The 2017 General Salma Hayek discussion thread...Part 3!!!

[Alpo]

I BELIEVE THAT SEX WORK is when you have a job that stimulates sexual thoughts in a person mentally or physically. Some sex work is mental like dancing at strip club, posing for Playboy, or writing dirty stories. Other sex work is physical, like being a porn star or a prostitute. I worked in a dungeon as a dominatrix way before I had even had sex (when I say “before I had sex,” I mean “before I lost my virginity”).

If your intent is to stir up sexual thoughts, you are a sex worker. On the other hand, I do not believe if you are a nude model at an art school that you are a sex worker, because the job of nude modeling in that context is to be a human subject, not a sexual object.

Depends on who you ask, doesn't it?

 

[Woobie]

Depends on who you ask, doesn't it?

I actually agree that it's just sex, not art. But does being a sex worker mean you no longer have equal protection under the law? Does any old wanker have carte blanche to do with your body as he pleases?

 

[BugI02]

My, you do get around Alpo

Cricket
Bikini dancer; former dominatrix

 

[SheepDog4Life]

I try to differentiate between the types of offenses being committed. The rape of an underage child is a hanging offense in my mind.

I agree that the allegations against Moore are far worse than those currently out there about Franken. Both in deed and because of the age, 14, of the victim. Rope, however, is too expensive for such scum, a 29 cent solution would be about correct.

The release of pictures by a female adult well after the fact and AFTER her appearance in Playboy is, to me, taking advantage of a situation to improve your career. If you appear in Playboy in the nude, you are a sex worker. Period. It ain't art. It's sex for sale in print.

I think Leeanne is exploiting a minor incident to boost her sagging career. It's manipulative, and you have fallen for it.

The only issue I would have with an allegation is whether it is truthful and factual. The picture and his multiple attempts at apologizing clear that hurdle for me.

Nothing she nor any woman could do, OTHER THAN CONSENT, clears him of his actions. Those are on him. Period. Full stop.

Your explanation implies that had she been, and remained, a "woman with her virtue intact", then his actions would have been bad. But she didn't, so, oh well... that is slut shaming.

Some of the other cases coming out are shameful and show a need for us, as males, to clean up our acts. You can attempt to isolate yourself from their actions, but you're male and every one of these cases creates mistrust on the part of females that you will have to deal with. Not your fault, of course. But they all bring us down.

I disagree... I am a man and I'm damn proud of it. I am decidedly not a "nice guy" and never want to be. That's for creeps, IMO. But I do strive to be a "good man", and I wake up every day pledging to myself to do my best to be a better man, a better father, a better significant other and a better person.

I am not ashamed to be a man today. In fact, I am ecstatic that the birds have FINALLY come home to roost on these pieces of s**t. If anything, it took too damn long.

IMO, as men, our job goes far beyond not being a creep. It means calling it out when we see it happening... not countenancing it for a second. We can all revere in Salma's beauty, but the second one man seeks to lay a finger on her without her consent, we should all be ready to bash the creep in the nose. (unless, of course, she beats us to the punch)

I'm really surprised at a few of these people. Oliver Stone is no surprise. A wanker and scum.

The only surprise I've encountered THUS FAR has been George H. W. Bush. His actions made me truly sad. The rest, IMO, exuded an entitled creep ethos.

Depends on who you ask, doesn't it?

I fixed a cabinet, once... that doesn't make me a carpenter. Yeah, if you make your living posing nude in men's wank magazines, you are a sex worker. Posing topless once, nah. Though even if she was in Playboy every month, buck naked, that doesn't entitle Franken to put his creepy hands on her.

ETA: Did some editting... done now.

 

[Alpo]

No. There is a fine line that men do not get to determine. Most of the cases noted so far are clearly cases of sexual predation. And we all know that there are guys out there who cross that line.

On the other side, there are women who exploit and or manipulate sex or sexual situations for their own benefit. That's also predatory, but I'm not sure we've given women much choice based on their subjugation since Eve made a bad decision.

Eventually, this is all going to blow back on those in power....and well it should. CEO's, Media moguls, Congressmen...and a President. Don't think Trump is getting a pass just because he's denied any wrongdoing. This backlash is going to be a neutron bomb and perhaps only the buildings will remain standing after the next couple of elections.

I actually agree that it's just sex, not art. But does being a sex worker mean you no longer have equal protection under the law? Does any old wanker have carte blanche to do with your body as he pleases?

 

[Alpo]

My, you do get around Alpo

Cricket
Bikini dancer; former dominatrix

I know how to google. You do too.

But, it refutes your definition pretty well, doesn't it?

 

[BugI02]

No. There is a fine line that men do not get to determine. Most of the cases noted so far are clearly cases of sexual predation. And we all know that there are guys out there who cross that line.

On the other side, there are women who exploit and or manipulate sex or sexual situations for their own benefit. That's also predatory, but I'm not sure we've given women much choice based on their subjugation since Eve made a bad decision.

Eventually, this is all going to blow back on those in power....and well it should. CEO's, Media moguls, Congressmen...and a President. Don't think Trump is getting a pass just because he's denied any wrongdoing. This backlash is going to be a neutron bomb and perhaps only the buildings will remain standing after the next couple of elections.

