Comments on: All for a good cause

All for a good cause

growabrain — Sat, 01 Oct 2005 01:09:25 -0800

4th annual & All for a great cause

By: papakwanz

papakwanz — Sat, 01 Oct 2005 01:36:33 -0800

Yeah, um... NSFW?

By: Meatbomb

Meatbomb — Sat, 01 Oct 2005 03:16:29 -0800

Pictures of women in clothes is NSFW?

By: nthdegx

nthdegx — Sat, 01 Oct 2005 03:24:03 -0800

"Boobiethon", papakwanz. It wasn't going to be a treatise on European monetary union, was it?

By: stavrosthewonderchicken

stavrosthewonderchicken — Sat, 01 Oct 2005 03:52:02 -0800

Could've been a drive to protect pelagic seabirds.

By: mathowie

mathowie — Sat, 01 Oct 2005 04:06:03 -0800

After four years, it's good to see this is still going and the photo quality is getting better. I dunno about putting photos of nursing babies among erotic photos of breasts is a good idea. I kind of have two bins in my brain listed under "boobs": one is marked "yeah, wow, hot!" and the other is marked "life giving organs providing the best start for a growing baby" and never the twain shall meet.

By: Dreama

Dreama — Sat, 01 Oct 2005 04:51:48 -0800

I'm with mathowie on the nursing pictures thing. Those of us who proudly fly the lactivist flag have been trying desperately to separate the use of breasts as a means of nurturing and nourishing from their sexual contexts. This kind of thing sets back that work in a bad way. Talk about subverting your own best interests.

By: RavinDave

RavinDave — Sat, 01 Oct 2005 04:57:21 -0800

er ... own "breast" interests -- ? /nicker-nicker

By: clevershark

clevershark — Sat, 01 Oct 2005 05:07:16 -0800

I'm not really against the "baby feeding" pics, but, like the male contributions, those are decidedly unoriginal after the first instance thereof. This one was kinda cute.

By: RavinDave

RavinDave — Sat, 01 Oct 2005 05:08:32 -0800

(Might wanna double check that ol' link CS.)

By: clevershark

clevershark — Sat, 01 Oct 2005 05:43:05 -0800

I should have added -- the link I included is unrelated to either babies or male boobies.

By: jonmc

jonmc — Sat, 01 Oct 2005 06:53:57 -0800

Them's are some nice boobies. PB & J girl rocks. Nutritional balance is important.

By: peacay

peacay — Sat, 01 Oct 2005 07:01:05 -0800

It's not the nursing mothers that shock, it's those damn manboobs thrown in.

By: matty

matty — Sat, 01 Oct 2005 07:03:44 -0800

So if ratearod.com starts accepting donations for charity can I make it an FPP?

By: Popular Ethics

Popular Ethics — Sat, 01 Oct 2005 07:18:12 -0800

So if ratearod.com starts accepting donations for charity I was wondering what this group would set up for prostate cancer...

By: scheptech

scheptech — Sat, 01 Oct 2005 08:26:15 -0800

both female and male 'rack shots' are accepted. One of the few contexts in which you'll see "female and male" instead of the conventional order "male and female". I not sure what that means but there you go. Yes, this is highly subjective but really, isn't the male body essentially humorous in appearance whereas the female body (as evidenced by the first pic) is (can be) downright ethereal? Probably just my point of view...

By: jonmc

jonmc — Sat, 01 Oct 2005 08:39:23 -0800

Yes, this is highly subjective but really, isn't the male body essentially humorous in appearance whereas the female body (as evidenced by the first pic) is (can be) downright ethereal? schepster, I've been positing that point of veiw (naked female body=beautiful, naked male body=ridiculous) for years around here and it's never brought me anything but flak.

By: rafter

rafter — Sat, 01 Oct 2005 09:37:57 -0800

Jerry: "Well, I was walking around naked in front of Melissa the other day--" Elaine: "Whoa! Walking around naked? Ahh... that is not a good look for a man." George: "Why not? It's a good look for a woman." Elaine: "Well, the female body is a... work of art. The male body is utilitarian, it's for gettin' around, like a jeep." Jerry: "So you don't think it's attractive?" Elaine: "It's hideous. The hair, the... the lumpiness. It's simian." George: "Well, some women like it." Elaine: "Hmm. Sickies."

By: cali

cali — Sat, 01 Oct 2005 10:05:33 -0800

Seeing the nursing moms and guys in there startles you out of the boobs-as-objects mindset, and draws attention to the point of the boobiethon. At least that's my theory.

By: Secret Life of Gravy

Secret Life of Gravy — Sat, 01 Oct 2005 10:28:21 -0800

So Jonmc, Desmond Morris's new book was written just for you! The Naked Woman Morris explores the evolutionary, cultural, and biological traits and tendencies that have caused woman to become the creature she is today. Morris is positively giddy with admiration for his subject, stating that the human female is "far more advanced" than her male counterpart, the result of evolutionary developments that make her the "most remarkable organism" on the planet. And yet, Morris avers, woman has not come far enough--at least in some global cultures, where male domination runs counter to human biological imperative. Thus, each chapter, which correlates to body parts as subtle as the brow and as expected as the breasts, examines how each characteristic has been shaped by social authority.

