posted 12-07-2002 09:58 AM         

quote:

---

Originally posted by naked maygun:
hmmm, i don't know about this...the article describes how this site aims to show people non-traditional versions of beauty, i.e. dreads, piercings, tattoos, and the like.

---

This part of your post made me think. Because what you listed are "non-traditional" choices but from my experience with the website, the girls are just hot waifish hipster chicks. Waifish women scrambling to make choices to look sexy is about as traditional as you get.

posted 12-07-2002 11:04 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by PoppaLarge:
Satan's Little Dumbass once posted a site where the women actually looked like honest-to-go punk chicks, if the LA junkie kind. SuicideGirls all look like poser art chicks. ;D

---

posted 12-13-2002 12:39 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by vendetta77:
I was attracted to punk rock partly because so many people involved in it were working to combat sexism...

---

And now you play in a band with a girl who lets men sexually objectify her for money.

quote:

---

...I like how Jessica Hopper says these women are being "sexually appreciated." My ass. I thought she, of all people, would understand the difference between objective consumption and appreciation. What a crock.

---

posted 12-13-2002 02:58 PM         

quote:

---

Originally posted by Trigger:
Do those men "appreciate" CPG?

---

posted 12-13-2002 03:05 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by vendetta77:
wha...?
Is your new pal daego filling your head with lies and rumors already? Wow. That didn't take long at all. Congratulations on your new partnership. I'm sure you two will be very happy together.

---

Hey settle down now, if I am wrong, tell me.
But I thought she said she did "a little dom work on the side."
Is that different than objective consumerism? Enlighten me, for I have never bought or sold "dom work."

posted 12-13-2002 03:36 PM         

quote:

---

Originally posted by Trigger:
Hey settle down now, if I am wrong, tell me.
But I thought she said she did "a little dom work on the side."
Is that different than objective consumerism? Enlighten me, for I have never bought or sold "dom work."

And what partnership are you talking about?

---

I believe the dom comment was a joke, based on mr. dedly's cat burglar scenario involving her. But if CPG chose to do dominatrix work on the side, it would likely be in the privacy of her dungeon or own home, and not broadcasted on a public forum such as the internet.

posted 12-13-2002 08:21 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by 2fisted:
Hell... even Lydia Lunch did a spread in Hustler!

---

posted 12-16-2002 04:02 AM            

Vendetta,
"My point is that the girls on this website have no control over how their image is used, and it sends a message to countless men that women don't mind being viewed as objects."
A) Actually, they do.
B) Hey, you know what? Some women LOVE being objectified. It's their choice. I wouldn't ever do porn, but hey, that's my choice. After all, nobody has a gun to these bitches' heads forcing them to do anything.
In reference to your reply to Clyde:
"This phrase gets plenty of quote time on the board, but Clyde, you're talking apples and oranges. I can't believe I even have to point this out. Choosing to have an abortion is a private, personal experience, not a public display that affects other women. Sexual exploitation and exhibition is vastly different from choosing to have a medical procedure that terminates a pregnancy."
How exactly is this an apples and oranges issue?
Isn't posing for a pornsite ( or magazine/video etc) a personal choice? And therefore a personal expierence, regardless of who it's shared with? I trust that any woman or man for that matter knows the full repercussions for doing so. Unlike an abortion, since that is the example you used, it doesn't actually kill a living being.

Punk has been a fetish for quite a while. Especially since the Greenday/Blink 182 popularity explosion, as was pointed out earlier. After all what is one of the most popular sexy woman/girl archtypes? The sexy schoolgirl. Which pretty much describes just about any punk rock girl or skinhead chick when they dress up and get girly. So if these girls are going to exploit the "mainstream", let them take their money and run with it.
XOXOXO

P.S. Daego, I can think of something sexier than looking at one of those sprawling lower back tattoos....getting one of those sprawling back tattoos done. mmmmmmm.

