Comments on: show them to me

show them to me

vronsky — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 12:33:55 -0800

show them to me (nsfw)

By: Lord_Pall

Lord_Pall — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 12:41:19 -0800

I don't have anything meaningful to add to that.

By: Lord_Pall

Lord_Pall — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 12:41:57 -0800

*Shows his Tits*

By: davros42

davros42 — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 12:41:59 -0800

Ha ha ha ha, oh boy. That was lovely, thank you.

By: RussHy

RussHy — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 12:43:33 -0800

Breast of the Web!

By: From Bklyn

From Bklyn — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 12:47:33 -0800

*Shows his tits in slow motion* *Slowly*

By: dersins

dersins — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 12:53:09 -0800

Needs more "amphorae" tag.

By: Turtles all the way down

Turtles all the way down — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 12:53:24 -0800

A single tear crawls down Turtles' craggy weathered face... *sniff* beautiful.

By: ColdChef

ColdChef — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 12:55:11 -0800

Titties on the internet? It's about damn time.

By: astruc

astruc — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 12:57:34 -0800

I hate the word "funbags" with a fire that burns a thousand suns.

By: loquacious

loquacious — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 12:58:12 -0800

ZOMG BOYZONE! Needs more boobies.

By: Alvy Ampersand

Alvy Ampersand — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 12:59:40 -0800

Ignoring the tags as I often do, I thought this was going to be about cats and their pokemons. Just goes to show the insidious way the internet warps people's brains.

By: grae

grae — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 12:59:50 -0800

boyzone? i don't see any boys!

By: davy

davy — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 13:02:09 -0800

I like how the old guy keeled over backwards. I can relate.

By: davy

davy — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 13:03:44 -0800

This is the kind of one-link Youtubery we should encourage. For the next one somebody should do a "Cut or not?" medley, just to be fair.

By: Greg Nog

Greg Nog — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 13:06:23 -0800

For the next one somebody should do a "Cut or not?" medley, just to be fair. What, like for teenagers' arms in long sleeves?

By: zoogleplex

zoogleplex — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 13:06:59 -0800

Suddenly my day seems much brighter. Thanks!

By: prostyle

prostyle — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 13:09:05 -0800

I would tell you that Fark is a few doors down, but even they had the sense to spin off their "Boobies" posts to an entirely different domain. Slipshod, vronsky. This will not do.

By: dirtynumbangelboy

dirtynumbangelboy — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 13:09:06 -0800

tits or gtfo ...oh.

By: yhbc

yhbc — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 13:11:12 -0800

So we're posting our favorite soft porn links now? Okay.

By: yhbc

yhbc — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 13:13:31 -0800

Filthy Food

By: mistersquid

mistersquid — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 13:15:24 -0800

I love breasts and all that, but the song and the video only made me think about how this video/song pretends sexual exploitation has the power of social regeneration when quite the opposite is true. Showing one's breasts on command and implying (even in jest) that people (read undersexed men) won't fight as a result perpetuates the myth that men are in sexual thrall to women. I think the video also distorts the meaning of the song because with the exception of Chris Farley, every single instance of breast-baring wis done by a conventionally attractive woman. MetFilter: where men cheer tittie shows as in a "Gentleman's Club."

By: From Bklyn

From Bklyn — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 13:17:08 -0800

*still lifting his shirt*

By: Mick

Mick — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 13:19:03 -0800

Post-Tits or GTFO

By: East Manitoba Regional Junior Kabaddi Champion '94

East Manitoba Regional Junior Kabaddi Champion '94 — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 13:20:05 -0800

sauce

By: Pastabagel

Pastabagel — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 13:23:13 -0800

For the last time, vronsky, no I will not show them to you. And stop standing in front of my house every night.

By: Malor

Malor — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 13:24:09 -0800

perpetuates the myth that men are in sexual thrall to women. Whaddya mean, myth? :)

By: davelog

davelog — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 13:24:41 -0800

the myth that men are in sexual thrall to women. It's only a MYTH? SHIT!

By: NationalKato

NationalKato — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 13:26:16 -0800

Oh, [IMG] tag...how I miss thee....

By: ColdChef

ColdChef — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 13:27:14 -0800

Filthy Food Holy. Crap. I really want a sandwich right now, but I don't know if I can trust myself alone with it.

By: ColdChef

ColdChef — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 13:28:20 -0800

yhbc redeems the thread. Good job, sir.

By: misha

misha — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 13:28:32 -0800

this video/song pretends sexual exploitation has the power of social regeneration Wow. Way to beanplate the song, mistersquid. As a woman, I think this is just harmless fun. It's not like anyone shown in this video was coerced into showing her breasts.

By: misha

misha — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 13:29:36 -0800

Oh, and the filthy foods video is brilliant.

By: diastematic

diastematic — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 13:29:50 -0800

What thu -- BOOBS on the WEB!?!? So glad I found this.

By: diastematic

diastematic — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 13:30:29 -0800

Second the filthy foods. Lunchtime!

By: RokkitNite

RokkitNite — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 13:30:52 -0800

Okay, three 'reveals' in I was starting to get bored. Your favourite breasts suck.

By: Firas

Firas — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 13:33:53 -0800

mistersquid, it's presumptive to assume that any time a woman chooses to bare her body she's under compulsion or duress. Women are as involved in raunch culture as men are. Social regeneration? The thing about we won't fight is a joke.

By: Firas

Firas — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 13:37:48 -0800

Also I'm not one for fixating on boobs but that video is achingly beautiful. That is all.

By: arcticwoman

arcticwoman — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 13:41:37 -0800

Show them to me (live) Dear Penis Today's the Day my Wife met my Girlfriend More Rodney Carrington on You Tube

By: arcticwoman

arcticwoman — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 13:42:35 -0800

All of the above are most definitely NSFW

By: mistersquid

mistersquid — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 13:43:48 -0800

Firas: did I not say "even in jest"? Second, I said nothing about duress. The problems exist independently of coercion. The song and video highlight male chauvinism, regardless of your apologetics. Oh, and misha: just because you're a woman doesn't mean this material is not sexist. Neither does your being a woman mean you have a better understanding of sexism than anyone else (or any understanding of it at all for that matter).

