Without downplaying the social structures in our culture that make it more normative to objectify women, I have to wonder how we could divorce objectification/object consumption from any format of sexuality. It seems like physical attraction and consumption go hand in hand on at least some level.

I am going to have to respectfully disagree with the little fellow. Toucans have huge scary beaks and I am honestly horrified whenever I see the little "pretty princess" pageant children.

The sexy mummy really reminds me of an article on io9 about sci-fi/fantasy fleshlights. Interesting fact: 3 of the 4 fleshlights were in some way walking corpses. Nothing makes a disembodied vagina in a tube more horrifying than making it the disembodied vagina of a diseased person.

Dangit, I thought I posted the video this morning. It's pretty sweet.

It's funny, but maybe I've been around too long... I missed that article and haven't been on Jez as much this summer so it is news to me.

"the lesbian shitasses"

It's not picture perfect, but it does actually resemble the guy who played Claude Speed in Rockstar's 8 minute short for GTA II.

I think that is the first time I have run something truly HD on my computer. I've had a non-widescreen monitor for years with a vertical resolution of 1050p—very well within the HD range as far as I know. But it died a few weeks back and I bought a new widescreen monitor with 1080p. Well shit, maybe I just don't…

If this works, it is awesome. I don't have any allergies I know of, but the idea still makes me very happy.

I don't get it, his experience bar just started rising when he saw the quest rewards, but he hasn't done the quest yet.

It was pretty obvious compared side by side. Anyone who knew the choreographer's work would've known immediately.

Yeah, the response did make it more stupid. Still, it's bad either way because it's still passing off objectification like it's no biggie.

Ha ha, fair enough, fair enough (of course I was saying "let me explain [my own jumbled words] but oh well.).

I appreciate the extra footwork Clancy and Scicurious put in, but I feel like the original argument falls apart as soon as you remember that our current definition of feminine is different from that at any other moment in time because femininity is a social invention. I mean, how would you even begin to quantify…

Well first off, don't say mansplainer. Lots of us aren't so deluded as to think it is good to be a sex object (well, some of us anyway).

I'm saying that every person who dances is working within the discourse of previous works. I don't think either of us (or anyone) has the authority to say what an artist can/can't do. You can be unhappy about how you respond to a certain work of art, but to claim hard-set rule is something different.

A few things.

Art and essay aren't the same thing. In essay you are very specifically saying, "these are my ideas unless I state otherwise." Art is about communication of human experience. Copying Einstein's quote word for word and not referencing it says something different than copying the quote and saying Einstein said it…

You and I take a different stance on the language there.

She's a pro at tucking?