never mind the raging variety) gets worse and worse. That's why I stopped having German and Swedish girlfriends around the age of 21).

Miguel, could you send them over to me? I absolutely love underarm hair on a woman. . .my wife just started shaving, after 10+ years of not, and not only do I not like it as much but she uses MY razor to do it with!

By: UncleFes

UncleFes — Fri, 05 Apr 2002 07:10:31 -0800

I only like women growing underarm hair if they subsequently mousse and style it.

By: goneill

goneill — Fri, 05 Apr 2002 07:28:50 -0800

Dong, what are all of those tools for?
I don't understand, can you explain it?

No more talk of underarm hair - I decree. I don't understand however Danf, why you would want these extra women when you are married

By: evanizer

evanizer — Fri, 05 Apr 2002 07:33:04 -0800

Wow. Let's follow the conceptual shifts of this thread and see if we can use the results to determine a divine order and prove the existence of God:

porn
Netscape
triple-double posts
Smurfs
death
goth
bunnyfire
etymology of "squicked"
porn aesthetics
Neale's butt
underarm hair
the living God
dong_resin
Vagisil cleansing foam

Hmm, nope. We'll have to try again another time.

Or perhaps we have prov'd a new concept, that it only takes 204 Mefi posts to get from any one of these concepts to any other of them. Of course maybe not. It's much too easy to get from, say, 'bunnyfire' to a mention of God or from 'underarm hair' to 'dong_resin'. That often even happens in the same post. Back to the drawing board.

By: MiguelCardoso

MiguelCardoso — Fri, 05 Apr 2002 07:39:32 -0800

Here you go, Danf.

By: MiguelCardoso

MiguelCardoso — Fri, 05 Apr 2002 07:43:58 -0800

Oops, evanizer just joined in.

By: MiguelCardoso

MiguelCardoso — Fri, 05 Apr 2002 07:51:15 -0800

Evanizer: rereading your brilliant analysis, I wonder whether one of the whizzkids here could set up a MetaFilter version of the Kevin Bacon Game.

Say I'd challenge people to go from Will Wheaton to beer nuts, from pastel jackals to oreos, from Rwanda to Jennifer Connelly or from Bollywood to Ikea in the minimum amount of jumps/links, using only MetaFilter and MetaTalk.

Wouldn't this be a great game? Would this bring down the Google/MeFi search or what?

By: Ufez Jones

Ufez Jones — Fri, 05 Apr 2002 08:36:11 -0800

Can we please, please add Sex in a Romanian Museum to the list? It'd be oh so randy!

*cue Jon Lovitz
"Dangerous Sex! Dangerous Sex! Oh, why can't there be a single word for Dangerous Sex?!? OOOOOOOooooooohhhhhhhhh!"

By: dong_resin

dong_resin — Fri, 05 Apr 2002 08:39:47 -0800

There is, baby : dong.

By: dong_resin

dong_resin — Fri, 05 Apr 2002 08:40:55 -0800

Aaah-yeah.

By: goneill

goneill — Fri, 05 Apr 2002 09:03:54 -0800

incessant talk of pancakes won't stop the mad underarm hair loving in this thread. you sly dog you.
Dong you look simply ravishing in your new photo. ravishing.

By: Danf

Danf — Fri, 05 Apr 2002 09:16:54 -0800

goneill:I don't understand however Danf, why you would want these extra women when you are married

I do not know quite how to respond to this. . .It was rhetorical, idle bantering. . .but now that I think of it, having a group of European women, flown to my city, put up in separate hotel rooms, none knowing about the existence of the others, all just waiting for my unannounced visits. . .I think I have a plan. . funding of course is a concern but I think a few textads on my blog will take care of that. . .thank you goneill for the nudge on this.. . I'll let you know how it turns out.

By: xena

xena — Fri, 05 Apr 2002 09:19:40 -0800

Just leave us to negotiating over our beloved Dong will you?

Dong honey, I be cooking up the vanilla puddin right now - $240 worth. A whole lotta puddin'..

By: dong_resin

dong_resin — Fri, 05 Apr 2002 09:36:48 -0800

Dats a booty-fulla slip-slop, baby, uh-huh.

By: goneill

goneill — Fri, 05 Apr 2002 09:38:10 -0800

dong your appearance is requested on 1835.

By: clavdivs

clavdivs — Fri, 05 Apr 2002 12:54:24 -0800

"the people who control the media assume that the mentality of this country is low. But I give people more credit than that..."

-Linda Lovelace

By: goneill

goneill — Fri, 05 Apr 2002 13:04:25 -0800

I think she goes by a new name now clavdivs.

By: clavdivs

clavdivs — Fri, 05 Apr 2002 13:51:32 -0800

really? cool. im quoating her diary. so to cite her as anything but what the book says is not correct. for instance...

(famous last words)

"French-Canadian bean soup. I want to pay. Let them leave me alone."

-Arthur Flegenheimer.

so what. flegenheimer? whos he...
aka Dutch Shultz. see, quoating flegenhiemer is not the same as quoating schultz.

By: clavdivs

clavdivs — Fri, 05 Apr 2002 13:54:52 -0800

of course id get a lower grade for spelling:)

By: goneill

goneill — Fri, 05 Apr 2002 15:09:49 -0800

That's funny clavs because I thought that she wrote that book under her new/old name, but you were right - and I was wong. So yes, I agree that she should be called lovelace when citing her book. I thought that you were using her stripper name when citing her book, but I was wrong and I humbly bow now.

By: clavdivs

clavdivs — Fri, 05 Apr 2002 20:07:45 -0800

forgetta bout it.

By: jcterminal

jcterminal — Sat, 06 Apr 2002 21:30:27 -0800

here's hoping the next edition of suicide girls is hosted by wil wheaton. that would rock.