By: doctorschlock

doctorschlock — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 13:44:59 -0800

My Pokemans! Yes! I will show them to you!

By: sotonohito

sotonohito — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 13:49:18 -0800

vronsky well, we may disagree about the enjoyability of discussing politics and theology, but I cand disagree with this post. Nice song too, and here I never thought I'd like country music.

By: Firas

Firas — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 13:54:54 -0800

I think your ferocious egalitarianism has crashed through the cliff barrier. What extent of volition on part of the women is required before your claim of exploitation becomes supercilious? By holding the test of 'exploitation' beyond consent you've managed to be patriarchal, patrimonial and patronizing—all at once.

By: NationalKato

NationalKato — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 13:55:51 -0800

I'm so glad I don't live in mistersquid's world.

By: homodigitalis

homodigitalis — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 14:00:43 -0800

FARK?!

By: mistersquid

mistersquid — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 14:03:02 -0800

Firas: What I'm saying is something that is very well known, which is that at every turn people willingly do things that compromise their integrity and agency. But the point about the problem with the video has nothing to do with whether or not the people willingly do what they do. My point is that in the idea (even as a joke) "show us your tits and the world will be better" is a product of chauvinism. To NationalKato. You know nothing about my world, so fine. I'm not against porn, prostitution, or any sex industry as a matter of course. I am against drivel such as featured at the top of this thread which is to me not beautiful, funny, or interesting. Oh, I forgot where I was and started thinking again. One second: WHOO TITS ON PARADE WHOO! THE WORLD IS BETTER. You're right. That was funny. Now I get it.

By: twsf

twsf — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 14:05:27 -0800

Say, whatever happened to [that young actress who once showed her boobs on screen thinking it would help launch her Hollywood career but hasn't gotten a call from an agent or producer since she turned 34]...?

By: soundofsuburbia

soundofsuburbia — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 14:07:03 -0800

After Phoebe Cates I got disinterested, so I started trying to identify the movies instead. When that horseback scene from "Private School For Girls" was shown I thought "ooh, I hope somebody tries to make a list, because that movie can't be too well known and then I can contribute"... and then I felt nauseous.

By: Optamystic

Optamystic — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 14:09:02 -0800

mistersquid's profile Contributions MeFi: 0 posts 70 comments Put up or shut up, bub.

By: Floydd

Floydd — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 14:11:22 -0800

*Meh*ta-taFilter.

By: mistersquid

mistersquid — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 14:17:52 -0800

Optamystic: If memory serves, the only conditions for commenting is that the thread be open and one is a registered user who has paid $5. So, I won't be shutting up just yet. Thanks, anyway.

By: LoopyG

LoopyG — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 14:24:33 -0800

Thats 71 now!

By: Dataphage

Dataphage — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 14:30:17 -0800

I completely agree with mistersquid. He should not be shutting up right now. He is very funny. And I perfectly see his points, the societies were young men see LESS breasts tend to be the most peaceful and understanding. Man, if women would just cover their ankles, there would be no wars. And women should not be trusted to do as they please, since it is well known all they do is compromise their agency and integrity. I once met a girl that liked to swim naked in the ocean. Did the lads and me, with the help of a few stones, teach her a lesson on integrity. BTW, does anyone have a video of men showing their muscular bodies? I hear those are completely sexism and chauvinism free.b

By: dopamine

dopamine — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 14:31:47 -0800

( . ) ( . )

By: Mick

Mick — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 14:32:16 -0800

someone is ashamed of his penis

By: Avenger

Avenger — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 14:32:17 -0800

Straight porn, really?

By: zerobyproxy

zerobyproxy — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 14:33:37 -0800

mistersquid has this one wrapped up, nothing left to see...move along...keep it moving...

By: Firas

Firas — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 14:34:37 -0800

Alright guys let's not pile on. He wanted some parrying. He got it. Now everybody chill. BOOBIES.

By: Armitage Shanks

Armitage Shanks — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 14:41:21 -0800

Chris Farley is still as funny as a speedball heart attack.

By: marxchivist

marxchivist — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 14:41:41 -0800

What? Where's Jamie Lee Curtis in Trading Places? Internet must be broke, couldn't find image of the above.

By: The Light Fantastic

The Light Fantastic — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 14:42:10 -0800

"Oh, and misha: just because you're a woman doesn't mean this material is not sexist. Neither does your being a woman mean you have a better understanding of sexism than anyone else (or any understanding of it at all for that matter)." Oh, shut the hell up! You sanctimonius....Here, I'll help you... (shoves a DDD in mistersquids mouth) There, all better!

By: soundofsuburbia

soundofsuburbia — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 14:46:15 -0800

BTW, does anyone have a video of men showing their muscular bodies? Every time I see that sentance (and it happens quite often) I think of Chavez' "Break Up Your Band". It's quite pavlovian. Or freudian, I forget. Anyway, unless you were kidding, go here.

