babble home
rabble.ca - news for the rest of us
today's active topics


Post New Topic  Post A Reply
FAQ | Forum Home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» babble   » walking the talk   » labour and consumption   » Lyreco's vision of the female worker

Email this thread to someone!    
Author Topic: Lyreco's vision of the female worker
Moire
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4639

posted 02 March 2005 12:47 PM      Profile for Moire     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 

I'm writing a letter. I'll post the address as soon as I find it.


From: Halifax | Registered: Nov 2003  |  IP: Logged
audra trower williams
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2

posted 02 March 2005 12:55 PM      Profile for audra trower williams   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Okay, we totally have to take them on.

But, um, this isn't a thread about Judy's book, so I'll move this topic into the feminism forum.


From: And I'm a look you in the eye for every bar of the chorus | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Moire
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4639

posted 02 March 2005 01:04 PM      Profile for Moire     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Oops. My bad, thank you.
From: Halifax | Registered: Nov 2003  |  IP: Logged
James
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5341

posted 02 March 2005 01:14 PM      Profile for James        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
The email link is below. But first, a question for audra, and just that; a question, not a criticism. Why is this topic presumptively one of "feminism"? When I noticed the thread, I realized that moire had probably mistakenly mis-catalogued it, but my first thought was "labour and consumerism" or "activism" as in a call to. Where do the lines fall? A curious but probably dense mind wants to know.

Anyway, here is an e-address for Lyreco customer relations : [email protected]

[ 02 March 2005: Message edited by: James ]


From: Windsor; ON | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
audra trower williams
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2

posted 02 March 2005 01:15 PM      Profile for audra trower williams   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Good point. I'll move it, AGAIN, to labour and consumption.

[ 02 March 2005: Message edited by: audra trower williams ]


From: And I'm a look you in the eye for every bar of the chorus | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
robbie_dee
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 195

posted 02 March 2005 01:36 PM      Profile for robbie_dee     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Oh my.

I agree about this as a good fit for Labour & Consumption. But can someone tell me a little more about who Lyreco is?


From: Iron City | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
audra trower williams
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2

posted 02 March 2005 01:47 PM      Profile for audra trower williams   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
An office supply company, I think.
From: And I'm a look you in the eye for every bar of the chorus | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
audra trower williams
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2

posted 02 March 2005 01:58 PM      Profile for audra trower williams   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Barf
From: And I'm a look you in the eye for every bar of the chorus | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Blue Collar
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8349

posted 02 March 2005 03:03 PM      Profile for Blue Collar     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I have to wonder after glancing through the entire online catalouge if this is just more than a campy/tacky ad campaign as both males and females are shown in a variety of settings?
From: Ontario | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
Moire
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4639

posted 02 March 2005 03:22 PM      Profile for Moire     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Both males and females are shown in ridiculous poses, but the females are the ones who are posing in the more derogatory positions. None of the men are half-naked, and I think we can all agree that the woman painting her nails on the desk is an offensive "tounge in cheek" suggestion to what society perceives secretaries and assistants do during the day.
From: Halifax | Registered: Nov 2003  |  IP: Logged
audra trower williams
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2

posted 02 March 2005 03:58 PM      Profile for audra trower williams   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
WOMEN IN BIKINIS: THE NEW OFFICE PROFESSIONALS?
Lyreco catalogue features exploitative and offensive depictions of one half of the work force

If you're looking to find a dated, derogatory view of women in the workplace, look no further than the Lyreco Catalogue. The office supply
company features scantily clad women draped over office furniture in an attempt to push sales. In one photo a woman is pictured sitting seductively on a desk, painting her nails with the white-out she presumably purchased through Lyreco. In another, a woman in a bikini lays on top of a desk "tanning" under some lamps.

Local advocates Allison MacLellan and Audra Williams have begun a letter writing campaign against Lyreco, in reaction to these ads. Williams' company, Lefty Lucy Communications, is calling for the company to pull the catalogue, issue an apology, and make a sizable donation to MediaWatch -- an organization that advocates for positive depictions of women in the media.

