gizgal Posts
Tachigami wrote...
Well, I was shocked.
Can't say I was, after reading...but I can see how you'd be disappointed (and shocked on your end!).
Sounds like they were up for a one-night stand and may have thought you somehow inferred that over the course of the evening.
Sprite wrote...
Sorry for being rude, but if you're afraid of vaginae, why are you on a hentai site?Gyna = female
Andro = male
Gynaphobia refers merely to fear of the biological sex, not the act of sex.
Or at least since the OP is using that term, I assume they know it means that.
If it's lack of interest sexually in women, that's something separate; I presumed based on the thread title's use of the word, and the fact that OP stated they were bullied by females, that they had more of a problem with fear of women than lack of attraction to them.
The furthest F! has/goes in terms of animistic characters in manga are kemonomimi or monstergirls.
But most all retain more semblance to humans than animals. Furry isn't a focus.
But most all retain more semblance to humans than animals. Furry isn't a focus.
Sorry to hear that! Bullying is scarring stuff, and when it ruins your interactions with an entire sex, that cannot be fun...
I am sure such a fearing of females will be tough to conquer, but like others are saying, you could try to address it in therapy. It may take time, but if you can separate the experience and individuals from your past who hurt you away from gender/sex perceptions, you might find success. :)
I am sure such a fearing of females will be tough to conquer, but like others are saying, you could try to address it in therapy. It may take time, but if you can separate the experience and individuals from your past who hurt you away from gender/sex perceptions, you might find success. :)
Yeah, and Virginia is trying/almost getting a horrible law forcing women seeking abortions to undergo an INTRA VAGINAL ULTRASOUND. By force. http://www.slate.com/articles/double_x/doublex/2012/02/virginia_ultrasound_law_women_who_want_an_abortion_will_be_forcibly_penetrated_for_no_medical_reason.html
Which constitutes unwanted penetration, aka RAPE. :|
Also, this bullshit... ZERO WOMEN allowed to speak, but men from various religious postions allowed? Wait, I thought uterus control was on trial here, not church-centric moral bullshit. -___-
http://jezebel.com/5885672/congressional-birth-control-hearing-involves-exactly-zero-people-who-have-a-uterus
I swear, if a Republican wins this coming election, I will be leaving the US as soon as I'm able. They're crazily motivated enough (and getting financially backed enough) to turn this great land into a place scarily reminiscent of the dystopian, anti-female novel "The Handmaid's Tale".
Which constitutes unwanted penetration, aka RAPE. :|
Also, this bullshit... ZERO WOMEN allowed to speak, but men from various religious postions allowed? Wait, I thought uterus control was on trial here, not church-centric moral bullshit. -___-
http://jezebel.com/5885672/congressional-birth-control-hearing-involves-exactly-zero-people-who-have-a-uterus
I swear, if a Republican wins this coming election, I will be leaving the US as soon as I'm able. They're crazily motivated enough (and getting financially backed enough) to turn this great land into a place scarily reminiscent of the dystopian, anti-female novel "The Handmaid's Tale".
Takerial wrote...
gizgal wrote...
Fadetoblack wrote...
gizgal wrote...
Wow, pretty gross replies.Yes, her pic was "inappropriate" for a yearbook, but guess what? She IS a model, and wanted to embrace that in her photo's pose and style.
That doesn't give anyone a right to harass her.
Exclude that particular photo? Yes.
But dressing a certain way does not give ANYONE permission to harm her. People can wear what they want and should be free from harm for doing so.
Stupid choice, perhaps. However, having her photo make international news is not something anyone anticipates (honestly, at least to this extent), and if it caused her name to be slandered, she has a right to seek justice.
At first, no one was harassing her about it at all. All they wanted her to do was to just submit a less racy yearbook photo. She blew up beyond what it needed to be. What makes it worse was the fact that her parent's supported her instead of simply telling her to just change clothes and wear something more school appropriate. Also, I'm trying to figure out how the school was 'mishandling the situation.' Her, her parents, and the students who protested something this simply resolved. If anything, it was their fault for blowing this up so that she could become a target.
I think publishing the photo constitutes "mishandling the situation", unless the young woman had a say it it...
She has no right to seek justice.
The only reason she even became slandered is because she and her idiotic mother made a big stink over something that they were in the wrong of.
She wants to be a model? Then make a model portfolio and submit it to an agency. A school yearbook is not such and it follows the same guidelines that would be within a schools policy.
I don't know of any school worth anything that would allow a student to come to school dressed like this
Spoiler:
Or like the original picture she submitted.
And the people who original published those photos were the family themselves.
The people who have handled the situation badly has been the family the entire way. It's like women with large breasts who wear tight fitting shirts and then 'get pissed' off when guys look at them.
Fuck off. She knew the exact type of attention she was going to be getting when she posed for those pictures.
I'm sorry, but to me, YES, the girl was stupid (and her mom is doing what any proud parent might -- defending her offspring, albeit in the wrong realm [law vs. with the school]) but saying something like "she knew the type of attention she was going to be getting" only drives home the point that this has been blown out of proportion.
