So much truth to that.

By

So much truth to that.

Originally shared by Steven G

Comments

Pertti said…
Well, the female could be in the males photo too.;P
June 25, 2012 at 5:51 PM
Niall Cook said…
yes, she could be.....as the object, naked & suitably posed. It's how we males roll
June 25, 2012 at 6:42 PM
michel prins said…
so we dont mind women take fotos the way they do ;)
June 25, 2012 at 6:45 PM
Chris Reece said…
Thank you for reminding me of just how much I hate hypocrisy.
June 25, 2012 at 8:11 PM
Jason ON said…
Me, the original poster? What's hypocritic about the cartoon?
June 25, 2012 at 8:24 PM
Chris Reece said…
Out of curiosity, are you aware of the meme's origins?

http://freethoughtblogs.com/dispatches/2011/12/28/reddit-makes-me-hate-men/

And please feel free to go ahead and tell me none of you guys has ever had your pic taken with something you own or want to own, or with something cool that a friend happens to have, or even just at a really cool place that you were proud to have visited.
June 25, 2012 at 8:40 PM
Jason ON said…
You're equating a joke about the differences between men and women taking
pictures with rape jokes?

And yes, I can say I don't take pictures oof something interesting with
myself or friends. Not normally, anyway. Go through my albums, I rarely
take pictures of people at all.
June 25, 2012 at 8:44 PM
Niall Cook said…
Give it away Jason ON you'll never win
June 25, 2012 at 8:50 PM
Chris Reece said…
You didn't go back to read the original story, did you?

The meme represented by this pic is due to a 15-year-old atheist girl proudly displaying a copy of an atheist book her Christian mother bought her. She made the terrible error of actually holding up the book in the picture and got thousands of rape jokes for it. And then this meme started showing up everywhere.

As for pics - we have a ton more pics of my husband doing stuff/holding up objects/posing for sightseeing than we do of me, does that make him a woman and me a man?
June 25, 2012 at 8:50 PM
Niall Cook said…
Christine Reece your argument is dissolving into irrelevancy. It does not address what the author intended, which is the proclivity for males to photograph 'things' and the  proclivity of females to photograph people. Often people AND things. You are conflating a hobby horse with a random perception. Doing so is both irrational and illogical.
June 25, 2012 at 9:03 PM
Chris Reece said…
Yes, it's completely irrational and illogical to point out where the meme came from, thanks for reminding me! You guys are so edgy and daring for helping a pack of internets douchebags continue to make fun of a 15-year-old girl. I shouldn't have questioned your unthinkable superiority!

Because this never happens. Ever. Cheers all.

http://twicsy.com/i/iQW7R
June 26, 2012 at 7:24 AM
Jason ON said…
Since neither the girl, the reddit thread, nor anything else relating to that post are mentioned or represented in the above image, I don't see the relevancy to your point, Christine Reece.  If your issue with the cartoon is nothing more than how the drawing above differentiates between the typical male's photography technique versus the typical female's photographic technique then by your logic we can scour the internet finding images and meme's poking fun at the the differences between the manner in which males and females take pictures and assign them some misogynistic beginning. But since this cartoon doesn't, as I said before, directly or indirectly reference  the circumstance you're trying to fit it into, I don't see the point of your continued argument that it does.

However, if it does in some way fit your meme other than a girl took a picture of herself with a book on atheism, them please demonstrate that. Show an exact post (on reddit) wherein that girl was posed similar to this cartoon and the trolling came tumbling in.

Oh, and Christine Reece, this link would have better represented your point on the matter: http://skepchick.org/2011/12/reddit-makes-me-hate-atheists/

It was the link from the link you provided to the Freethoughts blog.

However, if you read the link to skepchick.org, the image in question predates the circumstances you're tying it to by at least a few weeks and, again, has nothing to do with rape, misogyny or other inappropriate trolling behavior.
June 26, 2012 at 12:02 PM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

So, I asked Andrew Tamm, who filled my Stream with a hundred (sarcasm there) animated gifs and cat pictures to...

By
So, I asked Andrew Tamm, who filled my Stream with a hundred (sarcasm there) animated gifs and cat pictures to remove me from whatever Circle he has me in where he posts the animated gifs and cat pictures. It was either that or unfollow him and I didn't see any reason to unfollow him. Me asking https://plus.google.com/112885755521259735422/posts/78dwnvvgh4p Then he plusses me onto Public posts of animated cat gifs : https://plus.google.com/u/0/112885755521259735422/posts/EuuR1tnU3vJ https://plus.google.com/u/0/112885755521259735422/posts/8r6Grcm2Jpj https://plus.google.com/u/0/112885755521259735422/posts/74PgSu6iL2s Then one of his friends (or Circlers) starts plussing me into posts of animated cat gifs : https://plus.google.com/u/0/107120198886093172821/posts/gRW9JhWLs5T Don't get me wrong, I'm all about sarcasm and messing with people, but this seems sort of childish to me. Am I the only one who thinks so? So far I have only blocked people who have overtly spammed a thr...
Read more