Fantômas’ avatar

Hangedman wrote: Not that i had a problem with the old one, but I love his new avatar

Yep, much better...

 

I think that this avatar is f***ing awful, but well, on a site where people talk about sex, drugs, and the worst, music, there should not be problem with violence...

Edited by Borealis

 

see???? Stare at it long enough and it gets slower and slower!!!

Edited by Tony R

Trotsky wrote: I think most societies have strong religious (in US's case its Christianity, in Malaysia its Islam) sensibilities that try and suppress an open and honest acceptance of what human sexuality is ... yet violence is widely accepted ...

That really depends on which variant of Chrstianity you're looking at...if it's the conservative kind, I can definitely see there being a problem. But if it's a more levelheaded kind, the only way I can see anybody thinking there's something wrong with it is if they have objections to waiting to actually DO something until marriage.

Sean Trane wrote: Funny how a morally incorrect avatar discussion disgresses into a politically incorrect football thread.

Yes I must apologise for my part in that ... it is interesting discussion ... I do feel strongly that it is ridiculous that violence is far less censored than sex/nudity. As parents of three young kids, my wife and I have banned toys celebrating violence, and try and present sex/nudity in as open and honest a manner as possible. 

I think most societies have strong religious (in US's case its Christianity, in Malaysia its Islam) sensibilities that try and suppress an open and honest acceptance of what human sexuality is  ... yet violence is widely accepted ...

By the way, the ban on weapons still didn't work ... my son started school and now he's dancing around the house pretending a broom is a light sabre ... which is no different from what I was doing 20 something years ago!

Yikes ... who knew the football avatar would be more irritating than the hammer and sickle!

I believe The Bullet, Floydwright, Tony R and Ivan all commented on this.

First off, my avatar is a genuine picture of a "goal" that was scored by Tottenham Hotspur (the team that The Bullet and I both support) against Manchester United (a team that I loathe). However the linesman was too far behind the play and the keeper scooped it out before he arrived and it was not given as a goal.

As a long time Tottenham fan surrounded by Manchester United fans (including my father, most of my friends and relatives ... in fact, Malaysia has the largest number of MU fans outside the UK) I was particularly outraged since I have long mantained that Manchester United gain a distinct advantage when playing at their home ground (in league matches from 1993 to 2003 penalties were awarded at a rate of 17 in favour of Manchester United and 1 in favour of whichever opposition they happened to be playing!

At the time of the incident I had already been quite annoyed by a match a few weeks earlier when Arsenal (Spurs' historical arch-rivals) lost to Manchester United in a match filled with dubious refreeing decisions and had a record-breaking 49 game unbeaten run snapped. It takes some doing to annoy a Spurs fan over an injustice to Arsenal, but I've always preferred to see my team lose in a fair game, rather than win deceitfully. (can someone get me an emoticon with a halo?)

Tony R, as a die-hard MU fan has accordingly found a misleading picture (which I just realised he admitted to having manipulated)  The MU fans in my office behave in a similar manner ... and continually delete this evidence of blatant injustice which I have set as my background on my work terminal... so I thought I'd get my own back my using it as my avatar. It's all in good fun of course, between overgrown boys! 

By the way, Ivan, aside from supporting an EPL, the international football side I support, after my own no-hoper Malaysia of course is Colombia!     It's no joke supporting these brilliant self-destructive gents from half-way accross the world I can tell you!

Edited by Trotsky

Let me inform you Tony R that if the second picture is the real one, that's not a goal.

The whole 100% of the circunference of the ball has to pass the goal line and in this case obviously hasn't because a small part is covering the linel, or even if it's goal, thepicture doesn't define it.

If the left photo is true, well somebody should    the referee and the linesman.

Football is my second passion of course the real football, not the USA sport where the ball is kiked only a few times in a game.

Iván

Edited by ivan_2068

Tony--I think that's a goal being scored against his favorite soccer/football team, if I'm not mistaken.

The-Bullet wrote: As a Tottenham Hotspur fan I find Trotsky's Avatar :-    offensive and painful

Dont know what you are getting Mr Bullet..???

I think what's wrong is that our whole culture's got a very warped view of the human body, in general, and both extremes (the commercializing/pornography and the uproar you refer to) are really two sides of the same coin. I think what's gone wrong is that the body--most especially the female body, but the male one to some extent as well--has been commercialized and exaggerated to a point where it's no wonder you get people perceiving it as something grotesque. Just take a look at a beer commercial, for instance...you'd think a woman wasn't worth anything unless she had breasts so large they have to be fake and/or give her tremendous back pain to live with. Or look at Britney Spears (if you can!). I really don't appreciate the use of sex to sell.

If you look at how the human body is depicted in art (that includes both commercial and fine art), it's very rare to see something now like the Statue of David or some of Storm Thorgerson's artwork (Shine On box set, PULSE, Broken China) where the body is not exaggerated or excessively sensualized (in an exaggerated, distorted way), but rather respected for what it is. The thing with pornography is, I don't think that in many cases the people who make it are going for realism...they're in more of a commercial, selling mindset that ends up distorting what should be treated with much more respect. Plus, I really doubt the emotion sought after is love, with all its spiritual, emotional, intellectual, AND physical components that go into a mature relationship--but mere arousal.

Therefore I think it's perfectly understandable that parents would rather choose for themselves how they want to introduce kids to sexuality...it's not like the media is providing any real guidance. It's not an issue of parents teaching kids that nudity is evil (well, I imagine there are some, but that wasn't the case with my growing up), but of explaining what is and what is not a proper context. As for me, I probably found out in the best place of all: a medical book, where there was no agenda other than explaining the facts.

Edited by FloydWright