I think you're wrong. If it was going to have an effect more than it did when deployed, on his base and the women who voted for him, it already would have. The more that the accusers seem agenda driven creatures carrying the left's water the less effect they will have

What people forget is it is the stunning level of hypocrisy that gives these things their power. When we find out that, say, Charlie Sheen has been caught in questionable behavior its just "meh". He has never held himself to be a model for the behaviors of others

But when its someone who has worn the righteous facade, whether a senior official of Focus on the Family or a liberal hollywood scold, the reaction is much more severe

 

[BugI02]

I know how to google. You do too.

But, it refutes your definition pretty well, doesn't it?

So you don't know her, uhh ... more intimately? No spike heels and leather fetish?

 

[Alpo]

We'll see. Charlie Rose just got fired.

One down.

 

[Alpo]

So you don't know her, uhh ... more intimately? No spike heels and leather fetish?

I don't know why, but the use of teal always struck me as a leather and ball-gag kinda font color. I thought you might relate better.

 

[Hop]

For those posting text and not Salma pics...
https://alecsteeleshop.com/products/l

 

[Timjoebillybob]

Supposition. I'm sure we both haven't a clue to where that money went. Conversely, Trump got $8 for every hat sold. Barry had no involvement in the shirts, Donny had involvement with the hats. For a guy who flips-flops money between his golf courses and charity to pay for legal fees, a Tebow helmet, and paintings it seems pretty normal.

Nope, actually Trump didn't receive any money for the hats sold. Donald Trump for President may have, but that is not Trump. He's not even listed on the org chart for them.
Organization of Donald J. Trump for President, Inc. - Staff, Advisors and Supporters - General Election Edition
You keep acting like you believe that Trump pockets the money from the sale of them, which as I pointed out above is simply not true.

The legal fees bother me, the painting and helmet maybe maybe not. What did the charity pay for them, and how much did Trump bid/pay? For instance was the painting commissioned for 20k and Trump bid 50k?

The onus isn't on me to prove Obama hocked gear. It's on you. Trump obviously does.

I'm pretty sure I remember Obama wearing clothing with campaign insignia on it, which is no different that what Trump has done. Or "giving away" a bumper sticker for a certain level of donation, which Obama has also done.

But, it refutes your definition pretty well, doesn't it?

Not really that is just some persons personal definition. How about this one? Doesn't it refute your provided definition pretty well?
"Just because someone is attracted to someone else’s naked body in a photograph that, let’s say, was an “artistic nude,” doesn’t mean that photo was intended to create (or fulfill) a sexual fantasy. It was intended to show the human body in its natural form, create a mood, etc. I personally don’t always correlate nudity with sex. For me, this means it doesn’t fall under the category of sex work."

 

[Alpo]

TimJoeBillyBobFredDavid:

De Nile is more than a river.

 

[Timjoebillybob]

TimJoeBillyBobFredDavid:

De Nile is more than a river.

Yes it is, fortunately I'm not the one suffering from it. How about the World Health Org definition of "sex worker"?

Sex workers are women, men and transgendered people who
receive money or goods in exchange for sexual services, and who
consciously define those activities as income generating even if
they do not consider sex work as their occupation

Or perhaps Merriam-Webster

: a person whose work involves sexually explicit behavior; especially : prostitute 1

 

[Alpo]

Nice to see you quoting WHO. You don't believe them when they talk about global warming, but hey, they are OK on the sexworker thing. I understand.

 

[Woobie]

Nice to see you quoting WHO. You don't believe them when they talk about global warming, but hey, they are OK on the sexworker thing. I understand.

So do you always completely discredit others categorically when you disagree on one or two things?

Of course, if that's the case, you must be forced to agree with the stated definition because it was provided by an organization with whom you have agreed on one subject.

 

[Alpo]

You have a very curious way of juxtaposing your interrogatories, of which there are many.

 

[Woobie]

You have a very strange way of juxtaposing your interrogatories, of which there are many.

Ill take that as a "Yes, I agree with the WHO definition of sex worker, I'm just making a silly point because I can't refute what Timjoebillybob said."

 

[Alpo]

No. I didn't say that and haven't read the article associated with this definition. There are many definitions out there. I like the one I posted. You are welcome to yours, since you are just kibbitzing anyway.

 

[Woobie]

No. I didn't say that and haven't read the article associated with this definition. There are many definitions out there. I like the one I posted. You are welcome to yours, since you are just kibbitzing anyway.

Then why did you attack his use of the WHO definition? Were you being silly?

You can call it kibitzing, trolling, or anything else. But what I'm really doing is pointing out that this string of non-sequiters coming from you does not amount to an argument, counterpoint or anything else. You just take silly positions and offer no substantive defense for those positions. And when someone effectively controverts you, you revert to either calling them some version of a Republican sycophant, or you mention how much older you are, which apparently means you are automatically right. Meanwhile, you balk at or ignore questioning of your positions, which, if you were in the right would be easily answered.

This is your pattern when you take bad stances. This blaming the victim crap just happens to be the latest and perhaps the most memorable. On the other hand, when you are in the right, you do put together coherent arguments, support them, and effectively answer challenges.