why would people care that someone like Anna Nicole Smith died anyway? She was a stupid, coke-head slut who didn't contribute anything to society. All she did was bang an old guy for his money, that should not give her any kind of place in the media.
Let's not let our blind rage control us. I do think it is perfectly acceptable to create a new efficent language. But only if the little bastards learn real words first. It actually causes me distress when I realize that kids don't understand that "ur" is only shorthand, and not a valid word.
It's perfectly acceptable on text messages where there's a character limit, sure. But not i- Wait a minute! Some essays have page limits, and using "ur" instead of your and other such IM speak terms would save room and allow you to write more. That'd be a good idea if it didn't make you look like a drop-out.
Any girl classy enough to pick photos in Playboy over Hustler or that horridly depressing emotionless garbage that passes for pornography nowadays is not a total bimbo in my book. All life is precious, dudes. Learn to love it, or you'll never be able to be fully happy.
EDIT OF: I just realized that the people I'm trying to convince probably have some sort of e-nanny program their parents put on their computers to prevent them from going to potentially damaging websites. In that case, all I can do is wait until you grow up. It's a special process, full of adventure and uncertainty. The best part is when your testicles drop! Then you really feel like men!
I still don't see anything that establishes her as anything more than a "bimbo, fake celebrities who failed to contribute anything meaningful to society." I mean, wow. Playboy. Where would this country- nay, the world- be without Playboy? I shudder to think.
Look, I'm going to explain it one more time, and then after that God help you if you don't get it.
1) Playboy is classy, and a lot of the stuff in it can be considered art.
2) Anna Nicole made the world more beautiful. This is better than doing nothing.
3) Barring all of that, she was still a human being. Do you realize how fragile and amazingly complex ALL life is? To see any amount of it go, especially that which was a human being, so closely related to yourself, should be an immensely sobering experience.
Life's too short for hate or even apathy, guys. Fill it with all the love, respect, and joy you can.
1. It's porn. I don't care if it's classy compared to all the garbage internet porn there is out there today, it's still porn.
2. She also made the world fatter and made good people suffer through another garbage miracle weight loss product commercial.
3. I don't buy that coming from you. You're normally pretty rude and annoying. In fact, that's what you're probably doing now. If this hadn't been posted in the amusing news thread, and instead in the fucked up news thread, you'd probably be saying the same things myself and Johnny are.
Don't forget that she married an old guy for his money, got fat, got her own TV show, got kinda slimmer, got 270 million from the dead old guy, and then that "performance" on...I think it was the American Music Awards.
But yeah, otherwise, she was a great person, who we should continue to talk about on CNN for at least 17 months.
Don't bash what people consider art, there's a difference between BEARLY LEGEL COLLEGZ SLUTS ON CAMPUS 7 and a tasteful portrayl of the human form.
Do people use it for other reasons that it's aethestic value? Of course. But it's a byproduct of this society of ours. What about classical art? Is the Birth of Venus pornography? Michelangelo's David? Where do you draw the line?
Secondly, you need to give me some proof that that diet thing was bunk before you can make that argument.
Thirdly, don't pretend to know what Jakey's thinking and what his motivation for what he says is. Human life does have value, as much of a vapid golddigger as she may or may not have been, she's still somebody's child or friend or loved one, or whatever the case may have been, and it is very disrespectful to make light of someone's death.
The news can ramble on about her all they want, I stopped watching those 24 hour news stations months ago, all the news I get comes through NPR when I'm driving around, the music stations on the radio have been lacking as of late.
Don't forget that she married an old guy for his money, got fat, got her own TV show, got kinda slimmer, got 270 million from the dead old guy, and then that "performance" on...I think it was the American Music Awards.
But yeah, otherwise, she was a great person, who we should continue to talk about on CNN for at least 17 months.
Oh yeah. Certainly can't forget about that. What a shame that she's gone.
Secondly, you need to give me some proof that that diet thing was bunk before you can make that argument.