By: jonmc

jonmc — Sat, 01 Oct 2005 10:32:24 -0800

SLoG, I saw that book on the shelf at the bookstore the other day. I immediately grabbed it and read the sections on the fun parts. I do the same thing with medical textbooks. I'm a fuckin' pervert.

By: raysmj

raysmj — Sat, 01 Oct 2005 11:48:35 -0800

cali: Yeah, it's just a theory, for men can get breast cancer too.

By: Jesse H Christ

Jesse H Christ — Sat, 01 Oct 2005 12:27:03 -0800

The notion that the female body is inherently more pleasing to the eye sounds pretty silly to me. When I hear this I usually assume it is coming from a straight man. Some women have said similar things, but I think that only supports the idea that men are more interested in visual stimulation than women. I for one lingered far longer on some of the man-boob pics than on any of the women because to me a nice male chest is more appealing than a female chest. So much so that I would almost consider the appeal inherent if I were not aware of the fact that taste is subjective. Also, the pics of men's boobs are taken in such a way as to make them look unappealing.

By: notmydesk

notmydesk — Sat, 01 Oct 2005 13:21:17 -0800

"Those of us who proudly fly the lactivist flag have been trying desperately to separate the use of breasts as a means of nurturing and nourishing from their sexual contexts." I've been trying to do the same thing with my penis. It's not just a glorious object of lust, ladies and gays! It's a means of emptying my bladder of urine, but everytime I wee in public, someone makes a big fuss about it.

By: jonmc

jonmc — Sat, 01 Oct 2005 13:33:36 -0800

The notion that the female body is inherently more pleasing to the eye sounds pretty silly to me. When I hear this I usually assume it is coming from a straight man. Dude, look at yourself in the mirror. I enjoy my penis quite a bit, but I do realize that it looks like something that belongs inside a body rather than outside. Does thinking this way make me sexist, heterosexist or merely heterosexual? I'm betting on the third choice.

By: Busithoth

Busithoth — Sat, 01 Oct 2005 14:21:09 -0800

manboobs. womanboobs. can't we all just get along?

By: ackeber

ackeber — Sat, 01 Oct 2005 15:35:15 -0800

The notion that the female body is inherently more pleasing to the eye sounds pretty silly to me. When I hear this I usually assume it is coming from a straight man. Some women have said similar things, but I think that only supports the idea that men are more interested in visual stimulation than women. Men: odd body shape (bumpy, knobby), coarse sparse curly hair everywhere, and a giant fucking gross penis bouncing out of the middle of it. Women: soft and curvy and smooth and nice, with all their parts hidden between their legs or on the inside.

By: sciurus

sciurus — Sat, 01 Oct 2005 18:27:17 -0800

I am running a 5k next week for the blessed breast. All hail its mighty power!

By: Jesse H Christ

Jesse H Christ — Sat, 01 Oct 2005 23:09:17 -0800

Men: odd body shape (bumpy, knobby), coarse sparse curly hair everywhere, and a giant fucking gross penis bouncing out of the middle of it. Women: soft and curvy and smooth and nice, with all their parts hidden between their legs or on the inside. I agree that soft and curvy are good qualities on a woman, but there's no reason someone couldn't describe labia as "gross" or "odd" or describe breast as flab. Personally the appearance of a woman's body is a pretty netrual affair for me--not gross nor very interesting at all. I like the lines of a man's body--even average looking guys I think are wonderful to look at. And of course the giant (hopefully) bouncing (sometimes) penis is a bonus. But any wonderfulness or grossness is not in the nature of the body, but the viewer.

By: dabitch

dabitch — Sat, 01 Oct 2005 23:48:11 -0800

I'm joining Jesse H Christs camp. Men are gorgeous. Basta.

By: dabitch

dabitch — Sat, 01 Oct 2005 23:48:13 -0800

I'm joining Jesse H Christs camp. Men are gorgeous. Basta.

By: dabitch

dabitch — Sat, 01 Oct 2005 23:48:58 -0800

I swer that I only clicked once. Pardon the hiccup.

By: Jesse H Christ

Jesse H Christ — Sun, 02 Oct 2005 09:08:55 -0800

It's OK, it bears repeating.

By: dgaicun

dgaicun — Sun, 02 Oct 2005 13:28:36 -0800

"Could've been a drive to protect pelagic seabirds" I see this fellow very much enjoys looking at boobies:

By: Melinika

Melinika — Sun, 02 Oct 2005 15:58:46 -0800

I agree with cali. FWIW.

By: yousoundhollow

yousoundhollow — Mon, 03 Oct 2005 13:37:51 -0800

breast cancer awareness month begins today in the UK