P.P.S. My signature has nothing to do with this topic.
------------------
It's All Out Naked Violence.

posted 12-16-2002 11:09 AM         

quote:

---

Originally posted by Hellside:

Vendetta,
"My point is that the girls on this website have no control over how their image is used, and it sends a message to countless men that women don't mind being viewed as objects."
A) Actually, they do.

---

quote:

---

B) Hey, you know what? Some women LOVE being objectified. It's their choice. I wouldn't ever do porn, but hey, that's my choice. After all, nobody has a gun to these bitches' heads forcing them to do anything.

---

Hey, you know what? You missed my point. It is their choice, and I'm just saying it is a poor one that affects all of us! Yes, SOME women do like to be objectified, as it makes them feel SEXY and whatnot. Hell, I even like to feel sexy from time to time (*gasp*). To each his/her own. But not ALL women like to be objectified as such, and that is my contention. It angers me that punk rock has to be exploited on that level, and subjugated by mainstream 'tendencies' like pornography. And yeah, there has been bondage/punk-influenced porn for decades, but this site doesn't exactly legitamize it by making their girls seem more 'approachable' or 'accessible.'

quote:

---

In reference to your reply to Clyde:
How exactly is this an apples and oranges issue?
Isn't posing for a pornsite ( or magazine/video etc) a personal choice? And therefore a personal expierence, regardless of who it's shared with? I trust that any woman or man for that matter knows the full repercussions for doing so. Unlike an abortion, since that is the example you used, it doesn't actually kill a living being.

---

You're right-- sorta. Essentially, they are both decisions, but that's where the similarities end. A woman's decision to have an abortion does not affect me personally or the way men treat/see me. These images do, whether I like it or not. Dig?
Maybe it's apples and pears, since they have sorta similar textures...

quote:

---

I trust that any woman or man for that matter knows the full repercussions for doing so.

---

You have more faith in people than I.

posted 12-17-2002 04:37 AM            

A woman's decision to have an abortion does not affect you personally? I beg to differ. Firstly, your mother chose not to have an abortion, that most definately affects you personally. Secondly, because of other women's actions, the option of having abortion is yours to choose. Doesn't having the option of deciding what goes on with your body also affect you personally?

"But not ALL women like to be objectified as such, and that is my contention. It angers me that punk rock has to be exploited on that level."
I'm sure that more harm has been and will ever be done to Asian females from porn than any punk rock porn site will ever do to the punk rock scene(tm).

"You have more faith in people than I."
Not hardly.

And for the mass's consideration a few sites that are similar. www.heyiknowthatchick.com
and www.heyiknowthatguy.com

------------------
It's All Out Naked Violence.

posted 12-17-2002 11:12 AM         

quote:

---

Originally posted by Hellside:
"Do they have control over the way their images are interpreted by viewers? Sadly, no." That statement also applies to just about any photo taken of just about anybody.

---

Does it though? Then why is porn a multi-million dollar industry and portrait artists can't make a dime? What is it about porn that sells? I'll tell you. It's the intent behind the images. It is the lusty 'come hither' poses and sexual innuendoes. It's also the high demand for such risque material.
The real question here is: How can we be so sure of the POSER'S intent? You assert that these astonishingly young models know exactly what they're getting into. I think they are naive and largely unaware of what damage is caused by overt sexualization. Well, that pouty lip and naked breast is not there to be 'admired' by the viewer for it's 'pure beauty.' It's jack-off material, plain and simple. Perhaps they're comfortable knowing that they are objectified. But I don't want some guy at a club assuming I'm merely a sexual object just because I have a tattoo on my arm or a 'punk' look. It's the MESSAGE<MESSAGE>MESSAGE. And what about safety? What about that guy that interprets your image as "you want me bad" and follows you home from the party? There's an inherent danger in objectification.
Also, remember that these photos were taken with a purpose in mind. To generate $$ through a voyueristic means.

