i think he has made it clear that minimizing notional offence was not a desired aim
― nakhchivan, Tuesday, 27 December 2011 23:13 (twelve years ago) link
can we discuss Mark Ruffalo's chest hair kthnkx
― Lord Sotosyn, Tuesday, 27 December 2011 23:15 (twelve years ago) link
what I was getting at is that you imply that it's LESS insulting to suggest women are attracted to "a lack of adult ambition or perhaps even intelligence" than to suggest that they are attracted to "asexual boyishness" when in fact both suggestions are patronizing and insulting by their very nature.
I implied no such thing, either about all women, or the insult level. I was referring only to a possible reason (among others I've listed in the thread) that some women who find Mark Ruffalo attractive might do so, and wished to be understood properly as to the precision of that reason, when others decided my words meant something else, and that that something else was the basis for being patronizing and/or insulting.
― illegal crew member (C.K. Dexter Holland), Tuesday, 27 December 2011 23:20 (twelve years ago) link
Nor did I wholly dismiss the basis of the attraction, and repeated it in less judgmental terms that I think make it more acceptable/understandable, whichever gender is doing the desiring.
― illegal crew member (C.K. Dexter Holland), Tuesday, 27 December 2011 23:21 (twelve years ago) link
keep digging
― I am womansplainer hear me roar (Shakey Mo Collier), Tuesday, 27 December 2011 23:21 (twelve years ago) link
he's got a looseness that borders on rakishness. an apparent carelessness, he can seem almost unwatched, but he rubs his eyes, yawns, draws attention to himself. in films he just paws at everything around him.
the more this "threatening" word gets retracted from any commonly understood definition of what it usually means, the more obvious it is that this is some very specific bone being picked and has no actual significance in terms of actually describing anything real.
― judith, Tuesday, 27 December 2011 23:26 (twelve years ago) link
this is a good one to let go
― nice catch cuauhtemoc blanco niño (dayo), Tuesday, 27 December 2011 23:26 (twelve years ago) link
because men and women are not categories that can be arbitrarily swapped out and reversed fyi - these are categories that are informed by billions of years of biology and millions of years of human culture, they are not interchangeable
I see. Because we are victims of our biology and environment and can not transcend them, even for purposes of academic argument, we need a form of affirmative action in favor of validating womens' speech and desire such that it is unacceptable at this point to suggest that some women might act in the same fashion as some men (which fashion we have heretofore regarded as sexist)?
― illegal crew member (C.K. Dexter Holland), Tuesday, 27 December 2011 23:27 (twelve years ago) link
Yeah, I'm not even that into chest hair* but I just saw that and thought "jesus christ, YES"
*well, except for TY's weird sprinkly blond chest hair oh god it's been WEEKS since I posted a Thom pls pls pls I am fit to burst with fuckwant I'm so sorry but I have to...
http://userserve-ak.last.fm/serve/_/45866973/Thom+Yorke+000001.jpg
AAAAAHHHH I FEEL SO MUCH BETTER NOW lookit his eyes are so twinkly
― this is what YULE get if you xMASS with us (Fotherington Thomas), Tuesday, 27 December 2011 23:28 (twelve years ago) link
so when ILX proper comes back gabbneb will still be 51's right
― I am womansplainer hear me roar (Shakey Mo Collier), Tuesday, 27 December 2011 23:31 (twelve years ago) link
51d
While I don't wish to give offense, you're correct that I don't seek to minimize it. I try to be provocative in order to provoke thought (which is what I think this place is or should be about). Whether that works is another story.
― illegal crew member (C.K. Dexter Holland), Tuesday, 27 December 2011 23:32 (twelve years ago) link
If I wanted to "patronize" anyone, I would shut up.
― illegal crew member (C.K. Dexter Holland), Tuesday, 27 December 2011 23:34 (twelve years ago) link
can you work thru this idea you have of the 'unambitious' even 'unintelligent' becoming desire objects
iyo is this functionally pathological or is it merely an undesirable desiring?