What you just said is akin to victim blaming; "she knew what she was doing", "those clothes prove she's up to no good", "she was asking for it in that dress", etc.
It's not someone's responsibility to accommodate for ANOTHER person's gaze. Control your own urges, and let people wear what they want within the respective laws of their area (protip: short skirts and tight clothes ARE clothes).
YES, SHE IS DRESSED INAPPROPRIATELY FOR SCHOOL, and guess what, they were in the right to say "no" to that photo in a yearbook! I get that. I do. But guess what?
That's not even the problem anymore, as this thread and many articles on the story have made clear: the problem is the onlookers who assume that this young woman has some sort of ill intent JUST BECAUSE SHE WEARS SOMETHING THAT FLATTERS HER.
Fadetoblack wrote...
gizgal wrote...
Wow, pretty gross replies.Yes, her pic was "inappropriate" for a yearbook, but guess what? She IS a model, and wanted to embrace that in her photo's pose and style.
That doesn't give anyone a right to harass her.
Exclude that particular photo? Yes.
But dressing a certain way does not give ANYONE permission to harm her. People can wear what they want and should be free from harm for doing so.
Stupid choice, perhaps. However, having her photo make international news is not something anyone anticipates (honestly, at least to this extent), and if it caused her name to be slandered, she has a right to seek justice.
At first, no one was harassing her about it at all. All they wanted her to do was to just submit a less racy yearbook photo. She blew up beyond what it needed to be. What makes it worse was the fact that her parent's supported her instead of simply telling her to just change clothes and wear something more school appropriate. Also, I'm trying to figure out how the school was 'mishandling the situation.' Her, her parents, and the students who protested something this simply resolved. If anything, it was their fault for blowing this up so that she could become a target.
I think publishing the photo constitutes "mishandling the situation", unless the young woman had a say it it...
Wow, pretty gross replies.
Yes, her pic was "inappropriate" for a yearbook, but guess what? She IS a model, and wanted to embrace that in her photo's pose and style.
That doesn't give anyone a right to harass her.
Exclude that particular photo? Yes.
But dressing a certain way does not give ANYONE permission to harm her. People can wear what they want and should be free from harm for doing so.
Stupid choice, perhaps. However, having her photo make international news is not something anyone anticipates (honestly, at least to this extent), and if it caused her name to be slandered, she has a right to seek justice.
Yes, her pic was "inappropriate" for a yearbook, but guess what? She IS a model, and wanted to embrace that in her photo's pose and style.
That doesn't give anyone a right to harass her.
Exclude that particular photo? Yes.
But dressing a certain way does not give ANYONE permission to harm her. People can wear what they want and should be free from harm for doing so.
Stupid choice, perhaps. However, having her photo make international news is not something anyone anticipates (honestly, at least to this extent), and if it caused her name to be slandered, she has a right to seek justice.
if you can, why not? my ex and I were pretty much best friends prior, and then broke up due to distance, but we're still close friends. it's not impossible to go back to loving someone Platonicly.
Baka-Chu~ wrote...
I'll put it to you this way, men who complain about their girls not actively advancing the relationship, are just plain lazy. Girls always play hard to get, it's a way to make men fight eachother for her. When she claims her 'champion', she does anything he asks. Yes, women generally like being told what to do, they like being lead, they like being taken care of, it's human nature.Actually, it's not nature. It's nurture.
No trust issues or anything, but I think I'd probably start light if anything.
Besides, metal has gotta be uncomfortable, and rope burn would be a pain~
Besides, metal has gotta be uncomfortable, and rope burn would be a pain~
For things I cannot buy in my country/language/region code that are scannable or downloadable? No. These are the things I tend to use "gray area" legality downloads for.
For things I can obtain legally through common/non-impossible and safe means both on and offline? Maybe a bit. I don't often download these sorts of things anyhow, but if the law respected my right to access tools to do so, I'd be pleased.
However I would want the tools and sites/purveyors of torrents and downloads to be untouched: start taking them down, and you're not just blocking illegal activity, but also the free spread of free ideas (and freely, legally distributed materials).
For things I can obtain legally through common/non-impossible and safe means both on and offline? Maybe a bit. I don't often download these sorts of things anyhow, but if the law respected my right to access tools to do so, I'd be pleased.
However I would want the tools and sites/purveyors of torrents and downloads to be untouched: start taking them down, and you're not just blocking illegal activity, but also the free spread of free ideas (and freely, legally distributed materials).
AboveTail wrote...
It's because athletes perform a special service for the school or college that they are in by using their physical talents to represent them. At the high school level, I agree that it is a little ridiculous that athletes get special privileges, however, at the college level it is perfectly reasonable. They are devoting their time and energy to their sport for the school and should be given special consideration for it. In high school, I was a diver, and because of that, I was able to go to a prestigious university that I would not have otherwise been accepted to.
That's good and all, but the problem lies in letting the "athlete" students slide by in academics and get held to much lower standards (whereas other students might be failed for poor performance).