By: Pastabagel

Pastabagel — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 14:47:21 -0800

My point is that in the idea (even as a joke) "show us your tits and the world will be better" is a product of chauvinism. Only when the clips in the video are divorced from their context. In the underlying power dynamic between performer an audience, it is the performer who has the power, and the audience is dominated. In this context "show them to me" is not a command, but a plea. The woman in these clips, an actress she shows them to you, but in a context that ensures they are completely unattainable. The woman does not acquiesce, she denies the transfer of power to the male in having his wish granted, because he can never have her. In this light, the deployment of female nudity in a film is in fact a form of subjugation of the male viewer by the established power complex. It is wielded by the media as an instrument of domination. You will pay to view this and you will lust and you will be denied and you will repeat the cycle. The film's text gives the male viewer the impression that his lust is satiated, but the subtext in fact renders him impotent in two critical ways. First, she is not aware of you, the male viewer, and therefore you are nonexistent as a person. You are an abstracted object - a consumer - you pay to have your desire for her grow and yet she is ignorant of your existence. You consume siguls of desire. But she cannot desire you (she does not know you), and your sexual power vis-a-vis her is nil. Second, who in fact has she bared her chest for? For the creative, the artist who makes the film, and for the producer who funds it. For the totality of the creative vision to render it real. She does so to become art. But you are neither artist nor rich. You have no creative vision that she would want to participate in, and therefore you cannot even attract her intellectually or emotionally. Furthermore, as a consumer-object, you have no resources to render her vision real. As poor, you are further unable to appeal to her need for security and comfort. Again, you have nothing that would maker her desire you, or want you, or want to know you. In the context of your mutual sexual space, your penis is massless, with dimension zero. You have not seen these women, you have seen a crafted image of them, and as such they have placed themselves in your mind as an object of desire that you can never have. Thus, you, the viewer are objectified - you pay to view them, but the possession of the imagined object never transfers - and the actress is rendered whole - a sexual being with her power confirmed and validated in the form of hte art she produces. She is the queen, directing the course of countless males to build her hive. You are the drone, struggling uselessly against the hordes of other drones to mate with her once and die.

By: soundofsuburbia

soundofsuburbia — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 14:48:01 -0800

Apparently, every time I see that sentence I forget how to spell "sentence", as well.

By: Kraftmatic Adjustable Cheese

Kraftmatic Adjustable Cheese — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 14:49:39 -0800

mistersquid: Why is that when a woman shows her breasts it's automatically a "compromise" of her "integrity and agency"? Why do you get to define what integrity is for her and how it might be compromised?

By: TrialByMedia

TrialByMedia — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 14:51:15 -0800

Country music and boobs. Hold on while I spit out my chaw and put the safety on the gun--this one needs my full attention.

By: andrew cooke

andrew cooke — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 14:59:26 -0800

pastabagel that was good.

By: cgc373

cgc373 — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 15:01:40 -0800

Weird, TrialByMedia: I thought the whole point of this video was to take the safety off the gun. Oh well, it takes all kinds.

By: vronsky

vronsky — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 15:02:49 -0800

*bows before pastabagel's comment, promises to stop stalking her*

By: ROU_Xenophobe

ROU_Xenophobe — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 15:04:29 -0800

Your favourite breasts suck. Is that a Yoda-ism, or just translated very directly from the German?

By: beaucoupkevin

beaucoupkevin — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 15:04:51 -0800

I really liked the way that site's video player handles the volume control. A+ Oh, there were boobs?

By: Rangeboy

Rangeboy — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 15:05:48 -0800

Misha, I don't know if you're the first to use "beanplate" as a verb, but if you are, I salute you.

By: BrotherCaine

BrotherCaine — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 15:15:21 -0800

Could we get more puerile and exploitative posts like this please? I've got favorites to burn people.

By: stinkycheese

stinkycheese — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 15:20:23 -0800

No Uschi Digard? Having a montage of breasts in movies without Uschi makes the whole exercise fall kinda...flat.

By: From Bklyn

From Bklyn — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 15:21:36 -0800

*still lifting his shirt, though now from behind a plate of beans*

By: fungible

fungible — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 15:22:00 -0800

The comedy is that it's a touching country song, one that you would expect to have lyrics about a long lost girlfriend or a death of a loved one, but instead it's about tits. And now that I've explained it, it's no longer funny. I LIKE BIG BUTTS AND I CANNOT LIE YOU OTHER BROTHERS CAN'T DENY

By: Ambrosia Voyeur

Ambrosia Voyeur — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 15:22:15 -0800

*bares tits* *vomits all over them*

By: vronsky

vronsky — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 15:24:01 -0800

that video made me feel like a fungi

By: dbiedny

dbiedny — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 15:32:20 -0800

Titties and Beer.

By: Extopalopaketle

Extopalopaketle — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 15:51:37 -0800

Pastabagel FTW, with Ambrosia Voyeur a sort-of-close-but-on-a-different-track second. Metafilter: Your penis is massless, with dimension zero.

By: bluesky43

bluesky43 — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 16:01:11 -0800

ya know, I wish there was some view of the male anatomy that gave me the same reaction as most of the posters on this thread. On second thought.......

By: RussHy

RussHy — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 16:06:49 -0800

I read somewhere that "there are only two kinds of religions, those that think that sex is good for the crops and those that think that sex is bad for the crops." I am monitoring the crops...

By: maxwelton

maxwelton — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 16:09:28 -0800

I don't get the big deal. I mean, I often unthinkingly bare my manhood, which, giant and hairy, stuns all those who view it. Most are speechless, fascinated and yet--you can tell--slightly frightened or intimidated, depending on gender. (I can't even get both hands around it, to give a sense of scale.) From above the struggling waistline of my pants to below my jiggling man-boobs, it's evidence of my ~~virility~~ fondness for chocolate.

By: vronsky

vronsky — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 16:21:14 -0800

"I wish there was some view of the male anatomy that gave me the same reaction" how about bearforce 1 bluesky43? (caution, too gay for work)

By: Ironmouth

Ironmouth — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 16:37:09 -0800

And I believe it's derogatory to refer to a woman's breasts as "boobs", "jugs", "winnebagos" or "golden bozos".. and that you should only refer to them as "hooters".