― nakhchivan, Tuesday, 27 December 2011 23:38 (twelve years ago) link
dont be mean
― judith, Tuesday, 27 December 2011 23:41 (twelve years ago) link
he can't help it
i feel like his watch would get caught in all of that
― slandblox goole, Tuesday, 27 December 2011 23:41 (twelve years ago) link
ow
― nuhnuhnuh, Tuesday, 27 December 2011 23:43 (twelve years ago) link
Fuck it, let's just talk about Hitler hairdoes until the sun explodes
the panic, the vomitthe panic, the vomitgod loves his chest hairgod loves his chest hair yeah
http://userserve-ak.last.fm/serve/500/84286/Thom+Yorke.jpg
― this is what YULE get if you xMASS with us (Fotherington Thomas), Tuesday, 27 December 2011 23:44 (twelve years ago) link
a general girls&gays ws thread might be in order. i think its important to remember the main topic of general affirmation in this thread. mark ruffalo is attractive.
― judith, Tuesday, 27 December 2011 23:46 (twelve years ago) link
I don't believe I called it undesirable. And I'm positing "unambitious" or "unintelligent" only relatively to the desirer. Perhaps that is in fact a (socially) desirable desire at this particular point in history - women wishing to be more successful than their partners.
― illegal crew member (C.K. Dexter Holland), Tuesday, 27 December 2011 23:49 (twelve years ago) link
by attractive I assume you mean lacking in adult ambition or perhaps even intelligence
xp
― I am womansplainer hear me roar (Shakey Mo Collier), Tuesday, 27 December 2011 23:50 (twelve years ago) link
of course. i am threatened by men who are ambitious and intelligent.
― judith, Tuesday, 27 December 2011 23:51 (twelve years ago) link
You know what Mark Ruffalo is ~about~ to do here?
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_hpgX-yqoglg/TQWEZMh-5iI/AAAAAAAAErk/x9tO6PNQC-U/s1600/mark+ruffalo2.jpg
BITE HIS SHIRT.
It's a thing. It's so a thing.
― this is what YULE get if you xMASS with us (Fotherington Thomas), Tuesday, 27 December 2011 23:54 (twelve years ago) link
― judith, Tuesday, December 27, 2011 6:46 PM (8 minutes ago) Bookmark Permalink
yes! i am sorry, plax, i keep running off at the mouth itt and then i'll think of you and your clarity of purpose in starting this thread and feel guilt.
― horseshoe, Tuesday, 27 December 2011 23:56 (twelve years ago) link
Not all messages are displayed: show all messages (969 of them)
― judith, Tuesday, 27 December 2011 23:57 (twelve years ago) link
but no, horseshoe you are a delight on this thread!
it started so well! donofrio is probably mark ruffalo in a mark ruffalo suit!
― judith, Tuesday, 27 December 2011 23:58 (twelve years ago) link
<3
he kind of looks like brando in that shirt biting picture, am i crazy/racist?
xp haha that is one of my fave jho posts of all time now
― horseshoe, Tuesday, 27 December 2011 23:59 (twelve years ago) link
no i see it! i think there is a brando/ruffalo connection definitely.
can i just
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Gi8N25Xvus
― judith, Wednesday, 28 December 2011 00:01 (twelve years ago) link
I think he just looks like some Platonic ideal of hott mediterranean latin lover *insert racist stereotype here* coz even I'm feelin' that pic. But it could just be the shirt biting.
― this is what YULE get if you xMASS with us (Fotherington Thomas), Wednesday, 28 December 2011 00:02 (twelve years ago) link
no i see it! i think there is a brando/ruffalo connection definitely
Wow. Yes.
― illegal crew member (C.K. Dexter Holland), Wednesday, 28 December 2011 00:02 (twelve years ago) link
also gabbneb, i believe that you meant unthreatening in the (nonsensical) way you claim, but that's not how it's usually used when describing men, and in your initial post "unthreatening" was certainly legible in the usual sense of "asexual" or "someone 12-year old girls would like because they don't know anything about anything."
― horseshoe, Wednesday, 28 December 2011 00:03 (twelve years ago) link
man, that screentest. he is so bashful!