"Until they do these things," states Williams "I'd hope that their customers would take their business elsewhere."

MacLellan concurs. "I think all women would hope that their respective employers would look to an office supply company that promoted equal rights, and an appropriate image of women in the workforce"

Terri Fraser, a promotions coordinator for the HRM finds the ads extremely offensive.

"It really shocked me that they were depicting professional women in this manner" says Fraser, "I would expect to maybe see these images in a fashion spread, but in a office supply catalogue? It was insulting."

Fraser immediately wrote a letter to the company's communications department expressing her displeasure. After showing the pictures to colleague MacLellan, the two decided further action was needed, and requested the assistance of Lefty Lucy Communications, which had earlier worked with MacLellan on a successful campaign to remove Tourism Nova Scotia ads from reality TV show The Swan.

Lefty Lucy is calling on women and business owners across Canada to write letters of complaint to the office supply company, which has several high-profile contracts. The letter campaign also consists of carbon copying local businesses and government offices that may be interested to note Lyreco's perception of women.

For further information:

Audra Williams, Owner
Lefty Lucy Communications
(902)423-8938
[email protected]
www.leftylucy.ca

[ 02 March 2005: Message edited by: audra trower williams ]


From: And I'm a look you in the eye for every bar of the chorus | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Blue Collar
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8349

posted 02 March 2005 05:35 PM      Profile for Blue Collar     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Is it okay to ask the diffence between the catalouge and the pictures of scantly clad women found at leftylucy.com?
From: Ontario | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
audra trower williams
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2

posted 02 March 2005 05:44 PM      Profile for audra trower williams   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Uh. Feel free. But LeftyLucy.com is a bar band. Leftylucy.ca is my company, and I don't think there are any cheesecake shots there.
From: And I'm a look you in the eye for every bar of the chorus | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 02 March 2005 05:48 PM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Great press release, Audra. Just one question: what's "the HRM"?
From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Agent 204
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4668

posted 02 March 2005 05:57 PM      Profile for Agent 204   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Michelle:
Great press release, Audra. Just one question: what's "the HRM"?

The megacity that dare not speak its name.


From: home of the Guess Who | Registered: Nov 2003  |  IP: Logged
Sharon
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4090

posted 02 March 2005 06:16 PM      Profile for Sharon     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
The megacity that dare not speak its name.

That's very funny.

Halifax Regional Municipality.


From: Halifax, Nova Scotia | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged
Blue Collar
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8349

posted 02 March 2005 06:33 PM      Profile for Blue Collar     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Sorry my bad.
From: Ontario | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
angrymonkey
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5769

posted 02 March 2005 09:21 PM      Profile for angrymonkey     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Should throw in this image from the on-line catalog as well.

It's listed under document presentation. ?

I would like to have heard the thought processes(or lack of)that went into the design.
Looking at other images I imagine that they would say (like BC) that the men are shown looking silly and it's all in fun.
But I notice that the men, while looking goofy, are shown pretending to be:
a race car driver, magician, guru, sail border, karate black belt and office manager.
While the women are relegated to gardening, singing, but mostly just posing sexily.
Pisses me off.


From: the cold | Registered: May 2004  |  IP: Logged
Anchoress
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4650

posted 03 March 2005 03:07 AM      Profile for Anchoress     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Michelle:
Great press release, Audra. Just one question: what's "the HRM"?

Her Royal Madness.

But seriously, good work Audra.

I mean, who thinks of these things? Don't the advertisers know who buys most office supplies? Or are they trying to corner the tiny market of people who need stationery in order to write a letter that reads, "Dear Penthouse Editors..."


From: Vancouver babblers' meetup July 9 @ Cafe Deux Soleil! | Registered: Nov 2003  |  IP: Logged
Doug
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 44

posted 03 March 2005 10:33 AM      Profile for Doug   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Anchoress:

Or are they trying to corner the tiny market of people who need stationery in order to write a letter that reads, "Dear Penthouse Editors..."

"I never thought that this would happen to me, but while I was shopping for office furniture at Lyreco...."

I almost feel sorry for them - trying to make office furniture sexy has to be an impossible task.