By: mistersquid

mistersquid — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 17:04:58 -0800

Yeah, Pastabagel's post is pretty good despite its reproduction of (mainly French) poststructuralist and psychoanalytic theory. My main objection is that he or she hypostatizes "she" and gives that imaginary object control over a movie system where "she" never had it. Furthermore, the situation is symmetrical: as owner of the gaze, I am invisible to the performer and, so, to that extent sovereign. I don't object to psychoanalytic thought but arguing these women have control over the people who watch them depends on ignoring the material circumstances of the production of these films. The short answer is that these actresses do not determine the circumstances under which they expose their flesh for the pleasure of others. At all. Nice post, even if it is wildly wrong, verging on the point of incoherence.

By: Ambrosia Voyeur

Ambrosia Voyeur — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 17:08:23 -0800

( . )=^..^=( . )

By: Kraftmatic Adjustable Cheese

Kraftmatic Adjustable Cheese — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 17:13:50 -0800

The short answer is that these actresses do not determine the circumstances under which they expose their flesh for the pleasure of others. Your short answer is idiotic. Can you give us the long answer (which hopefully makes sense)?

By: vronsky

vronsky — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 17:14:09 -0800

I'm guessing you were bottle fed as a child mistersquid.

By: StrikeTheViol

StrikeTheViol — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 17:22:15 -0800

The short answer is that these actresses do not determine the circumstances under which they expose their flesh for the pleasure of others. So, Titus Squiddius, "slave actresses" will now join "bread" and "circuses" as part of the dole? Or do you mean that in a Calvinist predestinatory sense: Fish gotta swim And birds gotta fly I'm gonna bare my boobs till I die Can't help baring those boobs of mine No?

By: mistersquid

mistersquid — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 17:28:19 -0800

Kraftmatic Adjustable Cheese: I thought I was clear but here goes the second take: these actresses are employed in a system that uses their bodies to make money and to that extent they are not empowered (apotheosized into art) but are interchangeable commodities who perform for the pleasure of others. Also, on second more careful read, Pastabagel's discussion of the way in which spectators are in fact victims of a cinematic system that provokes and exploits their desire really speaks to the part of me that is sympathetic with Adorno and Horkheimer. Good stuff and I'm fully nodding about that. The stuff about "her" being turned into a piece of art (and so empowered) is claptrap. The role of the spectator is more complicated than you, Pastabagel, make it out to be, and it's more complicated than can be covered (adequately) in a MeFi thread. But I very much like the issues PB raises and the direction those issues take this almost-moribund thread.

By: Ambrosia Voyeur

Ambrosia Voyeur — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 17:29:21 -0800

Even I don't think this thread is worthy of a Mulveyfest, and I'm completely preoccupied in a personal and a professional sense with representation of women and sexuality in media. I tend to think the tittietittiestities noise our culture produces is a whole frequency I am ready to tune out now, or at least not invest intellect in. (Or maybe I just wish it were so, because homogenous "perfect" movie tits make still me feel inadequate, intellect be damned.) ...NEXT! Head-canting, you're up.

By: PeterMcDermott

PeterMcDermott — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 17:42:00 -0800

vronsky writes 'I wish there was some view of the male anatomy that gave me the same reaction'

"how about bearforce 1" And if those bears aren't hot enough for you, then there's always this one. (Even gayer, even less suitable for work/children/rabid hetboys/etc)

By: pax digita

pax digita — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 17:54:04 -0800

Thanx for the mammaries.

By: StrikeTheViol

StrikeTheViol — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 17:55:09 -0800

these actresses are employed in a system that uses their bodies to make money and to that extent they are not empowered (apotheosized into art) but are interchangeable commodities who perform for the pleasure of others. More seriously, I disagree with your statement, but taking the basic premise as valid, to what extent would that not be true of every performer ever hired? The phrase "victims of a system" provides limited justification for a flippant declaration like I quoted before.

By: vronsky

vronsky — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 18:00:06 -0800

Yeah Jennifer Connely's were pretty spectacular weren't they AV?

By: bashos_frog

bashos_frog — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 18:02:32 -0800

Pastabagel, i could've really used your talents (as demonstrated here and in other threads) when I was in college. Where the hell were you?

By: Ambrosia Voyeur

Ambrosia Voyeur — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 18:04:57 -0800

It's the objectification, or further fetishization of parts or infantilization or disembodiment, not the commodification, which is unique to women. It's kind of a made-up distinction, but you and I know that women can make a living on a body part, because men can orgasm from looking at one. Somehow the total package is wrapped up with the idea of "being human." I don't know how I feel about that, because it's somewhat untenable as a standard.

By: bashos_frog

bashos_frog — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 18:08:56 -0800

mistersquid's reaction to pastabagel is causing me to check the batteries in my Sokal 2000(tm) pomo humor detector.

By: Ambrosia Voyeur

Ambrosia Voyeur — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 18:11:54 -0800

vronsky: katie holmes just got robbed.

By: mistersquid

mistersquid — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 18:23:18 -0800

vronsky: I am a little embarrassed to say so but the good Freudian in me (if there is such a thing) admits I *was* bottle-fed, something I try to make up for every day of my life. Hee.

By: jessamyn

jessamyn — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 18:26:35 -0800

Is this the sort of thing I would need to not have an awesome rack to appreciate? Because that song is awful.

By: potsmokinghippieoverlord

potsmokinghippieoverlord — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 18:31:22 -0800

An awesome rack or a dick, I imagine. Since I have neither, I'm going to pass.

By: c13

c13 — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 18:39:33 -0800

Most normal people use their hand(s) to get off. Do words really work as well?

By: flapjax at midnite

flapjax at midnite — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 18:47:43 -0800

There are certain country music songs that are very akin to that plate of beans that doesn't need the overthinking. I'd say "Show Them To Me" is such a song. I agree with mistersquid, though, that it would've been nice if the video could've more closely mirrored the song's repeated celebrations of all kinds of breasts (mismatched, sagging, old, whatever). Of course, in fairness to the person who put this vid together, I guess it can be pretty hard to locate that many clips of exposed breasts that aren't, well, the current ideal.