I think where we differ is that you give people too much credit in terms of having a discerning eye, being open minded, intelligent, etc, and I give people too little credit. I'm rather skeptical.

quote:

---

A woman's decision to have an abortion does not affect you personally? I beg to differ. Firstly, your mother chose not to have an abortion, that most definately affects you personally. Secondly, because of other women's actions, the option of having abortion is yours to choose. Doesn't having the option of deciding what goes on with your body also affect you personally?

---

Okay, okay. You're looking at this with a broader, more historical perspective rather than a psychological one. I'm willing to bet hundreds of women get abortions every day. I do not feel an impact, at least not intimately. I can see where you are going though. Choice is choice is choice. Yes, I am personally affected by abortion insofar that I am legally able to make my own decision on the matter. But women don't get abortions for money, nor do they do it to feel appreciated, sexually attractive or 'wanted.' They do it because they aren't ready to be mothers, along with a plethora of other reasons. Apples and pears.

posted 12-17-2002 01:24 PM            

"What's good for us is good. What's good for them is no good."

I think that it has to be acknowledged that us guys have tastes in sexy stuff that a lot of women are never going to understand. Our brains ARE different regarding sex, and we should just accept that.

I understand that erotic pics of girls, though they may get some of us guys goin', often have a totally different effect on women. It's actually disturbing to many. (not that I'm personally not also disturbed by some porn too. I certainly am. But I speaking of innocuous stuff like the pinup type photos at suicidegirls.)

Here's an example of what I mean. I find pictures of men having sex, and all that, fairly disturbing on a gut level. I'm sure that most hetero males do too. But I think that it's a mistake to then think that it is by it's nature somehow wrong. Of course not. It's just not something that my brain is wired to see in the same way that say a gay man does. I bet that most women see straight porn in the same way we see gay porn.

I do agree that, yes, it is a bunch of phony bullshit that suicidegirls.com is some sort of punk community. Come on! But... I won't agree that sexy pinup pictures of real women is somehow wrong by nature.

If you've seen what most of the women in mainstream porn do to themselves to fit some bizarre image of sexy (horrific anorexia, plastic turgid fake boobs, rynoplasty, ugh...) hell, anything that eroticizes normal women looks positive. It's amazing how these mutilated woman have become some twisted standard of sexy. Just watch Elimidate and you're bound to see some.

posted 12-20-2002 11:57 AM            

I understand people’s problems with porno, but V77 I’m have a problem with your assertion about how these picture are interpreted. I’m going to have to side with HellSide on this one. No one can control how things are interpreted or perceived. Granted with images like this there are implied sexual connotations. Now if some guy is sitting at home wacking off to these pictures how does it do anyone harm? Now if that same guy after getting off to Punkrockchicks.com, goes out and rapes someone who appears to be punk, can that site be blamed for his actions? Before answering that question think about this: How did you feel when they tried to blame Columbine on Marylin Manson or when the families of the two boys who committed suicide sued Judas Priest. There are so many examples of songs containing references to violence and suicide, if the same guy in my first example is instead is sitting at home listening to Slayers “War Ensemble” playing Grand Theft Auto, is he harming anyone? Now if he finished his game then goes and finishes off half of his coworkers can you blame Slayer or the game?

I know this is still somewhat of an apples to pears or oranges to tangerines. I see and understand the objectification argument. But as it has been pointed out most of the women in porno know exactly what they are doing and are fairly compensated for there work.

quote:

---

Originally posted by naked maygun: in addition, my dislike for this is simple-i dont want jock assholes to all of a sudden think that "punk" is some new sexy fetish. im not expecting heads to turn when i walk down the street , but i dont want people to look at me or my friends and immediately equate the belt im wearing or my tattos with something related to sex.

---

How does the fact that now porn has come to “punk” now make it a problem? Why is it now different? Its ok when the jock sees the typical porno stereo type and equates her to sex, but when he sees you and equates you to sex it’s a problem.