Dr. Kwaltz wrote:

mmmcheezy wrote:

Dr. Kwaltz wrote:Watched a segment on CNN on this issue.

The ad will be aired, in the last few minutes of American Idol and with some parts either removed or redone according to the Lane Bryant company.

Beautiful women which for some reason caused Americans to be upset. Not that I can figure out why in a country with 1/3 of the population being morbidly obese.

I could understand if they wouldn't have aired a commercial for the latest heart attack from Burgerking but this....

Except that's not the case. Nobody has a problem with Victoria's Secret ads, or the skimpy outfits showcased on Dancing With the Stars. They're bothered because these women aren't fucking stick figures, they're closer to normal.

That is what I'm saying.

I'm not considering the size-0-freaks-of-nature-Americas-next-top-model-type of women to be beautiful.

In that case, thankyouverymuch

mmmcheezy wrote:

Dr. Kwaltz wrote:
That is what I'm saying.

I'm not considering the size-0-freaks-of-nature-Americas-next-top-model-type of women to be beautiful.

In that case, thankyouverymuch

I'm a man who like women curved like:



and

They're just being careful not to cause an earthquake and get a fatwa on them.

I've always had a thing for Topanga.

By the way here's the original source of the news that BrandySpears posted, courtesy of the googles she insists she's an expert on:

http://insidecurve.lanebryant.com/buzz/ ... t-want-it/

Tell me if that reads like ad copy or unbiased news to you?

Wait, I'm sorry, read the above in a generically outraged tone of voice at this horrible bigotry.

If you want such an unbiased source, why don't you go ahead and post an article that has the appropriate tone for you? My google search turned up several different hits.

My bride to be and I were watching some commercial last night that had some idiot model in it and I said "my goodness, she looks like a goddamn pencil" and Ms. 9142B said "She has no tits."

And the tag line of the commercial was "Cover it up."

To which I said "Yes, please do."

I cannot understand how breastless women that look like they have starved themselves into looking like twelve-year olds are supposed to sexy in any way, shape, or form.

I don't need women who disappear when they fucking turn sideways.

I don't need women who disappear when they fucking turn sideways

I think the phrase you're looking for is "lollipop heads"?

rJD wrote:

I don't need women who disappear when they fucking turn sideways

I think the phrase you're looking for is "lollipop heads"?

That's a good one!

NineOneFour wrote:

rJD wrote:

I don't need women who disappear when they fucking turn sideways

I think the phrase you're looking for is "lollipop heads"?

That's a good one!

I used to be a lollipop head but I'm not one now

Curvy women.. yummy slurp

mmmcheezy wrote:If you want such an unbiased source, why don't you go ahead and post an article that has the appropriate tone for you? My google search turned up several different hits.

It doesn't actually matter. You see, the original source on all of them was... the blog.

Now I can write it up really professionally, I can make it look really nice, but at the end of the day, the information is coming from the company's own blog.

Now there have been accurate things written in corporate blogs before. But you'll excuse me if I'm a tad skeptical of anything they say. Fun fact - people tend to tell a version of the truth that is favorable to them.

Allow me to offer a nod of approval for normal women with curves, as opposed to self-propelled sticks of bamboo ...

chairman bill wrote:

[url=http://www.rational-skepticism.org/viewtopic.php?p=152875#p152875]Paul G[/url] wrote:... I'm gorgous.

Is that 'gorgous' as in Gorgon-like?

Now, this is gorgeous ...

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PX7jeaXiETA[/youtube]

Oh thank you God(chairman bill)!

Arghhhh! Zombie thread alert! Someone save us!

What works against necromancy? Holy water and priests are out, we know they don't work.
Anyone got a shotgun?

Who cares about the corporate pornography that is advertisements?

Feminists? Because they say it objectifies women (but not men), and forces women into gender norms, etc.

Forty Two wrote:Feminists? Because they say it objectifies women (but not men), and forces women into gender norms, etc.

Some muddled thinking here. If you're going to have a bias, at least present it coherently.