From: Toronto, Canada | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
audra trower williams
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2

posted 10 March 2005 10:58 AM      Profile for audra trower williams   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Oooh, we got covered in Frank Magazine. Check it!
From: And I'm a look you in the eye for every bar of the chorus | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
HeywoodFloyd
token right-wing mascot
Babbler # 4226

posted 10 March 2005 11:09 AM      Profile for HeywoodFloyd     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
How did you get the knot out of your pantyhose?
From: Edmonton: This place sucks | Registered: Jun 2003  |  IP: Logged
NautiGirl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7707

posted 11 March 2005 07:01 PM      Profile for NautiGirl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Uh. Feel free. But LeftyLucy.com is a bar band. Leftylucy.ca is my company, and I don't think there are any cheesecake shots there.

Actually, I have been to your site, and was quite disappointed with some of the images in your portfolio. Not because I find them offensive myself--it is already established I am not easily offended--but because of the double standard you seem to have when it comes to using provocative images of women. Apparently from what I observed of the material LeftyLucy produced for "Dyke Night" (which contained an image of three nude women in a hot tube), or the Halifax Women's Dance (which featured suggestive images of women, particularly focusing on their cleavage,not to mention portraying cigarettes in an almost sensual and appealing manner as opposed to the very real health threat they present to women, who continue to smoke at alarming rates!) you have a very serious double standard concerning when it is approriate to use images of women and their bodies to sell or promote an event. When LeftyLucy does it, it's okay, for everyone else, it's wrong. More than a little hypocritical, don't ya think??????

[ 11 March 2005: Message edited by: NautiGirl ]


From: Halifax | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged
audra trower williams
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2

posted 11 March 2005 07:41 PM      Profile for audra trower williams   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Hey, neat! Do you write for Frank? That's exactly what they said.

I think if folks feel that picutures of women in a BATH advertising a BATH NIGHT are the same as pictures of women in a BIKINI advertising a STAPLER, then I don't know what to tell them

It's weird that, like, you only pop up when people think an ad is sexist and you don't.

quote:
Having fun antagonizing some hyper-sensitive femi-nazis on an online forum. Some people need to lighten waaaaaay up. I tell you, trying to reason and logic with some people is pointless.

Nice website!

[ 11 March 2005: Message edited by: audra trower williams ]


From: And I'm a look you in the eye for every bar of the chorus | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
NautiGirl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7707

posted 11 March 2005 08:15 PM      Profile for NautiGirl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Oh my. How pathetic that you have to resort to cyberstalking. And yet again, you don't actually bother to address any of my points, just divert the issue to me personally. Classic Audra from what I can see.

You know, the difference between you and me is that you are the so-called "communications professional", yet your responses to differing opinions are far from thought out, well argued or logical. Instead, you resort to quoting personal websites, making personal attacks, or the likes. I would expect more from someone who makes their living from public relations--certainly a more "removed" and thought out response. I can tell ya, if it were my company's image on the line, I would think twice before calling the likes of LeftyLucy. But then again, judging from the content of your comapny website, it is more about promoting yourself than your company anyhow.

I have a keen interest in the media, and marketing and advertising in particular, which is why this thread caught my attention. And I am much more offended by images of 14 year old girls wearing enough make-up to make them look like streetwalkers (which are prevalent, and far more damaging to an entire generation of future women but I don't see you objecting or protesting to every one of those around) then to ridiculous pictures from an office supply catalogue. I mean, I had to go grab the Lyreco catalgue from work just to get the whole picture for myself, and I must say I have never seen a LESS seductive bikini in my life!!!!! There is a lot more cleavage on display on your own website than on the Lyreco website. But again, it's okay if you are selling to lesbians, but not to the general public. DOUBLE STANDARD!

(And what message does your Halifax Women's Dance poster send to young women when they see attractive women smoking? How can you encourage them to enslave themselves to nicotine by glamourizing it's use? Disgusting.)


