Opinion of texarkana's signature?

[fhtagn]

Should be banned for being creepy, objectifying, etc.

odd words coming from someone who called the original photo "sleazy".




anyway, a little weird, but certainly not the most offensive sig that's been on the forum, and people are making a much bigger deal of it than it is.

[fhtagn]

I'm somewhat tired of people who keep fawning over skinny bleach blondes.

best of both worlds? lol

[fhtagn]

1. People shouldn't be shamed for enjoying pornography as long as people are not harmed in the making of it.
2. I find his current picture to be harmless and relatively tasteful.
3. I find his current picture no worse than the  cartoon or anime women in other users' signatures.
4. I support his current picture because it challenges the hegemonic image of the white beautiful woman that society reinforces. In fact, I find it refreshing



5. All signatures are awful and, for the most part, incredibly narcissistic. I turned signatures off as soon as I joined.

This actually was partly my intention. I think she's an absolutely beautiful woman and I'm somewhat tired of people who keep fawning over skinny bleach blondes.

Yay! Every woman has the right to be creepily objectified, regardless of their race and body type!

If him objectifying is the issue here, why aren't you making an equally big deal about the hot guys/girls threads on AAD? Those threads objectify much more than what Texarkana is doing here.

or even complaining on the "what famous person would you marry?" thread?

[fhtagn]

1. People shouldn't be shamed for enjoying pornography as long as people are not harmed in the making of it.
2. I find his current picture to be harmless and relatively tasteful.
3. I find his current picture no worse than the  cartoon or anime women in other users' signatures.
4. I support his current picture because it challenges the hegemonic image of the white beautiful woman that society reinforces. In fact, I find it refreshing



5. All signatures are awful and, for the most part, incredibly narcissistic. I turned signatures off as soon as I joined.

This actually was partly my intention. I think she's an absolutely beautiful woman and I'm somewhat tired of people who keep fawning over skinny bleach blondes.

Yay! Every woman has the right to be creepily objectified, regardless of their race and body type!

If him objectifying is the issue here, why aren't you making an equally big deal about the hot guys/girls threads on AAD? Those threads objectify much more than what Texarkana is doing here.

or even complaining on the "what famous person would you marry?" thread?

Because it's confined to a thread, it's a moderation free forum, it doesn't come up outside of the thread itself, this is the definition of whataboutery, the culture of aad makes complaining about things like it very not a good idea, seriously how can you not feel that tex's stuff is even slightly really creepy. etc.

the point is you cannot make a big deal claiming this is objectifying and saying this is wrong when there are entire threads that do it that you apparently see nothing wrong with. it's hypocritical.

[fhtagn]

1. People shouldn't be shamed for enjoying pornography as long as people are not harmed in the making of it.
2. I find his current picture to be harmless and relatively tasteful.
3. I find his current picture no worse than the  cartoon or anime women in other users' signatures.
4. I support his current picture because it challenges the hegemonic image of the white beautiful woman that society reinforces. In fact, I find it refreshing



5. All signatures are awful and, for the most part, incredibly narcissistic. I turned signatures off as soon as I joined.

This actually was partly my intention. I think she's an absolutely beautiful woman and I'm somewhat tired of people who keep fawning over skinny bleach blondes.

Yay! Every woman has the right to be creepily objectified, regardless of their race and body type!

If him objectifying is the issue here, why aren't you making an equally big deal about the hot guys/girls threads on AAD? Those threads objectify much more than what Texarkana is doing here.

or even complaining on the "what famous person would you marry?" thread?

Because it's confined to a thread, it's a moderation free forum, it doesn't come up outside of the thread itself, this is the definition of whataboutery, the culture of aad makes complaining about things like it very not a good idea, seriously how can you not feel that tex's stuff is even slightly really creepy. etc.

the point is you cannot make a big deal claiming this is objectifying and saying this is wrong when there are entire threads that do it that you apparently see nothing wrong with. it's hypocritical.

I never said the thread was okay, and the few times I've talked about it have(has?) been negative. And again, this is blatant whataboutism.

You fail to realize that this woman is a porn star. I don't think she really has an issue with someone she doesn't know seeing her as some sexual object considering that is literally the job that she signed up for.

You also never addressed my criticism in the other thread of you calling the original photo used "sleazy". I sure hope you don't claim to be a feminist if that was your wording of choice.

[fhtagn]

The way porn portrays women does have an affect on some mens attitudes(and y'know, its kind of gross to have this s**t shoved in your face on a public forum where uncensored swearing gets a post deleted). Not that I'd expect someone who unironically believes that trump and republicans aren't racist to get that kind of thing. BTW, "Sleazy" was referring to tex's use of it, genius. Stop being disingenuous.

Not sure where you're getting that from since I've never actually spoken about that, but good to know you still have a sense of imagination. also good to know you deliberately throw around the term "racist" at groups you just don't like.

That being said, yes, SOME men treat women differently because of porn, but not all men. Even women (gasp) enjoy watching porn, and a lot of times, it's not because of the men in it. Does that make those women evil for objectifying too?


It's already been established nothing about the original photo was pornographic, so you're not actually having anything shoved in your face that you wouldn't also find elsewhere on most non-porn internet outlets. If you don't like his sig that much, it's really not that hard to either scroll past or hit "ignore" and move on with your day. No b**ching necessary.