Political Correctness

[mustafur]

There's a difference between being "overweight" (she's a size 24, I believe) and promoting an eating disorder like bulimia or anorexia nervosa. It's also interesting that people like James Corden (who admittedly has lost five stone by cutting this one food out click here for 24 pages of what it is) don't seem to attract the same ire as female plus-size models.

When fat men become models come back to us.

 

[the_boy]

PC, weather you are for or against, will not make suicides or school/concert/church shootings go away. Too many entitled little bitches will always feel inferior because of competition.

 

[TenEightyOne]

No, there really isn't any difference in being unhealthy because you have an overstuffing yourself eating disorder or being miss pukey.
Both are disorders. Both are not beneficial for your health. Both should be treated equally. Fatty McPatty's ad should be banned too.

Being overweight isn't a disorder. Being "miss pukey" is.

When fat men become models come back to us.

You're kidding, right?

 

[mustafur]

Being overweight isn't a disorder. Being "miss pukey" is.



You're kidding, right?

Buzzfeed isn't exactly front page of Cosmo.

 

[TexRex]

How's anyone supposed to score if those danged goalposts keep moving?

 

[mustafur]

How's anyone supposed to score if those danged goalposts keep moving?

I'll admit I was proven wrong(given where this world is today), should of added a cavet of being at least shown in mainstream which it isn't.

 

[LeMansAid]

How's anyone supposed to score if those danged goalposts keep moving?

Yes, she's skinny, and yes, she moves - but I don't think you'd have a chance with her regardless.

 

[TexRex]

I'll admit I was proven wrong(given where this world is today)

I wouldn't say you were proven wrong at all; rather you set a goal for an individual and said goal was met.

Where is the world today anyway? And what bearing does that have on you being right or wrong?

should of added a cavet of being at least shown in mainstream which it isn't.

Just what is mainstream in this regard and why does BuzzFeed not fit the bill?

Yes, she's skinny, and yes, she moves - but I don't think you'd have a chance with her regardless.

Quel dommage!

 

[Dennisch]

Being overweight isn't a disorder.

No, it's perfectly normal to look like a pile of flubber.

 

[mustafur]

Just what is mainstream in this regard and why does BuzzFeed not fit the bill?

It's clear I was referencing the Cosmopolitan magazine cover when making the comparison, a magazine that has Models on it's cover nearly every issue, Buzzfeed on the other hand is is more of a jack of all trades media outlet that focus's on things that are not even close to mainstream thought, or interests, and it's not exactly known to promote the modelling industry.

 

[Johnnypenso]

There's a difference between being "overweight" (she's a size 24, I believe) and promoting an eating disorder like bulimia or anorexia nervosa. It's also interesting that people like James Corden (who admittedly has lost five stone by cutting this one food out click here for 24 pages of what it is) don't seem to attract the same ire as female plus-size models.

There's also a difference between being "morbidly obese" with a BMI of 50, and being at the low end of the accepted BMI range considered generally healthy. Do you not think 5'5" and 300 lbs is not the result of an eating disorder? Where in the ad is bulimia or anorexia being promoted?

 

[TexRex]

It's clear I was referencing the Cosmopolitan magazine cover when making the comparison

Is it? I mean...it might have been had you been engaged in the discussion and referenced that particular publication with regards to it, but you hadn't and you didn't, and it really wasn't as clear to others (myself or the one responding to that particular request) as it may have been to you.

Hell, you appeared to even acknowledge that it may not have been clear when stating that you should have added a caveat.

Buzzfeed on the other hand is is more of a jack of all trades media outlet that focus's on things that are not even close to mainstream thought, or interests

Well that's a rather peculiar assertion, particularly given that a quick Google of "top viral news sites" showed BuzzFeed as being ranked number one in at least a couple instances right off the bat.

and it's not exactly known to promote the modelling industry.

Is that what Cosmopolitan does? Mind you I don't follow it, but I was given to understand it published articles along the lines of "How to Get Over a Breakup While Freshening Your Makeup" and "10 Ways to Enjoy Your Period". Does it really promote modeling beyond its use of models and the inherent implication therein that there is a modeling industry?

 

[mustafur]

Is it? I mean...it might have been had you been engaged in the discussion and referenced that particular publication with regards to it, but you hadn't and you didn't, and it really wasn't as clear to others (myself or the one responding to that particular request) as it may have been to you.

It's pretty obvious it was as I was quoting someone talking about that exact picture of a size 24 model on the front cover of Cosmopolitan.

Hell, you appeared to even acknowledge that it may not have been clear when stating that you should have added a caveat.

That was because saying Model can refer to literally anything even Animal models.

Well that's a rather peculiar assertion, particularly given that a quick Google of "top viral news sites" showed BuzzFeed as being ranked number one in at least a couple instances right off the bat.