From: Halifax | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 11 March 2005 08:32 PM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I don't know why you're surprised at the reaction you got, Nautigirl. You came here for the express purpose of being rude and confrontational. You didn't come here to have a healthy debate, or in any good faith whatsoever. So you come here, post in a rude and insulting tone (not to mention lifting your post from a Frank Magazine article - did you have to pay royalties for that?), brag on your web-site about how you're going to go and stir up the "feminazis" (sorry, WHO is doing the cyberstalking again?), and then you wonder why you're not received well.

And they say feminists are the ones with victim complexes.

Why not just participate normally on babble, disagree respectfully, and enjoy your time here instead of being so rude to a community of people you don't know?

[ 11 March 2005: Message edited by: Michelle ]


From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Radices
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8494

posted 12 March 2005 02:00 PM      Profile for Radices   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
It can always be argued that in order for your point of view to have any credibility you must live by what you speak. I think it's valid to look at ones other activities to judge their sincerity. If Ms. Trowers wants to take on an office supply company for a catalog then one has to wonder about her commitment to the real issues. Firstly what is the readership, who does it impact most, and what is the impact. Measure that against all of the other problems in the world and well I think you get it.

[ 12 March 2005: Message edited by: Radices ]


From: Halifax, NS. | Registered: Mar 2005  |  IP: Logged
NautiGirl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7707

posted 12 March 2005 03:05 PM      Profile for NautiGirl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Michelle:
[QB]I don't know why you're surprised at the reaction you got, Nautigirl. You came here for the express purpose of being rude and confrontational.[QB]

No my Dearie, I came here to express a dissenting opinion. See the problem with your type is that you label people who express any opinion different from your own as being "rude and confrontational".

[QB] You didn't come here to have a healthy debate, or in any good faith whatsoever. So you come here, post in a rude and insulting tone (not to mention lifting your post from a Frank Magazine article - did you have to pay royalties for that?), [QB]

First, in the typical fashion of people of your ilk, who comment on things they hear about second hand as opposed to having first hand knowledge of (Audra's previous judgements on Mr. Keevill in the Alehouse thread, my first participation on this forum, are an example). I did not plagarize Frank in my post. Have you read the latest edition of FRANK? Could you please do me a favour and quote the phrases that you seem to think I have "lifted" from their pages??? To share the same viewpoint, as I apparently do, does not equate to plagarizing.

Where have I been rude or insulting? Did I personally insult Ms. Trower the same way she has insulted me in email, or insulted people who do not share her opinion? Nope. I have pointed out that she has a double standard in when it is okay to use suggestive images of women, and for what purpose, but that is not an insult by any stretch. If I were to say that "men must find her repulsive", which is quite similar to the phrase she used to describe a male she has never met, you would have a point. Again, a double standard exsists. It is okay for Audra to behave in such a manner, but not for anyone else, and even if they have done no such thing (I have not once made a personal attack on anyone at this site: pointed out errors in their logic, but not made a personal attack), it is acceptable, and even encouraged by some of the participants here to do so.


[QB]brag on your web-site about how you're going to go and stir up the "feminazis" (sorry, WHO is doing the cyberstalking again?), and then you wonder why you're not received well.[QB]

First of all, my website is a PERSONAL website, which I have in place for the purpose of family and friends only. It is not meta-tagged. You cannot locate it via Google, and it is not registered with any other search engines either. I take great offence with having my privacy violated to the extent that the link to a site which I have created at this point for the purpose of communicating with family and friends ONLY is posted on a publically accessible site. It is no different then me posting your home address or phone number, and I assume if you wanted that information shared, you would post it yourself. Likewise, if I wanted the general public to have access to my site, I would have included a link to it under my profile, as Ms. Trower did. Of course, it appears the issue of protecting one’s personal privacy seems to be one which is molded and formed to suit Ms.Trower and her followers, with little regard to those who fall outside that circle. I am sure the thought that it could jeoprodize my personal safety by having links to my photograph, and personal information such as where I work, where I sail from, where I attend classes never entered her mind. Again, if I wanted that information posted and viewable by the general public, I would have done it myself. It is Audra who shows a total lack of respect for others, and frankly, it disgusts me.

