I never said her drawing was weird or that anyone was weird for liking it. Jeez, is *that* what you're hung up on, that I don't think that picture is particularly hot?
Or is it really that you disagree with my assertion that sexualising men involves a little more than just having some attractive guys hanging around?
I said the "loving eye" is what separates Perez's work from standard comic book art of men. You know, because you were asking me how, since most comic book artists attempt to draw attractive men, it's different from material created with the explicit intent to *sexualise* men.
For the record, I can see the "loving eye" in your friend's work even though it leaves me cold. I thought we had established that I didn't like the pic because the aesthetic behind it is not my thing, not because I think it's deficient in some way.
No, I'm not "hung up on" that, thanks for being dismissive again. It isn't possible I could have a legitimate complaint, of course, I must be 'hung up on' something irrelevant.
I'm irritated by the fact you have consistently positioned your view as the 'correct' view of a very subjective topic. And comments like "at least it looks like somewhat like something someone might conceivably find sexy", "a more passable example than most" and then your quotations marks on 'sexy', are being incredibly dismissive.
Frankly, you've been plain rude, and when I said "I disagree with so much of what you're saying I do think we're going to have to chalk this one up to subjectivity", I actually meant "You're neither coherent nor polite so I don't feel like wasting my time discussing this with you."
You know, because you were asking me how, since most comic book artists attempt to draw attractive men, it's different from material created with the explicit intent to *sexualise* men.
I haven't asked you how anything, and I wish you'd stop stating your extremely subjective opinion as The Truth. Between the "here, let me tell you how it is," and the "obviously you're mad at something irrelevant rather than anything I've said" it's like talking to a guy.
Frankly, you've been plain rude, and when I said "I disagree with so much of what you're saying I do think we're going to have to chalk this one up to subjectivity" I actually meant "You're neither coherent nor polite so I don't feel like wasting my time discussing this with you."
Personally I found the reply you posted a fairly dismissive response, considering the fair amount of time I'd spent responding to your goading questions - responses that I only gave because I thought there was a deeper point to your line of questioning than "so why don't you think this picture is sexy? It is sexy! If you don't agree than I don't know what you expect to find that's any better! Well how is *that* any different to normal superhero comics!"
I haven't asked you how anything, and I wish you'd stop stating your extremely subjective opinion as The Truth.
You must have forgotten all the replies you left me that were riddled with questions. Just as you must have overlooked all the times I stated my opinions with the caveats "to me" and "IMO."
overlooked all the times I stated my opinions with the caveats "to me" and "IMO"
Number of times you used the caveat "to me": zero. Number of times used the caveat "IMO": one. (No "in my opinion" either.)
Evidence seems to suggest it's not that I overlooked "all the times", it's just that you imagined them being there when they weren't there.
I'd love to believe this would give you the idea that maybe your opinions are being expressed more didatically and forcefully than you intend, but what are the odds?
I also like the way you translated "asking you to elaborate in an attempt to understand your point of view" as "goading you because you don't like a picture I like". Seriously, goading? Where did you even get that from? Did you even consider the idea you weren't expressing your opinion very clearly, or do you just assume anyone who doesn't instantly understand you is a grudgewanker?
I mean, that's an interesting story you've made up about how I was obsessing about you not liking a picture, but it's just that. I support your right to write fanfic about me, if that's how you get your jollies, but I'm going to have to ask you stop presenting it as truth.
Oh, and I see you've translate 'I didn't "ask you how" anything' as 'I didn't ask you anything'. I realise the stuff you pretend I say is easier to argue with, but perhaps you could just stick to the stuff I say. I mean, if you're going to make up all my interior and exterior dialogue, you might as well just write yourself notes, no need to bring the Internet or the real me into it.
Judging from what your earlier reply to me, I just assumed that paraphrasing was fair game now!
Also, you may have missed the "to me," but it is still there. It's even in some nice round brackets that make it easy to find.
Anyway, good night. I spend too much time in my day job dealing with horribly aggressive strangers to make it worthwhile engaging them in my spare time too.
Paraphrasing means keeping the meaning but changing the wording. Dropping 'how' changes the meaning. It's not paraphrasing.
Oh, I'm sorry for missing that instance. But as I'm sure you're not foolish enough to try and pretend one instance of each is all those times, my point stands that you're claiming to have qualified your opinion a lot more than you actually did.
Good night to you too. If you behave like this to the strangers you meet at your day job, I'm not at all surprised they're aggressive. Of course, on this showing, they could just be asking you questions which you assume are goading based on some offense you imagine they feel. How horribly aggressive!
While Scans Daily encourages vigorous debate, overt aggression is unnecessary. If you find a thread escalating, take a step back, or bow out of the conversation. While we note you attempted to bow out, you also returned to this thread.
While we realize there may be personality conflicts and that not all members need to get along or like one another, we ask that our members respect one another. Thank you.
While Scans Daily encourages vigorous debate, overt aggression is unnecessary. If you find a thread escalating, take a step back, or bow out of the conversation. While we realize there may be personality conflicts and that not all members need to get along or like one another, we ask that our members respect one another.