Viral as in Social Media, kinda different news and like i said they do multiple things, saying any of that is related to the subject at matter is just pulling at straws.

Is that what Cosmopolitan does? Mind you I don't follow it, but I was given to understand it published articles along the lines of "How to Get Over a Breakup While Freshening Your Makeup" and "10 Ways to Enjoy Your Period". Does it really promote modeling beyond its use of models and the inherent implication therein that there is a modeling industry?

Don't see Buzzfeed doing this:

 

[Whitestar]

"We considered that the model appeared unhealthily underweight in those scenes and concluded that the ads were therefore irresponsible."
If that's the conclusion for the skinny model then I would be interested in hearing their conclusion for the fat model. Seems to me they could just swap "under" with "over" and come to the same conclusion.

 

[Spurgy 777]

You think she doesn't look unhealthily underweight in the scenes mentioned in your link? What was the point of the second picture?

Your standards are hilarious, you’re perfectly happy for an ad to be banned because a women who is a healthy weight has her ribs showing but don’t see any issue with showing someone clearly unhealthily overweight.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

Yeah I'm confused how the ad as well is pushing for unhealthy eating disorders and diseases, I'm also confused how someone is overweight and unhealthy is acceptable to make a claim that this should be banned. Or why they should be defended. Since there is plenty to prove by the science and medicine you I would assume tout and respect @TenEightyOne (as seen from other threads), that shows unhealthy weight on the opposite end -being fat- leads to various risks and diseases.

So I would think the best promotion of one self is middle of the road, I find this near superficial support odd and far more conducive to unhealthy habits than a healthy person doing a job given.

 

[TexRex]

It's pretty obvious it was as I was quoting someone talking about that exact picture of a size 24 model on the front cover of Cosmopolitan.

You were quoting someone highlighting a double standard. Your comment that followed the citation appeared to be an attempt at justifying such a double standard by indicating there were no "fat men" models at whom such ire could be directed.

Prompted by such an apparent indication, the existence of fifteen such examples was presented.

That was because saying Model can refer to literally anything even Animal models.

The type of model is not the caveat that you indicated ought to have been imposed...

should of added a cavet of being at least shown in mainstream which it isn't.

...is it? That said, you indeed indicated the type of model as being "fat men", and the implication therein is that they are specifically overweight male humans rather than the more generic "Animals".

Viral as in Social Media, kinda different news

Someone really ought to bolt those goalposts down.



Yes, social media can be instrumental in something reaching the mainstream, but no caveat regarding how something got there was previously imposed.

and like i said they do multiple things, saying any of that is related to the subject at matter is just pulling at straws.

They indeed do multiple things, that fact has indeed been established, but the subject at hand being "fat men" models and them having highlighted such a subject indicates that they indeed do that as well.

Don't see Buzzfeed doing this:

Queueing?



I'll admit that I don't really pay attention to BuzzFeed, and I've actually looked into it more in the last twelve hours than on all other occasiones combined, but if "this" refers to covering topics regarding fashion...well...it turns out that they actually do. They actually have an entire section--their "As/Is" section--devoted to such topics.

They've also covered amputee matters, which is appropriate because...

...

...wait for it...

...

...you don't have a leg to stand on.



Oh and not that it's of any particular consequence, but it appears Cosmo did a piece on fat men models as well:

https://www.cosmopolitan.com/uk/fashion/g12157785/plus-size-male-model/

 

[mustafur]

I will be the first to admit that I don't have a leg to stand on, This is more of an own Goal.

 

[Danoff]

Didn't see anything in the swimsuit ad to suggest that the model was unhealthy (not that that would be grounds for banning it).

 

[Dennisch]

Didn't see anything in the swimsuit ad to suggest that the model was unhealthy (not that that would be grounds for banning it).

Ribs man. They saw ribs!

And meanwhile in the McDonald's photoboot:

Such a bacon of fitness. Such glaze.

 

[Johnnypenso]

Ribs man. They saw ribs!

And meanwhile in the McDonald's photoboot:

Such a bacon of fitness. Such glaze.

That head tattoo on her arm is almost lifesize.

Standing for your flag and kneeling for your religion is no longer politically correct in the Democratic party and gets you forced out of a job.

Mark Salvas was hired last month to be the executive director of the local Democratic party in Allegheny County, Pennsylvania, and just weeks later is resigning due to old social media posts from him and his wife that have drawn negative attention. Salvas maintains that he’s not sorry for what he put on Facebook, however, and claims he is only resigning because he was asked to leave.

Salvas’ Facebook post from last year included an image of him and his wife, with the message, “I stand for the flag, I kneel at the cross,” a reference to NFL players who took up the practice of kneeling during the National Anthem before games as a form of protest.

A Marine veteran, Salvas is not sorry for what he said. In an interview with local KDKA, he repeated the message and said he has a right to speak his mind and express his patriotism.