It's already been established in this thread. Go back and read the original article as posted by Serephel:
Earlier this week, Smith was included in a class-action lawsuit against a company, TrimSpa, for which she had worked as a spokesperson. TrimSpa makes a product it claims leads to substantial weight loss. The lawsuit alleges the marketing of the product, TrimSpa X32, was false or misleading.
I'm not angry. I'm engaging in what I feel is a civil discussion (or it is at this time, I'm hoping it doesn't turn into a flame war) of how much Anna Nicole Smith was worth to the world. I'm also not the only one who feels she was pretty useless overall, as evidenced by Johnny and Takeru's posts. And as for liking to argue... No, not really. If I was looking for an argument, I would have said something along the lines of "Anna Nicole Smith was a worthless cow. Good riddance." But I merely said that zombie fights were more entertaining than Ms. Smith before John decided to get all in my face about it.
Do people use it for other reasons that it's aethestic value? Of course. But it's a byproduct of this society of ours. What about classical art? Is the Birth of Venus pornography? Michelangelo's David? Where do you draw the line?
No, I don't consider any of that to be porn. It's not meant for that purpose. Playboy, however, is. I mean, come on. Look at the first cover in the link John posted. "19 ways to take off her panties"? Playboy would be right there in the supermarket checkout lines with all that other smut for women if it didn't contain pornographic material.
Thirdly, don't pretend to know what Jakey's thinking and what his motivation for what he says is. Human life does have value, as much of a vapid golddigger as she may or may not have been, she's still somebody's child or friend or loved one, or whatever the case may have been, and it is very disrespectful to make light of someone's death.
I think you meant John. But I actually agree with John's assessment. And yours.
I mean, ok. I'm irreverent. I have made light of this situation. But I certainly don't genuinely think ill of her. And not because she's dead, now, and you're supposed to think highly of the dead or whatever. It's just I try not to think ill of anyone. Truthfully, I pitied her more than anything. Hopefully she's at peace now.
Hamelin asked where art stops and pornography starts, well the answer is simple. Pornography starts when it is designed to be masturbated over. The creation of Adam, or David could be seen as pornographic, due to the nudity, but they were not made to be arousing, thus are NOT pornographics. As are photos of naked women for the purpose of showing off the human form. Playboy is made for horny men to masturbate over. It isn't art.
1. As John commented, life is indeed precious and it should be revered. I may be a bad person for putting this article up in the amusing news thread. I have come to terms with this. However, I do have a problem with how our media tends to glorify the deaths of some and trivialize the deaths of others. Remember when that girl Natalie Holloway disappeared in Aruba a few years ago? That shit was on the news for months, mostly because she was pretty, white, and rich. Quick, when was the last time a black or Asian girl disappeared, resulting in media coverage for months?
Anna Nicole Smith's death at the age of 39 is indeed sad, but is her death actually more important than others? Does her death deserve to be on the front page and in the breaking news headlines of CNN and every other major news source when there is still a genocide occuring in Darfur, when we are still in war losing more and more American lives, or when there is any other major event in the world? I can guarantee you there is no shortage of terrible deaths around that could be reported. Plenty of people in developing nations are struggling to survive, dying horrible, painful deaths at the hands of hunger, violence, or civil strife. Yet, Anna Nicole Smith's death is more important and newsworthy? Think about it.
2. The line between pornography and art is vague, partially because it is subjective to the person and the time frame. Go back a few generations, and the Sears catalogues could be considered pornographic. With Playboy, it could be either way. Sure, it depicts naked women in seductive poses, but the scenery is often carefully selected, and it doesn't have close ups on the vagina, much less close ups of actual sex. Magazines like Hustler and Penthouse do, but not Playboy (...so I hear).
Art is subjective, and it means different things to different people. Artists who are fascinated with the human body may see a picture as art where a conservative Christian would see the same as pornogaphy.
3. And yes, mjc, you do seem to get into a lot of arguments. I think a lot of that can be chalked up to the fact that in text, intonation and inflection in sentences is completely void, which can drastically alter the meaning of sentences. What you think you mean can be misinterpreted on the boards. I say this because it seems like you have a lot of contrasting opinions lately which you are quite steadfast in defending. Which is fine, it's good to be certain of oneself. I'm just saying what I've seen lately.
