So you are watching reporting by someone who created the stupider version of barstoolI can't post a link without violating the rules but Clay Travis
Enlighten me as to which rule would be violated.I can't post a link without violating the rules but Clay Travis is reporting on a protest at the Louvre. You can find the post on his Twitter. I really tried to figure out what they were protesting but their message was....distracting.
The global feminist activist group FEMEN staged a topless protest at Paris’s Musée d’Orsay this weekend to demonstrate against the museum’s barring of a woman from entering the galleries until she covered up her low-cut dress.
it was topless Femen protestorsIf you managed to find whatever you can't post on DP, I'm sure you can find out what the purpose was.
Rule 19. Doesn't seem to make a lot of sense to push the issue.Enlighten me as to which rule would be violated.
The only thing I can see in connection to this is just another example of what a bunch of prudes americans really are if this news violates some rule here. and what an absolute prude this travis must be in his comment on twitter.
If posting a picture of women protesting about the sexist government and culture of france by exposing their breasts ( and they did not even do that much as they covered their breasts with paint ) in a demonstration is against rule 19 then I would definitely like to debate that point with a moderator. That they would think womens breasts are an embarrasment and should be kept hidden is nothing more than the same prudish and immature behaviour that makes some french men a bunch of sexists.
Is this what you are on about?
https://news.artnet.com/art-world/femen-stage-protest-musee-dorsay-1908260
Rule 19. Pornography / Nudity / Graphic Images - Instances of clear and purposeful sexual or lewd nudity or of sexual acts should not be posted.Rule 19. Doesn't seem to make a lot of sense to push the issue.
it was topless Femen protestors
That would be your opinion. Should someone with an opinion that actually makes a difference around here feel differently then it becomes a problem.Rule 19. Pornography / Nudity / Graphic Images - Instances of clear and purposeful sexual or lewd nudity or of sexual acts should not be posted.
See those words in bold. There is nothing sexual or lewd about women protesting unless your a man who cannot get his mind out of the gutter whenever he sees a woman. The very point of being topless is to expose those who think a woman must hide her body.
As I pointed out the women did not even go that far as they used paint to cover their breasts.
And your comment is right on the button to the accusation that americans are a bunch of prudes that you think the issue is exposed breasts.
The issue is that many have had enough of living under the nonsense of abrahamic morality that give men the right to tell women how they should dress. The issue is not that you and the moderators here may be embarrassed by a pair of tits.
I've been on Manhattan sidewalks. Shoes would have been advisable.I find all of this particularly funny because here in New York City, being topless is not only legal, it hardly warrants more than a passing glance. On at least two Summer occasions I walked out of my midtown office at lunchtime, 38th and Broadway, and saw pairs of women strolling up to Times Square wearing nothing above their waists, ... and they weren't protesting anything. It was just a hot day.
It would only make a difference should one of the moderators wish to give us a demonstration of some nasty patriarchal abrahamic based thinking that women need to hide their bodies because men are so immature that they cannot control their own lust.That would be your opinion. Should someone with an opinion that actually makes a difference around here feel differently then it becomes a problem.
It's a protest opposing violence against women. Seems like a worthy cause that the OP has chosen to dismiss.If you managed to find whatever you can't post on DP, I'm sure you can find out what the purpose was.
It's a protest opposing violence against women. Seems like a worthy cause that the OP has chosen to dismiss.
Apropos of which, I'm available to shave french women. Just sayin' ...I thought the frenchwomen were protesting how available women's shavers are.
That isn't scheduled for pubic outrage until Super Bowl LXXV, to be held in San Juan Puerto Rico in 2041.It's always amusing to see the prudishness of some Americans.
I remember nipplegate where a nipple was shown for almost a few whole seconds at the super bowl halftime show by accident and some people acted like the singer had rubbed her lady garden into the camera lense.
That isn't scheduled for pubic outrage until Super Bowl LXXV, to be held in San Juan Puerto Rico in 2041.
The problem with attention-grabbing methods is that sometimes the actual message gets lost in the noise.
Remember, most of us here in the US don't speak French and had no idea what they were saying.
Only if Lady Sonia does the halftime shows. And I mean does.London should hold the Super Bowl every 4th year.
Only if Lady Sonia does the halftime shows. And I mean does.
I appreciate the irony of a protest against sexual violence by sexually harassing people. Probably the same pinheads who throw soup at paintings to protest climate change.It's a protest opposing violence against women. Seems like a worthy cause that the OP has chosen to dismiss.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?