― horseshoe, Wednesday, 28 December 2011 00:04 (twelve years ago) link
he seems high to me
― judith, Wednesday, 28 December 2011 00:05 (twelve years ago) link
also gabbneb, i believe that you meant unthreatening in the (nonsensical) way you claim, but that's not how it's usually used when describing me
Fair enough. I'd like to think that ILX is free of that sort of thing.
and in your initial post "unthreatening" was certainly legible in the usual sense of "asexual" or "someone 12-year old girls would like because they don't know anything about anything."
Fair enough, again, but I explicated it not too many posts later (and had adverted to a genderless view in the original post).
― illegal crew member (C.K. Dexter Holland), Wednesday, 28 December 2011 00:07 (twelve years ago) link
Why the fuck are we having this discussion here when Ruffalo's chest hair presents more semiotic challenges?
― Lord Sotosyn, Wednesday, 28 December 2011 00:07 (twelve years ago) link
holy hell @ at FT's last ruffalo pic
― silvana mangano, Wednesday, 28 December 2011 00:08 (twelve years ago) link
Yeah, can we talk about that chest hair some more?
― this is what YULE get if you xMASS with us (Fotherington Thomas), Wednesday, 28 December 2011 00:11 (twelve years ago) link
I explicated it not too many posts later (and had adverted to a genderless view in the original post).
― illegal crew member (C.K. Dexter Holland), Tuesday, December 27, 2011 7:07 PM (3 minutes ago) Bookmark Permalink
maybe you and i should just get our own thread, but to me saying that mark ruffalo is unthreatening in comparison to dudes who are more like the dude version of "strong women" is not genderless! how we characterize "strong women" and "threatening men" (lol) is all about characteristics that we think of as typically masculine.
― horseshoe, Wednesday, 28 December 2011 00:13 (twelve years ago) link
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_pKBndCJ3uLs/Sx3eUBLTonI/AAAAAAAADKM/r4fQ9SLAzKo/s640/JOAN+W-+PAINTING+(FULL)lo.jpg
― judith, Wednesday, 28 December 2011 00:13 (twelve years ago) link
http://www.anothermag.com/filestorage/20/0/20520.jpg
― judith, Wednesday, 28 December 2011 00:15 (twelve years ago) link
is all about characteristics that we think of as typically masculine.
And I think it's clear that I don't, or at least am speaking academically as if they are not. Perhaps because I was raised by equally successful parents (who admittedly are not free of gender roles)?
― illegal crew member (C.K. Dexter Holland), Wednesday, 28 December 2011 00:16 (twelve years ago) link
my dilemma here is the facial hair, i think i prefer clean-shaven ruffalo out of the box but i'm willing to entertain other povs
― nuhnuhnuh, Wednesday, 28 December 2011 00:16 (twelve years ago) link
ah the non-gendered paradise that is "speaking academically"
― I am womansplainer hear me roar (Shakey Mo Collier), Wednesday, 28 December 2011 00:17 (twelve years ago) link
he has a clean shaven face that suggests three day stubble. he has a mussed look about him. i realise this is getting a bit terius nash.
― judith, Wednesday, 28 December 2011 00:18 (twelve years ago) link
haha i totally end up feeling all terius nash after posting about mark ruffalo for too long
― horseshoe, Wednesday, 28 December 2011 00:19 (twelve years ago) link
in the sense of, i am being a creep
― horseshoe, Wednesday, 28 December 2011 00:20 (twelve years ago) link
― illegal crew member (C.K. Dexter Holland), Wednesday, December 28, 2011 12:16 AM (2 minutes ago)
i don't think it is in any way possible to imagine such a space in which gender is abolished. and to do so would be to imagine a completely different context for desire from the one we are stuck in. what you are trying to do is p much just as dumb as what you are actually doing.
― judith, Wednesday, 28 December 2011 00:21 (twelve years ago) link
Horseshoe, you know I met stanley tucci, right??
― smoove operator, Wednesday, 28 December 2011 00:22 (twelve years ago) link