[ 12 March 2005: Message edited by: NautiGirl ]

[ 12 March 2005: Message edited by: NautiGirl ]

[ 12 March 2005: Message edited by: NautiGirl ]


From: Halifax | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged
NautiGirl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7707

posted 12 March 2005 03:17 PM      Profile for NautiGirl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Might I add, that making a big deal about this, has yet again, increased the publicity for this company that they wouldn't have recieved otherwise.

I have had that catalogue sitting over my desk for 2 months, and never even gave it a second glance or thought after recieving it. Of course, since all this fuss, I have flipped through it several times, and found a great little desk organizer that I can't live without and will order first thing on Monday. I wonder how many other people will have reacted the same...

Audra, you are a "real" marketer's best friend.


From: Halifax | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 12 March 2005 03:20 PM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Messy desk, eh?

Who is Ms Towers?


From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
NautiGirl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7707

posted 12 March 2005 03:25 PM      Profile for NautiGirl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by skdadl:
Messy desk, eh?

Who is Ms Towers?


oops. My bad. will correct.


From: Halifax | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged
Radices
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8494

posted 12 March 2005 04:52 PM      Profile for Radices   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 

From: Halifax, NS. | Registered: Mar 2005  |  IP: Logged
audra trower williams
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2

posted 12 March 2005 05:03 PM      Profile for audra trower williams   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I found your website by putting "Nautigirl" in google. Try it sometime! I also found your bragging about what a skilled fellater you are! What if kids saw THAT?! The horrors!

Also, judging by your "Walmart Managers Gone Wild" photopage, I really don't think "your company" would ever hire me anyway.

Bath nights and women's dances are obviously marketed differently from office supplies. It's nice that you're concerned about the affect that the media has on young women, though. What're you doing about that?

[ 12 March 2005: Message edited by: audra trower williams ]


From: And I'm a look you in the eye for every bar of the chorus | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
NautiGirl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7707

posted 12 March 2005 05:13 PM      Profile for NautiGirl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
LOL

Yep, would seem to me that those ads certianly use a more seductive and objectifying veiw of women to sell their product then the tongue-in-cheek photo's used in the Lyreco catalogue.

But apparently, if you're Audra, and you are using women's sexuality to market to lesbians (hey, I am sure lesbians order office supplies too!LOL) it is acceptable.


From: Halifax | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 12 March 2005 05:21 PM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
What part of "office supplies are different than a bath night" are you having problems understanding? It is appropriate to show women in a bathtub or in a state of partial undress to advertise a WOMEN'S BATH NIGHT, which is by definition supposed to be a sensual and perhaps sexual experience. Whereas office environments (you know, where you might need office supplies) are not places that women go in order to have sensual or sexual experiences.

Also, how absolutely naive must a person be to post under the same alias on a bunch of different sites, link to her supposedly "private" web site (lesson #1 - no such thing as "private" on the internet especially if you link to your web site from other public sites), and then get all upset because someone she called a "feminazi" found her easily on google?

I would suggest that if you don't want people to find things you've posted about being an expert at giving blow jobs (not that there's anything wrong with that, btw - admirable talent), as well as your personal web site, that perhaps you shouldn't link to your site from campus kiss (which IS googlable). Or, maybe if you've decided to have sport on a discussion board with "feminazis", you should perhaps not use the SAME ALIAS there as you do on other boards where you're bragging about your fellating prowess, or on sites where you've linked to your personal web site.

Just a thought.

[ 12 March 2005: Message edited by: Michelle ]


From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
NautiGirl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7707

posted 12 March 2005 05:29 PM      Profile for NautiGirl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Originally posted by audra trower williams:
I found your website by putting "Nautigirl" in google. Try it sometime! I also found your bragging about what a skilled fellater you are! What if kids saw THAT?! The horrors!

Ah my dear, was my "friend" in Toronto who felt strongly about that "skill". I personally find it a little pathetic that a man would put so much emphasis on something so silly. Almost as patheic as having to rely on Google in an effort to discredit people vs being able to use a good, well thought out arguement based on the issue at hand.