Founded by girl geeks and members of the slash fandom, scans_daily strives to provide an atmosphere which is LGBTQ-friendly, anti-racist, anti-ableist, woman-friendly and otherwise discrimination and harassment free.
Bottom line: If slash, feminism or anti-oppressive practice makes you react negatively, scans_daily is probably not for you.
no subject
Date: 2011-11-28 08:56 pm (UTC)Or is it really that you disagree with my assertion that sexualising men involves a little more than just having some attractive guys hanging around?
I said the "loving eye" is what separates Perez's work from standard comic book art of men. You know, because you were asking me how, since most comic book artists attempt to draw attractive men, it's different from material created with the explicit intent to *sexualise* men.
For the record, I can see the "loving eye" in your friend's work even though it leaves me cold. I thought we had established that I didn't like the pic because the aesthetic behind it is not my thing, not because I think it's deficient in some way.
no subject
Date: 2011-11-28 09:14 pm (UTC)I'm irritated by the fact you have consistently positioned your view as the 'correct' view of a very subjective topic. And comments like "at least it looks like somewhat like something someone might conceivably find sexy", "a more passable example than most" and then your quotations marks on 'sexy', are being incredibly dismissive.
Frankly, you've been plain rude, and when I said "I disagree with so much of what you're saying I do think we're going to have to chalk this one up to subjectivity", I actually meant "You're neither coherent nor polite so I don't feel like wasting my time discussing this with you."
You know, because you were asking me how, since most comic book artists attempt to draw attractive men, it's different from material created with the explicit intent to *sexualise* men.
I haven't asked you how anything, and I wish you'd stop stating your extremely subjective opinion as The Truth. Between the "here, let me tell you how it is," and the "obviously you're mad at something irrelevant rather than anything I've said" it's like talking to a guy.
no subject
Date: 2011-11-28 09:40 pm (UTC)Personally I found the reply you posted a fairly dismissive response, considering the fair amount of time I'd spent responding to your goading questions - responses that I only gave because I thought there was a deeper point to your line of questioning than "so why don't you think this picture is sexy? It is sexy! If you don't agree than I don't know what you expect to find that's any better! Well how is *that* any different to normal superhero comics!"
I haven't asked you how anything, and I wish you'd stop stating your extremely subjective opinion as The Truth.
You must have forgotten all the replies you left me that were riddled with questions. Just as you must have overlooked all the times I stated my opinions with the caveats "to me" and "IMO."
no subject
Date: 2011-11-28 10:07 pm (UTC)Number of times you used the caveat "to me": zero.
Number of times used the caveat "IMO": one. (No "in my opinion" either.)
Evidence seems to suggest it's not that I overlooked "all the times", it's just that you imagined them being there when they weren't there.
I'd love to believe this would give you the idea that maybe your opinions are being expressed more didatically and forcefully than you intend, but what are the odds?
I also like the way you translated "asking you to elaborate in an attempt to understand your point of view" as "goading you because you don't like a picture I like". Seriously, goading? Where did you even get that from? Did you even consider the idea you weren't expressing your opinion very clearly, or do you just assume anyone who doesn't instantly understand you is a grudgewanker?
I mean, that's an interesting story you've made up about how I was obsessing about you not liking a picture, but it's just that. I support your right to write fanfic about me, if that's how you get your jollies, but I'm going to have to ask you stop presenting it as truth.
Oh, and I see you've translate 'I didn't "ask you how" anything' as 'I didn't ask you anything'. I realise the stuff you pretend I say is easier to argue with, but perhaps you could just stick to the stuff I say. I mean, if you're going to make up all my interior and exterior dialogue, you might as well just write yourself notes, no need to bring the Internet or the real me into it.
no subject
Date: 2011-11-28 10:17 pm (UTC)Also, you may have missed the "to me," but it is still there. It's even in some nice round brackets that make it easy to find.
Anyway, good night. I spend too much time in my day job dealing with horribly aggressive strangers to make it worthwhile engaging them in my spare time too.
no subject
Date: 2011-11-28 10:27 pm (UTC)Oh, I'm sorry for missing that instance. But as I'm sure you're not foolish enough to try and pretend one instance of each is all those times, my point stands that you're claiming to have qualified your opinion a lot more than you actually did.
Good night to you too. If you behave like this to the strangers you meet at your day job, I'm not at all surprised they're aggressive. Of course, on this showing, they could just be asking you questions which you assume are goading based on some offense you imagine they feel. How horribly aggressive!
no subject
Date: 2011-11-28 10:40 pm (UTC)Not ever, really, but certainly not because you think they were too forceful in their opinions about sexy pictures of men. :/
no subject
Date: 2011-11-28 10:54 pm (UTC)Mod Note
Date: 2011-11-28 11:07 pm (UTC)This is under discussion by the Mod team so we may come back it.
Mod Note
Date: 2011-12-04 05:03 pm (UTC)While we realize there may be personality conflicts and that not all members need to get along or like one another, we ask that our members respect one another. Thank you.
Mod Note
Date: 2011-12-04 04:55 pm (UTC)