You'll have an easier time convincing me that I'm mistaken if you don't in one minute claim how much you hate debating semantics and then turn around the next minute and claim that your interpretation of how words work is "Linguistics 101".
My point was that that's why I hate debating semantics. It's the dynamic nature of language that makes semantics debate a waste of time.
Likewise, judging a feminist-leaning group of sites as representing the national zeitgeist is equally misguided.
Feminist-leaning group of sites? Who what where now? I'm basing my impressions on what I read linked via When Fangirls Attack. It's a *neutral* link-blog that collects links to feminists, anti-feminists, and everybody in between. Again, as I keep admitting, I can only judge popular opinion based on who actually bothers to speak out. And so far.... Yeah, I think this is porn, and so do most other people. Popular opinion IS pretty damning evidence in this context.
FANGIRLS: EEEWWW that's PORN!
Nitpick, but I hate it when people bring this up. Did I just imagine those thirty-some plus male bloggers who also labeled the cover as porn? Did I just imagine those letters from male comic book retailers and artists who also decried the cover as porn? Saying that "only fangirls" see a problem with the cover is dismissive and stupid. Stupid because it ignores the fact that even men (oh my gosh!) can be grossed out by a gross cover, and dismissive because it implies that if only girls are upset then it must not be something worth worrying about.
As for the last part of your comment, I'm tempted to get into it, but then I'd be breaking out the psychology textbooks and miring myself in more tl:dr. But let me say that the idea that just because a child has been exposed to tentacle rape once makes all subsequent exposures moot is... Really, really off the wall. Seriously, that's not how it works.
no subject
My point was that that's why I hate debating semantics. It's the dynamic nature of language that makes semantics debate a waste of time.
Likewise, judging a feminist-leaning group of sites as representing the national zeitgeist is equally misguided.
Feminist-leaning group of sites? Who what where now? I'm basing my impressions on what I read linked via When Fangirls Attack. It's a *neutral* link-blog that collects links to feminists, anti-feminists, and everybody in between. Again, as I keep admitting, I can only judge popular opinion based on who actually bothers to speak out. And so far.... Yeah, I think this is porn, and so do most other people. Popular opinion IS pretty damning evidence in this context.
FANGIRLS: EEEWWW that's PORN!
Nitpick, but I hate it when people bring this up. Did I just imagine those thirty-some plus male bloggers who also labeled the cover as porn? Did I just imagine those letters from male comic book retailers and artists who also decried the cover as porn? Saying that "only fangirls" see a problem with the cover is dismissive and stupid. Stupid because it ignores the fact that even men (oh my gosh!) can be grossed out by a gross cover, and dismissive because it implies that if only girls are upset then it must not be something worth worrying about.
As for the last part of your comment, I'm tempted to get into it, but then I'd be breaking out the psychology textbooks and miring myself in more tl:dr. But let me say that the idea that just because a child has been exposed to tentacle rape once makes all subsequent exposures moot is... Really, really off the wall. Seriously, that's not how it works.