starvingartist
-
Posts
353 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Events
Posts posted by starvingartist
-
-
I recently came across an interesting article on lesbianism. What are your thoughts? Do you consider yourself to take an active or passive role in your relationships? The opinions in the article are historic in nature, however do they say anything about homosexuality today? Or are they outdated archaic ways that form a definitive dichotomy of sex, when in actuality one does not exists, for example are sexual roles either passive or active? In light of the current popularity or should I say coming out of recent bi sexual and lesbian women, I wonder if this trend has undertones of control issues, i.e. taking on active roles in relationships, etc. Or is it simply an attention seeking mechanism used by women today?
Part of the Article (it was rather long):
Female homoeroticism in Rome was frequently discussed and written about · Sources: we see evidence of this in Roman Medical writings, love spells, dream interpretations, astrological texts and comments by philosophers and dramatists · We also see in Roman Empire the rise of Latin Nouns for women who loved other women sexually (Lesbia - used by Clement of Alexandria, Tribas - used frequently by writers) · Bernadette Brooten argues that we can essentialize lesbians easier than gay men because "lesbians" or the equivalent Noun, have existed since the Roman Empire · The consistency of a lesbian concept may be due to the consistency of women's social status CENTRAL ISSUE: In phallocentric culture dominated by men, sex between women was seen through that lens - Women who had sex together violated the role of women serving men. This act flew in the face of male dominance. Furthermore, Men assumed that women must see sex as they did - with a penetrator and penetrated. One woman had to assume the role of a man and penetrate the other - an obscene act to men who were angered by the idea of women emulating men. · Act / Impact issue - a phallocentric question. For men whose sex is centered around penetration, the role of penetrator and penetrated is central. For women, this question is historically peripheral · Active / Passive issue for male writers - It deeply troubled male writers to consider who was the active and passive partners in woman/woman sex · Was an "Active" woman who inserted an object into another woman "Manlike" and deserving of scorn? Did the passive partner who allowed this woman to be a man deserve scorn as well? · Masculinity is attached to women for not submitting to men, as well as for acts they perform together · We do not know what the women thought of the active / passive issue, only what men had to say about it Sources for Female Homosexuality: Commissioned Love spells · Written by men, following secret formula · Read Page 83 Astrological Texts · Astrologers believed that the stars could cause "unnatural" behavior such as lesbian sex (male homosexual sex was deemed natural) · Because of a certain configuration of the stars when a girl was born, she would be a Tribas, virago, or other orientations · *Sexual orientations were not only homo, bi and heterosexual, but astrological orientations for unnatural women could include passive / active roles, age roles, attraction to foreigners, attraction between economic statuses, etc. · * Passive / Active roles were more important to the astronomers than male or female roles Medical texts · Doctors such as Soronos and Ephesos frequently wrote about Tribades as mentally ill · Whereas men who penetrate boys or men could be viewed as healthy, women who penetrated other women, or women who allowed themselves to be penetrated by a woman (not a man) were always viewed as sick ·
-
Originally posted by enigma29301
Clubbers, people into the club scene tend to be more open minded, liberal, humane....no where in the world except in the US would you see pro-US government clubbers!
So what can I say??? Just have one thing to say.....the typical American mentality can best be described this way...
A man walks into a bar and decides to play billiards, he walks around and starts to poke a man with his cue. The man ignores him. So he goes, and starts poking another man.....this time the man says "Stop it" but the other guy keeps poking and nothing happens, so he starts to poke another man, this time the man says "Next time you're going to regret poking someone" but nothing happens so he goes and pokes more people...... Finally, a man comes up to him, punches him in the face and walks away. But the guy starts screaming, crying, and yelling "Hey, you can't hit me, you can't do that to me, I AM AN AMERICAN!"......
Anyways, have fun with your ignorant right wing rants.......I'm outta this section.......
What would that say about clubbers if they were all homogenous?
Also you stated clubbers are more open-minded, liberal, and humane. Are you trying to imply that the right is closed-minded, conservative and inhumane? What about liberal republicans? Also I would not go as far as to say that all republicans are close minded and inhumane.
-
I have some definition in my back from dancing, but I want more. What exercises, and how much weight should I use to further define my back?
-
Here's a link you can watch the show yourself. (scroll downn its after the porn star one)
-
Originally posted by siceone
which states are these?
I do not recall specifically, but I did see it on Oprah, hehe. I will try to find out where exactly.
-
Originally posted by cintron
I could care less whether Saddam was involved with Al Quaida. Maybe he was, maybe he wasn't.
It's the fact that he had hundreds of tons of chemical weaponry at the conclusion of the Iran/Iraq war, which has since vanished and nobody has found. That concerns me, especially given the hostility of the entire region.
Saddam doesn't need to have high level meetings with Osama at Club Med.
He could just leave the door to the chemical weapons unlocked and put a post it note on a light pole.
That's what concerns me.
Very valid point...
-
Originally posted by siceone
Polygamy has no place in Judeo-christian marriage, if you like you can email the author of the article. I read the article with the assumption of traditional marriage polygamy isn't included within.
something that I find disturbing is that while there may be some "radical views" there are alot of good points you don't damn a person cause he's not totally on your side do you? or because he thinks a little differently than you?