From: Halifax | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged
audra trower williams
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2

posted 12 March 2005 05:34 PM      Profile for audra trower williams   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
You've been given an argument several times. You just keep pretending you haven't.
From: And I'm a look you in the eye for every bar of the chorus | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 12 March 2005 05:37 PM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Well, given that her original purpose in coming here was to stir up the "feminazis", it's not surprising that she ignores the substantial responses she gets.
From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
NautiGirl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7707

posted 12 March 2005 05:45 PM      Profile for NautiGirl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by audra trower williams:
You've been given an argument several times. You just keep pretending you haven't.

I don't want an argument: I want a logical, NON-PERSONAL debate about the issue. There is a difference. You seek only to discredit on e personal level, not to actually debate the issue.

{{{shaking my head}}}


From: Halifax | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 12 March 2005 05:48 PM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
You didn't want a non-personal debate. You came here to "antagoniz[e] some hyper-sensitive femi-nazis on an online forum". Just because you didn't want us to SEE that this was your motive in coming here doesn't mean that WASN'T your motive.
From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Radices
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8494

posted 12 March 2005 05:49 PM      Profile for Radices   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
So if I'm following this correctly it's ok to objectify women (or men for that matter) depending on the context?
From: Halifax, NS. | Registered: Mar 2005  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 12 March 2005 05:51 PM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
It's okay (as far as I'm concerned) to advertise for a WOMEN'S BATH NIGHT by showing women in a bath tub. Sorry you're having such a hard time figuring out why sexist stereotypes of female office workers isn't the same as advertising a women's bath night.
From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
audra trower williams
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2

posted 12 March 2005 05:51 PM      Profile for audra trower williams   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I actually don't think every single depiction of a woman as sexy is "objectification". It depends, as all things do, on context.
From: And I'm a look you in the eye for every bar of the chorus | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
NautiGirl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7707

posted 12 March 2005 05:52 PM      Profile for NautiGirl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Michelle:
Well, given that her original purpose in coming here was to stir up the "feminazis", it's not surprising that she ignores the substantial responses she gets.

No, my original purpose in coming her, way back when, was to comment on how I think that women do a dis-service to ourselves by flapping our gums about relatively minor things like billboards and silly pictures on catalogues while larger issues go ignored. It was only after I expressed a dissenting opinion and discovered that rather than trying to thoughtfully explain their point of view, or thoughtfully try to explain why they disagreed with mine, they would rather Google me and post comments, links, etc from other websites on here vs enter into reasonable debate or discussion.

If someone would like to take the time to enter into a reasonable debate, instead asking dragging up everything I have ever posted to the internet, I am more than willing to TAKE YOU SERIOUSLY and participate.


From: Halifax | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged
audra trower williams
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2

posted 12 March 2005 05:54 PM      Profile for audra trower williams   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Please tell me, NautiGirl, what "larger issues" you think I am ignoring?
From: And I'm a look you in the eye for every bar of the chorus | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
NautiGirl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7707

posted 12 March 2005 05:55 PM      Profile for NautiGirl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by audra trower williams:
I actually don't think every single depiction of a woman as sexy is "objectification". It depends, as all things do, on context.

So can you please, and I mean this seriously, for once explain to be how it is objectification yo use an image of a woman in an office supply catalogue but it is not objectification to use much more sugestive images of women in the material your comapnay produced?


From: Halifax | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged
NautiGirl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7707

posted 12 March 2005 05:56 PM      Profile for NautiGirl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by audra trower williams:
Please tell me, NautiGirl, what "larger issues" you think I am ignoring?

Oh my God, where to even start? I tried to have this discussion with you before....


From: Halifax | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged
NautiGirl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7707

posted 12 March 2005 06:01 PM      Profile for NautiGirl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Double Post
[ 12 March 2005: Message edited by: NautiGirl ]

[ 12 March 2005: Message edited by: NautiGirl ]


From: Halifax | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged
Contrarian
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6477

posted 12 March 2005 06:25 PM      Profile for Contrarian     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Can't even think of one, I guess.
From: pretty far west | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged
audra trower williams
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2

posted 12 March 2005 06:30 PM      Profile for audra trower williams   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I recall a lot of your saying you think some of the issues I've worked on aren't important. What I DON'T think you've touched on is:

1. What issues you think are more important.
2. In what ways you think I am neglecting these issues.
3. What you are doing to improve the world in the ways you think it is lacking.