By: vronsky

vronsky — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 18:50:22 -0800

there's a song?

By: kigpig

kigpig — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 18:53:20 -0800

I think the videomamographer person should have supported what the song was claiming to stand for and shown some less than popular images of breasts, in a non-sarcastic context of course. On preview I see flapjax just said that. It leaves the whole argument in question without. I'd think they could be obtained in a medical journal though perhaps that's not the best of ideas.

By: OrangeDrink

OrangeDrink — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 18:55:32 -0800

Utter (hyeugh hyeugh) waste of time that I watched all of.

By: RussHy

RussHy — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 19:20:50 -0800

Maybe some people need tips on How to Look at a Naked Lady.

By: Joey Michaels

Joey Michaels — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 19:26:27 -0800

All right, and now for the important part. Anyone care to try to name all of the movies and actresses in the clips?

By: poweredbybeard

poweredbybeard — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 19:29:27 -0800

110 comments. On the thread about the song about the tits. Seriously.

By: flapjax at midnite

flapjax at midnite — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 19:51:27 -0800

111 !

By: papercake

papercake — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 19:51:46 -0800

What a bunch of boobs. I would, in an instant, throw over my world to snuffle my face in Jennifer Connelly's magnificent bosom.

By: Justinian

Justinian — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 19:52:19 -0800

mistersquid - I saw Demi Moore in Striptease in that clip. I believe she received $20million for that role. In what possible sense was she an interchangeable commodity? In what sense was it not her choice? Would I be exploited if I agreed to whip out Mr. Happy on film for $20million?

By: cortex

cortex — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 19:54:51 -0800

Is this the sort of thing I would need to not have an awesome rack to appreciate? Because that song is awful. Funny story: my work filter blocks a lot of stuff, and other stuff I'll generally avoid regardless (like a post that seems to be a video full of topless women) just so as not to get fired, so I couldn't actually look at this when I saw it come into the flag queue. I'm generally pretty okay with sexy sexy metafilter posts, so I just sort of shrugged and figured if it was lame Matt or Jess would nuke it. Then I came home, watched it, and meh'd all over my keyboard. Points for fairly spot on propaganda-country ballad execution, but those lyrics weren't stunning. Felt like a Team American outtake.

By: Arturus

Arturus — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 20:02:16 -0800

I'm actually sympathetic to mistersquid's point, having just a few days ago read an explanation of male gaze theory that actually made sense and clicked for me. The problem is, as I understand it, that women are conditioned to appear (that is, that their primary way of acting in with regard to social contexts is dominated by being observed in their acting), while men are more able to simply act. This sort of media plays into this dynamic, by setting up women who are to be looked at, while at the same time, the male observer is almost never shown at the same time, or at best shown in an anonymizing way, allowing him to serve as a stand in for the audience member. The limited power and agency women are granted in this exchange (which can be real, and I'm not discounting it) is only granted in the course of her embracing her role as an observed entity and not able to act simply on merit. That said, I think there is a place for that, and I think men are increasingly taking on parts of this role as well, but there's nowhere near equality on this issue, and until there is, media which embraces the role of being observed for women, which reinforces the message which comes from nearly every bit of social conditioning is, in fact, pushing a sexist agenda. The fact that the woman has consented to this is great and all, but doesn't change the message of the work which is that women are to be looked at and men are to look. This has nothing to do with not being okay with nudity, sex, or even porn, it has to do with an awareness of the implications of how these things are framed and dealt with, with what is portrayed as normal in the media and culture and thus becomes so in the minds of the next generation. I like all those things myself, but I also think it's a good idea to look long and critically at the effect they have in their portrayal.

By: spaltavian

spaltavian — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 20:03:36 -0800

Mistersquid: Firas: What I'm saying is something that is very well known, which is that at every turn people willingly do things that compromise their integrity and agency. You're the chauvinist. Sexuality compromises the integrity of women only to someone who thinks sex is something that hurts women and that it's something women "give up".

By: flapjax at midnite

flapjax at midnite — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 20:13:26 -0800

cortex writes: but those lyrics weren't stunning.... D'ya really think, though, that anyone could come up with lyrics for a low-brow gag song like this that would be "stunning"? I mean, I think the songwriter pretty much succeeded at grabbing the low-hanging fruit (you'll pardon the expression) that he was reaching for. This ain't Leonard Cohen, here, grappling with the finer shades and deeper intricacies of the psychosexual. This is a guy singing about TITS!

By: cortex

cortex — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 20:22:04 -0800

Sir, I give you Jonathan Coulton. Or Al Yankovich. Or Tom Lehrer. Or, or, or. Whether one or the other of them would aim for this particular material is between them and God, but people can write nasty good if they've got the skills and the inclination. Heck, maybe Randy Newman even.

By: jessamyn

jessamyn — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 20:33:50 -0800

This is a guy singing about TITS! That's the whole point. There are lots of great songs written about tits, this is not one of them. Were it not for the *tee hee* factor of women with their shirts off -- something that most of the female MeFites see every day, AMIRITE ladies? -- this post is ubermeh. I heard AC-DC's "Big Balls" on the way home today in the car and still think that song is a great stupid ribald double-entendre fest, especially because it's a guy singing about his enormous nuts. It's funny. This is a video made by dudes, with a ungreat song by a dude, with a bunch of clips form movies where women take their shirts off. It's lousy as porn, it's lousy as music, and the thing that makes it decent as a post at all -- like I'm going to delete the knockers post... the girl mod? -- is that male gaze thing, the co-feeling that you're (any of us, me included) getting a peek at something normally not available to you. Except that it's available to anyone who can pay for a movie ticket or get this video off the intertubes. So, it's a cheat anyway. And I can look at myself in the mirror for free and not have to read a bunch of dumb comments about it afterwards. Yay for tits.