3. And yes, mjc, you do seem to get into a lot of arguments. I think a lot of that can be chalked up to the fact that in text, intonation and inflection in sentences is completely void, which can drastically alter the meaning of sentences. What you think you mean can be misinterpreted on the boards. I say this because it seems like you have a lot of contrasting opinions lately which you are quite steadfast in defending. Which is fine, it's good to be certain of oneself. I'm just saying what I've seen lately.
Getting into arguments isn't the same thing as enjoying arguing. And I'd personally rather be able to back statements that other people find questionable, than sit there like an idiot going "I don't like DDR cause it's teh stupidz lol."
...The line between pornography and art is vague, partially because it is subjective to the person and the time frame. Go back a few generations, and the Sears catalogues could be considered pornographic...
Perhaps we should start another thread on the topic, but I ask you: Where do Victoria's Secret catalogues fit in? I realize they're mainly trying to sell stuff, but, like the lingerie section of a Sears catalog, they're selling "sexy." So how different are they from a Playboy?
Better, what about the fact that, until the past 100 years or so, most female models for artists were prostitutes or otherwise women of "ill repute"?
I think an important point to consider, but one that can be difficult to actually discover, is the intention behind the image in question. What is the intention behind Victoria's Secret catalogues? Is it to tastefully present an image of the female form, or is it to excite viewers sexually? Personally I think that Victoria's Secret mostly falls under the "sex sells" category, and thus really isn't art. And since it is most likely meant to excite viewers sexually, you could consider it pornography, even if there's no nudity. But I guess that calls into question the definition of the word 'pornography'.
Comments
Actually, she'd been complaining of "flu-like symptoms" for some time. So maybe it wasn't an overdose. *shrug*
Oh yeah, god, Leetspeek is dumb.
Yeah. Except if you don't accept IM speak, you can't accept 1337 speak, because 1337 speak is even more rage inducing than IM speak.
It's perfectly acceptable on text messages where there's a character limit, sure. But not i- Wait a minute! Some essays have page limits, and using "ur" instead of your and other such IM speak terms would save room and allow you to write more. That'd be a good idea if it didn't make you look like a drop-out.
Man, now I have to draw zombie Abe Lincoln fighting zombie Anna Nicole smith. Abe Lincoln rocks my socks!
They're more entertaining than Anna Nicole Smith ever was.
http://www.playboy.com/worldofplayboy/features/anna-nicole-smith/
Any girl classy enough to pick photos in Playboy over Hustler or that horridly depressing emotionless garbage that passes for pornography nowadays is not a total bimbo in my book. All life is precious, dudes. Learn to love it, or you'll never be able to be fully happy.
EDIT OF: I just realized that the people I'm trying to convince probably have some sort of e-nanny program their parents put on their computers to prevent them from going to potentially damaging websites. In that case, all I can do is wait until you grow up. It's a special process, full of adventure and uncertainty. The best part is when your testicles drop! Then you really feel like men!
Should I be worried? My testicles haven't dropped yet... Oh, wait. That wasn't meant for me.
1) Playboy is classy, and a lot of the stuff in it can be considered art.
2) Anna Nicole made the world more beautiful. This is better than doing nothing.
3) Barring all of that, she was still a human being. Do you realize how fragile and amazingly complex ALL life is? To see any amount of it go, especially that which was a human being, so closely related to yourself, should be an immensely sobering experience.
Life's too short for hate or even apathy, guys. Fill it with all the love, respect, and joy you can.
2. She also made the world fatter and made good people suffer through another garbage miracle weight loss product commercial.
3. I don't buy that coming from you. You're normally pretty rude and annoying. In fact, that's what you're probably doing now. If this hadn't been posted in the amusing news thread, and instead in the fucked up news thread, you'd probably be saying the same things myself and Johnny are.
But yeah, otherwise, she was a great person, who we should continue to talk about on CNN for at least 17 months.
Do people use it for other reasons that it's aethestic value? Of course. But it's a byproduct of this society of ours. What about classical art? Is the Birth of Venus pornography? Michelangelo's David? Where do you draw the line?