Speaking of Polygamy, Did you know that it is legalized in certain states in the United States. Many of which the women are not free to leave at their own will etc, and are forced at a very young age into marriage. Why is the government able to recognize polygamy but not gay marriage?
I admire and respect people who make me question my belief systems more than those who concur. But as far as that article, that author did little to sway my opinion.
-
Originally posted by siceone
Discovering my sexuality
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: April 20, 2004
1:00 a.m. Eastern
© 2004 WorldNetDaily.com
It seems everyone is discovering their sexuality these days.
Actually homosexuality is anything but "new". There were even several historical societies that readily accepted it. For example, the Romans. Homosexuality to some degree was even looked upon in philosphical light as being true love. The act of a man loving another man was thought to be a higher love, because it was on more than carnal desire. Further, what is upsetting about the anti-gay marriage movement and this article in particular is that it does not recognize that the United States promotes seperation of church and State. Therefore, two men or women having a legal contract of marriage should not be questioned because of its lack of religious or moral acceptance. On the same note, I find it somewhat distasteful and unresponsible of the government to bring to the forefront of national issues, gay marriages. When there are apparently other more important issues. Such as the unemployment rate, the economy etc. Also, if the government wants to promote morality, why is gambling legal? or drinking? or prostitution in some states? In my opinion the legality of these issues have more significant weight on the concept of the sanctity of marriage. I would also like to add that I for one would consider myself more conservative than the average American. I am used to living with many unstated laws of behavior, interaction etc. And to some degree I feel the U.S. could benefit socially if they promoted such behaviors that you would find in many European countries. However gay marriage does not directly or indirectly affect a society's moral and social condition. There are other more pressing issues that do directly affect the social conditions, and these issues never seem to be addressed because they turn profits and fit well into the scheme of a capital society, as I mentioned earlier, alcoholism, legalized gambling, prostitution, etc.
-
Shoes are definitely an addiction for me. Especially Manolo's, love at first sight every time...
-
Asymetrical cuts, so hot. Big chested women step aside, this look is not for you hehe.
-
Men, don't ever do this.. regardless of what designer is doing it...
-
Originally posted by babbo
and your point is????
My point is they do not care about people dying. If they did they would promote peace and be anti-war in general.
-
For the most part, nations do not enter war for the primary reason of keeping the death count at a minimum. If this were the case the U.S. would not have entered war to begin with...
-
Originally posted by dgmodel
and yet you have nothing to wear... how is this possible??? even if you put on an outfit you really liked a few weeks/months ago, you put on now and are like what was i thinking... which leaves me wondering, if every seven years your taste buds change, how often to "stylebuds" change???
This is so true. Well you could always try updating your old clothes. If your not handy with a a pair of scissors or sewing machine I would not recommend it. I for one constantly alter my clothes to fit the new trends. For example shortening the hems of skirts. For the most part I think jeans have the longest shelf life. You can always change them up by adding embroidery, or other designs along the hem lines, like many designers do each season. You can also alter dresses to have a completely new look. Lately Ive been opening up the back of many of my dresses bringing it down to just below the waist. I think this look is so sexy, where the back is completely exposed. I could go on forever, I think more people should experiment, it really is not as difficult as it sounds. If you spent a fortune on a dress that is quality material by no means throw it out just try to update it. Or make it into a shirt or something. The possibilities are endless.
-
When did I say I did not like Bush? Besides that I would never put complete blame on the president. There were several individuals and agencies who should hold some accountability. Such as the systemic problem between the FBI and CIA. Neither the Bush nor Clinton Adminstration solved the problem. Further, this problem has existed for quite sometime. It was identified but never properly addressed. I guess my final comment is that entire Government failed the nation. Is that a better positioning statement for you? Oh, and my first comment was that hindsight has 20/20 vision, there was no need for you to point out the monday morning quarterback garbage, hehe.
-
Originally posted by siceone
And the 8 years prior to the clinton office with 3 attacks on american soil and american interests? right? cause al queda and bin laden were behnind those too.
Actionable intelligence means a being giving a who what where and a means to go get them. After clinton passed up osama 3 times there was none.
They simply did not know where he was they were still trying to find him you act like everyone just stopped.
you neglected to mention that this PDB document was a historical document there was no new data or actionable intelligence on the attacks.
you're going to give clinton a pass for 8 years but hold the bush administrations feet to the fire for 8 months? not to mention the fact that trying to change the legal structure to these agencies cannot be done over night and a legislative process must be followed in order to do so? this legislative process depending on partisan ship could take months to even a year and change.
of course after 9/11 this strucutral problem was fixed cause it was found immedieatly to be the source of the problem so the LAWMAKERS in congress and senate changed it. The Executive in this country can not change laws on a whim that doesn't happen.
this memo was 2 lines in an email saying that there are cells in the US, that does nothing with out some information to do anything about. what did you expect her to do start kicking down the doors of every muslim in this country?
the different between a plan and a set of actionable courses is that a plan is based on intelligence of how to deal with a clear threat when you know where it is and you know where it's coming from. and actionable course is one of many plans that could be used to achive those ends. It's the difference between being told to buy a red car and being told you can buy the same car in a variety of colors and trim packages each need to assesed for viability.
the PDB question was a bullshit question , plain and simple he picked parts of that document out of context, with out even explaining what the purpose of the documment was. then when she tried to explain it he cut her off many times. It would make sense how ever that this part of the 3 hours of testimony because it's the only part that can be spun to be negative when in actuallity it's not.
how comes you're not calling for Bill Clinton, Who passed up osama bin laden 3 times, and neglected to kill him twice, to tesify publicly Im sure that would be great shit. but of course what he has to say is classified.