By: flapjax at midnite

flapjax at midnite — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 20:42:25 -0800

Heck, maybe Randy Newman even. I'd love to hear Randy Newman's version of a song about tits, but I think he's got too much class, and, I just don't think he'd find enough to work with (so to speak) if he had to be as relentlessly point-specific as this tits song is. In other words, I think he'd raise the artistic bar too high, and the result might be a great Randy Newman song, but it would move things out of the boundaries of gag-song and into art. He couldn't possibly keep the song dumb enough to succeed in an area of songcraft that actually needs to be dumb in order to work. And of course, releasing a racy song about female anatomy might not be the best career move at this point for the man, who, after all, is scoring Pixar films distributed by Disney... he might find himself out of a job. And on preview, jessamyn, you'll note that I am not making a dumb comment about you looking in the mirror. I honestly don't want you to ever have to read dumb comments. Unfortunately, that is part of your job description, though, amirite? Oh, but also... There are lots of great songs written about tits... Examples?

By: vronsky

vronsky — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 21:00:08 -0800

For the record, I would not have had a problem with the girl mod deleting it. It would not have even occured to me. But if someone had posted a montage of men's packages set to Big Balls, I probably would have skipped it. (And seconding everything flap just said.)

By: Poolio

Poolio — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 21:02:59 -0800

It's Whip 'Em Out Wednesday.

By: cortex

cortex — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 21:04:25 -0800

I'd love to hear Randy Newman's version of a song about tits, but I think he's got too much class I dunno. He's got a wonderfully nasty streak to him, and is capable of funny, surgical focus on parodic subjects: Short People got no reason Short People got no reason Short People got no reason To live They got little hands And little eyes And they walk around Tellin' great big lies They got little noses And tiny little teeth They wear platform shoes On their nasty little feet And anyway, I think I disagree with you on the apprehension of what this song could be and still serve well its ostensible purpose. This here is tits and a song about tits; what's wrong with it is that the video is lousy and the song is lousy, not that the concept isn't artistic enough.

By: jessamyn

jessamyn — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 21:09:04 -0800

that is part of your job description, though, amirite? I meant the comments on youtube or wherver that video is hosted, I'll read dumb comments here until my eyes bleed and be happy to do it. Good Songs About Tits Boobs A Lot (really, go listen to this to see how it should be done) (YT version) Busted How Do you Like These Babies Now? Push Th' Little Daisies (YT) Sheela Na Gig My Breasts Are Out of Control Song of Solomon? this one?

By: flapjax at midnite

flapjax at midnite — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 21:13:13 -0800

Wow, jessamyn comes through, big time! I'll check out all those links, but right now I've gotta go down to the studio and start work on a new song. It's about elbows. Just elbows. The video's gonna be killer, too!

By: Alvy Ampersand

Alvy Ampersand — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 21:19:41 -0800

Rufus is a Tit Man♫ by Loudon Wainwright lll Uh, yeah, that Rufus.

By: vronsky

vronsky — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 21:20:06 -0800

I disagree that the video is lousy. It certainly has a nice nostalgic quality to it. All those illicit titty shots you remember from watching cinemax in your parent's basement. I liked the way they synched the piano with Belushi's eyebrows. But I admit to having a soft spot for 80's soft core (and disliking porn in general). If it had been in a musical genre you like (but still dumb) set to clips of princess leia in her bikini, or anime, do you think you might have had a different reaction?

By: cortex

cortex — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 21:26:15 -0800

With the exception of a few cuts that displayed a rudiment of good timing, the video was a playlist of clips. I've got the same soft stop, vronsky, and one for cheesy country ballads besides. It just wasn't really very good.

By: vronsky

vronsky — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 21:27:15 -0800

holy modal rounders - ha. They were on the Easy Rider soundtrack. (and song of solomon made me laugh.)

By: jessamyn

jessamyn — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 21:27:24 -0800

Take the same clips, sync them up to Boobs A Lot, and I promise to love it.

By: Firas

Firas — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 21:35:54 -0800

A bit uncomfortable with writing this here but ... ok: I don't think it's lousy as porn. It's not Girls Gone Wild, it's not just a camera flashing by a bunch of people opening their shirts and doing a sterile zoom on a portion of their anatomy. Did we watch the same video? It's scenes, stories, faces, expressions—it's a collage of seduction (note how many of those scenes have the woman in total control of the situation.) It's not a video of tits. You have to be blind! It's a video of striptease, it's a video of voyeurism—I mean, those American Pie clips? Yeah, no accident. They were highlights of the sexual tension buildup in those movies. I mean, it starts with a women in a bikini striding out of a pool (archetypal oomph shot) and ends with a woman seducing a guy away from his pool game, with pit stops at—jesu christe, there's a woman standing behind a guy spraying champagne onto the woman in front of him before he laps it up, hello? and a reenactment of lady fucking godiva—this is a veritable parade of common 'sexy' triggers. Drawing the montage from mainstream cinema almost guarantees that. PS. I'm sympathetic to the claim that "show us your tits" is an essential chauvanistic war-cry: of course it is. I mean just the "us" part of it takes it from only excessively demanding to having an edge of bullying. I could go on about the whole male gaze issue and how much of it is reflexive, in that—well, something I've come to realize how much women themselves are involved with maintaining the standard presentation of women's sexuality, including major appreciation of their own sexual "thrall"—but anyway yeah, it would boil down to the fact that women know exactly what they're doing and how they're participating in their own sexual identities.