Secondly, you need to give me some proof that that diet thing was bunk before you can make that argument.
Thirdly, don't pretend to know what Jakey's thinking and what his motivation for what he says is. Human life does have value, as much of a vapid golddigger as she may or may not have been, she's still somebody's child or friend or loved one, or whatever the case may have been, and it is very disrespectful to make light of someone's death.
The news can ramble on about her all they want, I stopped watching those 24 hour news stations months ago, all the news I get comes through NPR when I'm driving around, the music stations on the radio have been lacking as of late.
You're angry a lot and like to argue.
Oh yeah. Certainly can't forget about that. What a shame that she's gone.
It's already been established in this thread. Go back and read the original article as posted by Serephel:
I'm not angry. I'm engaging in what I feel is a civil discussion (or it is at this time, I'm hoping it doesn't turn into a flame war) of how much Anna Nicole Smith was worth to the world. I'm also not the only one who feels she was pretty useless overall, as evidenced by Johnny and Takeru's posts. And as for liking to argue... No, not really. If I was looking for an argument, I would have said something along the lines of "Anna Nicole Smith was a worthless cow. Good riddance." But I merely said that zombie fights were more entertaining than Ms. Smith before John decided to get all in my face about it.
No, I don't consider any of that to be porn. It's not meant for that purpose. Playboy, however, is. I mean, come on. Look at the first cover in the link John posted. "19 ways to take off her panties"? Playboy would be right there in the supermarket checkout lines with all that other smut for women if it didn't contain pornographic material.
I think you meant John. But I actually agree with John's assessment. And yours.
I mean, ok. I'm irreverent. I have made light of this situation. But I certainly don't genuinely think ill of her. And not because she's dead, now, and you're supposed to think highly of the dead or whatever. It's just I try not to think ill of anyone. Truthfully, I pitied her more than anything. Hopefully she's at peace now.
It was a little amusing, though. >_>
Anna Nicole Smith's death at the age of 39 is indeed sad, but is her death actually more important than others? Does her death deserve to be on the front page and in the breaking news headlines of CNN and every other major news source when there is still a genocide occuring in Darfur, when we are still in war losing more and more American lives, or when there is any other major event in the world? I can guarantee you there is no shortage of terrible deaths around that could be reported. Plenty of people in developing nations are struggling to survive, dying horrible, painful deaths at the hands of hunger, violence, or civil strife. Yet, Anna Nicole Smith's death is more important and newsworthy? Think about it.
2. The line between pornography and art is vague, partially because it is subjective to the person and the time frame. Go back a few generations, and the Sears catalogues could be considered pornographic. With Playboy, it could be either way. Sure, it depicts naked women in seductive poses, but the scenery is often carefully selected, and it doesn't have close ups on the vagina, much less close ups of actual sex. Magazines like Hustler and Penthouse do, but not Playboy (...so I hear).
Art is subjective, and it means different things to different people. Artists who are fascinated with the human body may see a picture as art where a conservative Christian would see the same as pornogaphy.
3. And yes, mjc, you do seem to get into a lot of arguments. I think a lot of that can be chalked up to the fact that in text, intonation and inflection in sentences is completely void, which can drastically alter the meaning of sentences. What you think you mean can be misinterpreted on the boards. I say this because it seems like you have a lot of contrasting opinions lately which you are quite steadfast in defending. Which is fine, it's good to be certain of oneself. I'm just saying what I've seen lately.
And I'm done.
Getting into arguments isn't the same thing as enjoying arguing. And I'd personally rather be able to back statements that other people find questionable, than sit there like an idiot going "I don't like DDR cause it's teh stupidz lol."
Perhaps we should start another thread on the topic, but I ask you: Where do Victoria's Secret catalogues fit in? I realize they're mainly trying to sell stuff, but, like the lingerie section of a Sears catalog, they're selling "sexy." So how different are they from a Playboy?
Better, what about the fact that, until the past 100 years or so, most female models for artists were prostitutes or otherwise women of "ill repute"?