“I’m not ashamed of my patriotism, not one bit. I fought for this country. I think I have a right to have a voice and be patriotic.”

Likewise, he doesn’t begrudge athletes who express themselves by kneeling.

“That’s part of what the flag stands for. It gives them the right to do that,” he said.

While he stands by his comment, he agreed to step down from his position after the head of the party asked him to do so.

“I was asked by the chair of the Allegheny County Democratic Party to resign my position due to the controversy that was taking place on social media, and I did,” Salvas said.

 

[Dennisch]

That head tattoo on her arm is almost lifesize.

That's not so difficult when you have so much canvas to work with.

 

[TexRex]

Standing for your flag and kneeling for your religion is no longer politically correct in the Democratic party and gets you forced out of a job.

Mark Salvas was hired last month to be the executive director of the local Democratic party in Allegheny County, Pennsylvania, and just weeks later is resigning due to old social media posts from him and his wife that have drawn negative attention. Salvas maintains that he’s not sorry for what he put on Facebook, however, and claims he is only resigning because he was asked to leave.

Salvas’ Facebook post from last year included an image of him and his wife, with the message, “I stand for the flag, I kneel at the cross,” a reference to NFL players who took up the practice of kneeling during the National Anthem before games as a form of protest.

A Marine veteran, Salvas is not sorry for what he said. In an interview with local KDKA, he repeated the message and said he has a right to speak his mind and express his patriotism.

“I’m not ashamed of my patriotism, not one bit. I fought for this country. I think I have a right to have a voice and be patriotic.”

Likewise, he doesn’t begrudge athletes who express themselves by kneeling.

“That’s part of what the flag stands for. It gives them the right to do that,” he said.

While he stands by his comment, he agreed to step down from his position after the head of the party asked him to do so.

“I was asked by the chair of the Allegheny County Democratic Party to resign my position due to the controversy that was taking place on social media, and I did,” Salvas said.

The contents of the article as you cited them contradict the assertion you made in linking to said article.

He stated he was asked to resign, not due to his actions, but due to controversy taking place over his actions, and there's no indication that he's involved in the controversy beyond having instigated it.

It's not an unreasonable request given the circumstances, as he was hired to do a job, one that ultimately enables representatives of a political party to spread the message of the party's intentions within a specific area, and the controversy taking place due to his presence within the administration impedes the spread of that message.

As it's common practice these days to do a social media sweep as part of the employment vetting process, with the high-profile nature of the position putting an emphasis on such a course of action, it's not entirely unlikely his prospective employers were aware of his stance and hired him anyway because there was no reasonable indication it would prevent him from fulfilling his duties. What followed was out of his and his employer's control.

What he's quoted as having said in no way suggests that he was forced out, rather that he merely the request for resignation, but that didn't stop you from putting your own dirty little spin on it.

Are the origins of the controversy on social media known? I mean...I wouldn't put it past right-wing zealots to dig up dirt on their opponents and create a narrative, one that they themselves may not actually subscribe to, that they then utilize the [often] cluster**** that is social media to let said narrative run rampant. I'm also not the least bit surprised that you would perpetuate it through intentionally inaccurate representation.

Edit:

 

[Dotini]

On Monday, a federal district court judge in California ruled to dismiss Stormy Daniels‘ defamation lawsuit against President Donald Trump, and ordered the adult film star to pay his legal fees.

 

[BobK]

On Monday, a federal district court judge in California ruled to dismiss Stormy Daniels‘ defamation lawsuit against President Donald Trump, and ordered the adult film star to pay his legal fees.

Interesting. Wonder why I didn't see a mention of this on Yahoo News or Huffington Post?

 

[Dotini]

Interesting. Wonder why I didn't see a mention of this on Yahoo News or Huffington Post?

Possibly because all along the story should have been confined to pages of the National Enquirer. But perhaps more likely when porn stars become politically weaponized by activist lawyers and the weapon blows up in their face, the MSM finds it convenient to look away?

 

[TexRex]

Interesting. Wonder why I didn't see a mention of this on Yahoo News or Huffington Post?

Probably because you didn't look...

...

...like...at all.

Tired narrative is tired.

 

[Johnnypenso]

On Monday, a federal district court judge in California ruled to dismiss Stormy Daniels‘ defamation lawsuit against President Donald Trump, and ordered the adult film star to pay his legal fees.

That's a real blow to Stormy Daniels. You had to know Trump wouldn't take this lying down and would probably come out on top. He's really anal about winning this type of civil suit. Avenatti should stick to ambulance chasing. He'd be more effective with people getting rear ended.

 

[Dennisch]

Ha.

 

[TenEightyOne]

That's a real blow to Stormy Daniels. You had to know Trump wouldn't take this lying down and would probably come out on top. He's really anal about winning this type of civil suit. Avenatti should stick to ambulance chasing. He'd be more effective with people getting rear ended.