By: flapjax at midnite

flapjax at midnite — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 21:44:15 -0800

cortex, I think it's appropriate in this case that you point to Short People. That is pretty much the one tune, really, in the whole Randy Newman catalog, that I think can be squarely placed in the gag-song category. I think he himself would agree with that assessment, and in fact I've heard that he was rather dismayed that it became the hit that it did: it was actually a bit of a throwaway for him. Now, the fact that it also happens to be a very good gag-song is par for the course: we are talking Randy Newman here. Therefore, of course, it's too deep to be just a gag-song. It's also a message song: it's an anti-bias, anti-prejudice song, served up, as is often the case with the great Newman, as a big walloping chunk of irony. So, am I agreeing actually with you, here, and helping you to make your point? I'm not sure anymore! I think we probably agree on all this, somehow, anyway, but we're taking opposite roads to get there. Suffice to say, Randy Newman is one of the great, great American songwriters. As I see it, you're saying this tits song is not as great as a Randy Newman song, and there'll be no disagreeing on my part. I guess my main point is that, it's a jokey, dumb, throwaway song designed for a few laughs, and it even got a chuckle or 2 out of me. Out of that deep, dark, usually well-concealed lowbrow part of me. Sometimes there's things so low, you just have to chuckle. By the way, I like talking with you about music. We should do it more often! And, yeah, jessamyn, Boobs A Lot is a fun tune, I like how they're playing with the rhythm of the lyrics. But they're not all big and round, gat-dammit, and I still say the "Show Them To Me" guy deserves at least some small credit for referencing (and indeed clebrating) the fact that there's a lot of variety out there in tit-land!

By: vronsky

vronsky — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 21:51:42 -0800

See I think they are hearing Toby Keith flapjax, so a certain bias reveals itself, where I am hearing what I would describe as a poor man's Jimmy Buffet.

By: cortex

cortex — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 22:05:29 -0800

Well, what I'm hearing is bar-country sensibility flushed up cozy against radio-country balladeering to comic effect. Buffet writing (on a very off day, granted), and Keith or Clint Black or Garth Brooks setting it to Country Music Awards montage-bait. And yeah, flapjax, I think we do pretty much agree—I'm not arguing that Randy Newman would write this song (though I think Coulton might, if he wanted to—he's young and scrappy and doesn't have to worry about Disney gigs yet), but clearly there is the talent out there to do this song better as what it is than these folks did, even if they put in a wholly respectable (and, yes, at times chuckleworthy) effort. It just doesn't seem up to the fuss. It's not great. Damnation: faint praise promptly commuted in context.

By: The Light Fantastic

The Light Fantastic — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 22:08:18 -0800

Metafilter: wildly wrong, verging on the point of incoherence.

By: honeydew

honeydew — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 22:10:31 -0800

Maybe some people need tips on How to Look at a Naked Lady. HOW TO LOOK AT NAKED LADIES: Often. This also summarizes my feeling on the post.

By: shmegegge

shmegegge — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 22:23:37 -0800

this post fucking sucks, and I hate vronsky.

By: astruc

astruc — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 22:46:56 -0800

Someone should take this stupid titty video over to Mefi Music and write something pretty to go with it.

By: Sparx

Sparx — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 23:18:16 -0800

Is this the sort of thing I would need to not have an awesome rack to appreciate? Dunno. I have an awesome rack* and I thought it was pretty meh. *it has many, many servers on it

By: vronsky

vronsky — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 23:37:13 -0800

You're aloud to hate me shmegegge. No biggie.

By: flapjax at midnite

flapjax at midnite — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 23:59:22 -0800

You're aloud to hate me shmegegge. Perhaps he'll just hate you silently from now on.

By: vronsky

vronsky — Thu, 30 Aug 2007 00:14:29 -0800

inside joke flap

By: From Bklyn

From Bklyn — Thu, 30 Aug 2007 00:28:08 -0800

*lowers shirt, puts now empty plate of beans in sink. Rinses, washes, dries plate and spoon and puts both away. Leaves room...*

By: Ambrosia Voyeur

Ambrosia Voyeur — Thu, 30 Aug 2007 00:32:10 -0800

My favorite song about boobs, by far. Firas: in the diegesis, those women's characters are arguably perfoming their sexualities in empowered ways. And really, that's not the case across the board. Ugh, the titty montage from wedding crashers? Totally blew that movie for me (bound to happen at some point) However, we do not have perpetual suspension of disbelief, we know that this is a media work meant for our consumption, and therefore these women are objects, as much as a prop or a lens flare. That's why porn isn't about plot or empowered women, it's about glistening sphincters, dropped jaws and undulating breasts. The last of which are apparently magic enough to inspire world peace, if the narration in this little can-can dance is to be believed. I dunno, I don't see it. I get the symbolism of the breast as comfort, and I like thinking of myself and of women as possibly the most intriguing source of beauty on God's earth, but, well, I don't have balls, was breastfed till 2, and now just prefer a good ass. Boobs are oversaturating the visual market. More hips 'n' ass, please. Arturus: Thanks for sponsoring Mulveyfest. I mean it, it's nice to get that all written out for people who don't take it as assumed.

By: Ambrosia Voyeur

Ambrosia Voyeur — Thu, 30 Aug 2007 00:35:51 -0800

One more thing: is "Show Us Your Tits," "Tits plz or gtfo" or any other iteration of this ever funny? Do people not realize that this has been said in earnest to me and other women since we were ten? Isn't that just gross? Maybe I just believe they mean it.

By: grubi

grubi — Thu, 30 Aug 2007 06:02:57 -0800

I am not a bad man for liking tits. I don't care what anyone says.

By: cortex

cortex — Thu, 30 Aug 2007 07:09:21 -0800

Usage note: the juxtaposition of "plz" and "or gtfo" is disorienting to me. Do people do that? "or gtfo" is such a strident imperative that it doesn't seem like it'd brook a qualifying pleasantry on the conditional request, but then I suppose irony makes all things possible.

By: kirkaracha

kirkaracha — Thu, 30 Aug 2007 07:45:20 -0800

Then I came home, watched it, and meh'd all over my keyboard. Is that what they're calling it these days? Good Songs About Tits No Big-Ass Titties?

By: shmegegge

shmegegge — Thu, 30 Aug 2007 08:07:13 -0800

I would like to apologize for my earlier comment. I should not have said that this post fucking sucks and I hate vronsky. I don't actually hate vronsky. It was drunk posting, and for that I'm sorry.