From: And I'm a look you in the eye for every bar of the chorus | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
meades
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 625

posted 12 March 2005 06:42 PM      Profile for meades     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
ahem.
This would be the point you ignore, NautiGirl:
quote:
I think if folks feel that picutures of women in a BATH advertising a BATH NIGHT are the same as pictures of women in a BIKINI advertising a STAPLER, then I don't know what to tell them

From: Sault Ste. Marie | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Radices
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8494

posted 12 March 2005 07:03 PM      Profile for Radices   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Michelle:
It's okay (as far as I'm concerned) to advertise for a WOMEN'S BATH NIGHT by showing women in a bath tub. Sorry you're having such a hard time figuring out why sexist stereotypes of female office workers isn't the same as advertising a women's bath night.

I was fine up until the part about you being sorry for me. It would be easy to attack you back instead of attacking the issue.

My take is that if its ok depending on the context then since everyone has their own frame of reference the context is different for each individual. Women use office supplies as well as bath tubs...right? Who buys them? If the catalog is offensive to the majority of purchasers then I guess it will be another failed attempt at marketing...and they won't do that again. Why aren't you upset with the women that modeled for the pictures? What about the agency that produced the graphics? What real difference to the plight of objectified women can be gained by going after an office supply company for their catalog. We live in a world where sex sells and not only by depicting women but also men. The real issue for me is one of respect for the individual...man or woman. I don't see a lot of that in these threads.


From: Halifax, NS. | Registered: Mar 2005  |  IP: Logged
NautiGirl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7707

posted 12 March 2005 07:14 PM      Profile for NautiGirl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Audra, I don't make a living out of creating this big persona of improving the lot of women in this country. You do. Yet you choose the silliest things to get your panties in a twist about.

Bigger issues then billboards and dumb photos in a catalogue?

Mmm....wage equity/gender discrimination in the work place, violence against women, funding for health issues specific to women, support of single parents (not welfare, but education programs, childcare, etc), conditions for women abroad....etc.

Hey, the volunteer girl's hockey/ringette/soccer coach (male or female), who dedicates hours a week to teach girls teamwork, to believe in themselves, encourage and respect each other, sportsmanship etc does more to improve the future for women in this country, and has a direct and positive impact on their lives then all the silly press releases you can prodcue.


From: Halifax | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged
Radices
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8494

posted 12 March 2005 07:19 PM      Profile for Radices   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by audra trower williams:
I recall a lot of your saying you think some of the issues I've worked on aren't important. What I DON'T think you've touched on is:

1. What issues you think are more important.
2. In what ways you think I am neglecting these issues.
3. What you are doing to improve the world in the ways you think it is lacking.


1. The welfare single mom trying to get through university so she can break the cycle.

2. Spending time on what seems like frivilous issues like advertising. Well more to the point when its sooo pervasive in society choosing an office supply catalog.

3. I treat women with respect and dignity on an individual basis and don't tolerate others that don't. Little urikas I'll admit.


From: Halifax, NS. | Registered: Mar 2005  |  IP: Logged
NautiGirl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7707

posted 12 March 2005 07:24 PM      Profile for NautiGirl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
double post

[ 12 March 2005: Message edited by: NautiGirl ]


From: Halifax | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged
NautiGirl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7707

posted 12 March 2005 07:25 PM      Profile for NautiGirl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
double post again...i am getting good at that.lol

[ 12 March 2005: Message edited by: NautiGirl ]


From: Halifax | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged
NautiGirl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7707

posted 12 March 2005 07:26 PM      Profile for NautiGirl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Radices,

from what I can observe, most women's groups cease to take a genuine interest in a pregnant woman when that woman choses not to exercise her right to terminate her pregnancy. I see lots of "feminist" groups being vocal and loud about the right to choose, but doing very little to support and assist those who make a choice that is not abortion.