I agree that there were problems in the bush administration but cmon there were way more in the clinton administration and a huge problem between the intelligence agencies.
let's just be a little fair a tiny bit fair I didn't hear you say anything when richard clarke said one thing in his book and then another thing on the stand. or when he laid out the failed clinton terrorist policy. Nor did I hear you talk about the LACK of the word bin laden or alqeda in the final national security report of the clinton administration.
There was also this interesting part where she did lay out the plan she was trying to implement to crush alqeda in afganista, you knwo the part where she was talking about putthing pressure on pakistan for intelligence and so on and so forth. you think that you can call up pakistan and they're gonna be like " yup one bin laden coming right up" NO. that takes alot of time and diplomacy. but of cours e when saudi arabia, sudan, and afgainistan handed bin laden over on a silver plater, Clinton refused because there was no legal basis on which he could be held. but that's ok right?
by the way how you doing it's been a while
I am good, how are you?
Well I will agree that you raise some interesting points. But at the same time those very same arguments did little to sway my opinion in that direction. I think it is because I am somewhat cynical. History also shows how a governmental change in political parties to some degree thwarts problems on the basis of a long standing anti party sentiment. Basically, when a different party takes over, the work or beliefs of the preceding party are often rejected or neglected. I feel this was the case with the Bush Administration. Yes, he kept some of the same employees. But keeping someone on the payroll, and actually respecting them and their work are two different things.
-
To keep the list short I would say Lanvin or Helmut Lang.
-
I agree hindsight has 20/20 vision. However, there should be some accountability for the actions taken or lack there of before 9/11. I literally was speechless and in complete disbelief as Rice answered questions today. My favorite was the question in regards to what the title of the P.D.B. was, and she responded without hesitation, "I believe the title was Bin Laden determined to attack inside U.S. " Also the fact that she received a memo stating that there were cells in the U.S. and she was not sure if she warned the president etc. Additionally, she said that she was not given a plan but a set of actionable courses. Are they not one in the same? Finally, she tried to imply that they did not have sufficient time to make changes necessary to deal with the systemic problems with the C.I.A. and F.B. I. , but then goes onto say that immediately after 9/11 they made the changes. In all honesty I am not sure whether or not 9/11 could have prevented or not, but I am positive that it seems that even smallest measures to guard against any terrorists attacks were not taken since Bush took office.
-
Originally posted by raver_mania
Interesting article Igloo - where is it from?
I'm just surprised its not one any other sites...something like this would make headlines. Thus, I will hold any opinion till I hear more.
Youarehot - no-one on this board ever said Saddam will not be caught. So, I don't know what you're moseying about. I will sing a different tune ONLY after WMD's are found. That has always been my stance - since you're a newcomer here, you might not know that.
Actually it is headline news, on print and tv media. However this board disagrees on every issue, except one, being that the media is bias by nature. With that said this "memo" may be purely fabricated.
However if it is in fact genuine, then it most certainly creates a direct link to Saddam and 9-11. But even with this uncovering it is not fair for people to use this as a means of justifying war. I think for the most part the majority of people against war, held this belief because Iraq posed no imminent threat on the U.S. Thus the was was made offensively and could have been avoided.
-
Originally posted by raver_mania
Seems like there is little difference between the right and left, with both sides guilty of many of the same crimes each accuses the other of. The underlying difference between the two is that the right would like to win the world over through force, while the left would like to win the world over through extended diplomacy.
And then there is the far far right (hawks) which thinks itself as superior to other nations in the world and that these nations should be controlled (overtly or covertly).
I usually find your posts insightful but I must wholeheartedly disagree with your statements, lol. The main differences deal with financial policy, but there are also other governmental policies which are inherent to either the right or left. As far as tactics for winning the world over I think you may be outstretching historical events to convey a prevalent left or right ideology, which in reality does not exists. Actions taken during isolated incidents should not be used to generalize a specific party platform, but rathering the re-occuring stances on polices and issues that encompass the specific party and are generally expected is what in fact seperates the right from left.
-
Originally posted by dgmodel
Hi~!
Does your reply imply that you are indeed a blonde female with green eyes?
-
If you had your own line what would you label it?
-
Originally posted by iamme
quite the beauty...cant seem to figure out where youre from though
and your friend look like edward scissor hands
I am Italian
My friend is actually quite good looking here is a better pic
-
I am not really drunk, but my friend sure is.
Back
in Useless Blabber
Posted
Thanks for the advice I will try those.