By: liquorice

liquorice — Thu, 30 Aug 2007 08:53:18 -0800

Please don't victimise women any further by trying to suggest that they have no control over their body or decisions that they make in regards to it. You can ramble all you like about the societal pressures at work, the patriachial society we live in and the ideals about society we have ingrained from the moment we take a breath in this godforsaken world, but we're not all pawns that acquiesce to male desire and even on the occasions that we do, it's not about pleasing your nameless, faceless person. And by 'we' I speak only for 'me'. We're not a homogenous group, mmkay? Also, I have no problem with breasts on screen, I just wish that more often it would be for non-sexual purposes, too.

By: Ambrosia Voyeur

Ambrosia Voyeur — Thu, 30 Aug 2007 09:37:45 -0800

If you believe in titties as palliative for the cruel realities of the modern world, fight for nudity!

By: shmegegge

shmegegge — Thu, 30 Aug 2007 11:44:07 -0800

Also, I have no problem with breasts on screen, I just wish that more often it would be for non-sexual purposes, too. posted by liquorice at 11:53 AM on August 30 [+] [!] now, I hated the video, but I'm confused by this comment. I mean, in Eyes Wide Shut for instance, they show breasts when Tom Cruise is giving a breast exam, and when a dead girl is lying naked on a mortuary slab. Is this more of what you'd like to see in movies? Because when I think of non-sexual exhibition of breasts in real life, they're not very often and the moments when it is aren't especially interesting for a movie. I mean, you'll see someone getting dressed in the morning in a movie sometimes and then see a breast, but who wants to see people going through a boring repetitive and tedious morning ritual more often in movies? Sure, there are times when it's done artfully in a film (again, Eyes Wide Shut comes to mind) but I've never felt like there should be more of that in film. Or a breast exam. I feel like they happen far more often than movies portray, but they're also not interesting unless the results are tragic. Now, I will agree that breasts should be OBJECTIFIED less in movies, as should female anatomy in general, but I'm not sure if that's what you're saying.

By: shmegegge

shmegegge — Thu, 30 Aug 2007 11:59:16 -0800

as far as randy newman gag songs are concerned, by the way: if short people counts as a gag, then I humbly submit Political Science and Rednecks. Political Science: No one likes us. I don't know why. We may not be perfect, But heaven knows we try. All around Even our old friends put us down. Let's drop the big one, see what happens. We give them money, are they grateful? No, they're spiteful and they're hateful. They don't respect us, so let's surprise 'em. We'll drop the big one, pulverize 'em. Asia's too crowded, Europe's too old. Africa is far too hot and Canada's too cold. South America stole our name. Let's drop the big one There'll be no one left to blame us. We'll save Australia. Don't want to hurt no Kangaroo. We'll build an All American Amusement Park there. They got surfin' too! Boom goes London. Boom Paris (pronounced Par-ee) More room for you and more room for me! Every city the whole world round will just be another American Town! Oh, how peaceful it'll be! We'll set everybody free! You wear a japanese kimono baby, Italian shoes for me! They all hate us anyhow. So let's drop the big one, now. Let's drop the big one, now. And Rednecks you should go look up because I don't remember all they lyrics, but it's brutal.

By: shmegegge

shmegegge — Thu, 30 Aug 2007 12:04:38 -0800

yes, all they lyrics. well typed on my part.

By: bookish

bookish — Thu, 30 Aug 2007 12:46:33 -0800

So, in conclusion: this thread is how jessamyn almost killed me. I've had "Boobs a Lot" stuck in my head since last night. Today, I was driving home from the store, singing to myself, concentrating way to much on the call-and-response, when in my jingle-addled dementia I accidentally ran a red light, slamming into the side of another car (luckily, the driver was unhurt). Swear to god, I was actually singing "do you wear your jock a lot?" to myself at the moment I realized my car was about to slam into his. And then the airbag smashed me in the chest so hard I could not find the breath to insist that you gotta wear your jock a lot. That song is dangerously infectious and its consumption should not be encouraged.

By: jessamyn

jessamyn — Thu, 30 Aug 2007 18:34:39 -0800

Oh my gosh bookish, I am terribly sorry and I am glad you are okay. Though I do blame vronsky.

By: liquorice

liquorice — Fri, 31 Aug 2007 05:46:45 -0800

Now, I will agree that breasts should be OBJECTIFIED less in movies, as should female anatomy in general, but I'm not sure if that's what you're saying. Actually, that's what I was saying, if in a very incoherent way.

By: yhbc

yhbc — Fri, 31 Aug 2007 10:43:56 -0800

And here I thought I was the only one who couldn't stop singing "Boobs a Lot" all day, even when in the presence of female clients and assistants. Yeah; thanks a lot jessamyn.

By: saturnine

saturnine — Sat, 01 Sep 2007 13:56:43 -0800

Nobody has talked about how much they're gonna pay me to show my boobs. This is the important issue, because no one is gonna get them free. All those women in the video? Got paid.

By: cortex

cortex — Sat, 01 Sep 2007 14:05:08 -0800

Well, in a blogological sense, these are "your" boobs, so, you know, ha.

By: flapjax at midnite

flapjax at midnite — Sun, 02 Sep 2007 06:21:47 -0800

Nobody has talked about how much they're gonna pay me to show my boobs. This is the important issue, because no one is gonna get them free. Hmm... so, what's your price, then? Fixed rate, or sliding scale? Just curious. I've never paid, myself, you understand.

By: Brandon Blatcher

Brandon Blatcher — Mon, 03 Sep 2007 06:49:33 -0800

Push Th' Little Daisies is about tits?!. WTF?

By: jessamyn

jessamyn — Mon, 03 Sep 2007 08:36:51 -0800

Push Th' Little Daisies is about tits?!. According to an interview with Ween, yes.