Quote:
Originally Posted by PanKrato
For real,
They need to get a life. We're here to watch the arts of unarmed combat, not a bunch of worthless hoes. People with no respect for girls need to get out more.
|
"Worthless hoes?" I am really quite sure that their boyfriends/husbands and family members would disagree strongly with that,indeed,take extreme personal umbrage over a remark like that,that is, if they didn't attribute it to coming from the mouth of someone terminally brain dead.
You've never met these ladies. In the few instances in my life when I was actually able to personally meet some professional models,they were all fine ladies who saw modeling and the subsequent media exposure as a stepping stone to careers in cinema,or music,or some other media-intensive enterprise.
I personally object to the word "ho." I agree with the people who see it as a disparaging term that is essentially misogynistic in import.It entered mainstream vocabulary by way of the cultural abomination known as "gangsta rap" and the low life criminals who tried to re-invent themselves as quote un-quote "rappers."
I sincerely feel that the word "ho" has no place in the vocabulary of a gentleman.
More importantly,though, your other comments bring to mind the debate that occurred sometime ago over the free TV airing of the Lee Marvin movie "Point Blank." To re-cap, in the original movie, there is a very,very brief scene where an actress, I believe it is Angie Dickinson,appears topless in what was supposed to be a topless bar in California.
That brief scene was cut out for free TV viewing.
But the critics said:Look what was left in the movie!!!
"Point Blank" was, at the time, one of the most ultra-violent movies ever made!Those who were responsible for the TV editing found nothing objectionable at all about showing somebody getting blown away by being shot in the head with a high-powered rifle.
Or what about the scene where Lee Marvin gets set up in the back of a bar,and there are three hoods waiting for him.One of them has a pipe, one of them has a blackjack, and I believe the other has a chain or something equally vicious.
The scene where Lee Marvin fights for life has to be one of the most ultra-violent scenes in a movie of its time.
So the critics raise the question:Why is it all right to show somebody being murdered by a high-powered rifle or show somebody being set-up in an alleyway and being beaten by hired thugs,but it's not okay to show a woman's breast?
I say the same thing.
Why is it okay to see somebody get kicked in the head or smashed in the face or guillotine choked,or subjected to an excrutiatingly painful submission hold, but it is wrong to give someone a glimpse of a beautiful woman who has a nice body?
And I want to go on record as one of those people who believe that a woman's body, when it is beautiful, is one of the most beautiful things in the universe!
Just my opinion,
Ferdelance