Bi-Polar Bear wrote:she looks like Sinead O'Connor only stupid.
Sinead O'Connor was hot...
Lord Ellpus wrote:It's a self feeding industry, so it balances out in the end.
Oh, I have no doubt that its a symbiotic relationship, just think it's one that appeals to the baser instincts.
Comparison with porn holds up that way too: porn stars, mags and buyers are also in a symbiotic/reciprocal relationship. Doesnt change the fact that much of it is pretty gross.
smorgs wrote:I have no doubt that you had the intention of painting a picture, flushd. No need to rally your troops
Flushd didnt "rally" me, I'm more than able to be an opinionated prick all by myself.
smorgs wrote:The Romans used to produce fan mags about particular gladiators, mainly for the women!
Now that I did not know. Kind of cool, that.
I dont mind fan stuff - its the nasty stuff I think is, well, nasty.
OK, perhaps instead of the outright porn analogy this one: there's these boy mags, like Loaded and, I dunno.. bunch of em, for the brash and loudmouth teenagers / twenty-somethings. More lifestyle than Playboy, but still lotsa large photos of nude or almost nude ladies. And though its almost all bland cheesecake, sure, I bought one or two, earlier. But you know what turned me off, and also just weirded me out? You have these near-nudies, right, and then they're accompanied by captions or descriptions of the ladies in question that basically bash or ridicule them. So you have this mix of fascination with agression, driven by envy or resentment (she'd never sleep with someone like you), or I dont know what. I think its kinda creepy. Thats what these often mean-spirited gossip mags remind me of, the same mix of fascination with resentment/agression.
ok, enough psychologizing..