From: Halifax | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged
audra trower williams
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2

posted 12 March 2005 07:40 PM      Profile for audra trower williams   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
NautiGirl, I assure you I do lots of work every day -- from helping out on election campaigns for progressive candidates, to helping get underreported social-justice issues in the media, to mentoring young women in rough situations, to doing free communications work for anti-poverty groups -- none of which is suffering by my spending some time writing a press release or two to address what I see as sexist advertising.

I think if anyone is spending far more time/energy shooting off her mouth than she is trying to improve things, it's you.


From: And I'm a look you in the eye for every bar of the chorus | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Tommy_Paine
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 214

posted 12 March 2005 07:45 PM      Profile for Tommy_Paine     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by NautiGirl:
Radices,

from what I can observe, most women's groups cease to take a genuine interest in a pregnant woman when that woman choses not to exercise her right to terminate her pregnancy. I see lots of "feminist" groups being vocal and loud about the right to choose, but doing very little to support and assist those who make a choice that is not abortion.


Whoa.

Let me get my hip waders and my shovel. My roses thank you.


From: The Alley, Behind Montgomery's Tavern | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Anchoress
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4650

posted 12 March 2005 07:48 PM      Profile for Anchoress     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
May I suggest that it might be better to refrain from responding to posters who are engaging in obvious baiting behaviour?

[ 12 March 2005: Message edited by: Anchoress ]


From: Vancouver babblers' meetup July 9 @ Cafe Deux Soleil! | Registered: Nov 2003  |  IP: Logged
N.Beltov
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4140

posted 12 March 2005 07:50 PM      Profile for N.Beltov   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
NautiGirl:...from what I can observe, most women's groups cease to take a genuine interest in a pregnant woman when that woman choses not to exercise her right to terminate her pregnancy. I see lots of "feminist" groups being vocal and loud about the right to choose, but doing very little to support and assist those who make a choice that is not abortion.

And this has WHAT to do with the Lyreco issue? (Hint: Nothing.) So why did you post it? You were confused? You wanted to start a new thread and couldn't figure out which button to press?
Nah. You posted it because it is consistent with a pathological anti-feminist series of postings that you've already made. And in such a context, it makes perfect sense. But why would any babbler want to make any more replies to such troll-like postings? One is enough for me. In fact, one is too many.

"Buu Bye."


From: Vancouver Island | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged
NautiGirl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7707

posted 12 March 2005 08:15 PM      Profile for NautiGirl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
As I have said to you before, the more time you spend associating your name with frivilous issues, the more you chip away at your credibility.

It is unfortunate I guess, given the other activities and initiative you mention that you are active or involved in, that when I hear your name, or the mention of your company, I immediately associate it with petty protests though.

And again, you come to this forum, freely and openly connecting it to your "real life" persona: they are one and the same. I come here chosing to keep it quite seperate from my other internet activities and involvement (whish is why I had not posted links to my personal webpage or my email address), and 100% seperate from my RL world, yet you show such blatant disrespect as to see it as your perrogative to post a link to my personal website and comments from other pages here. Yes they are out there. If someone choses to search for them, I guess they are free to. But that does not make it fair or right for you to post that here. Apparently your respect for women and/or privacy is something you are selective about, and do not apply to women in general.


From: Halifax | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged
NautiGirl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7707

posted 12 March 2005 08:21 PM      Profile for NautiGirl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by N.Beltov:

And this has WHAT to do with the Lyreco issue? (Hint: Nothing.)
....

"Buu Bye."


It has about as much to do with the Lyreco issue as posting a link to my personal web page, my comments from another web forum, or assuming that I have an internet dating profile on a site called campuskiss or something along those lines. Why have you not chosen to ask that same question to those who chose to post PERSONAL information about me, or turn this into a thread that is about me, istead of the issue?

[ 12 March 2005: Message edited by: NautiGirl ]


From: Halifax | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged
Radices
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8494

posted 12 March 2005 09:14 PM      Profile for Radices   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Seems like a good question to me. If we're all defending the honor of women in the catalog why is ok to degrade one here? If you can't walk the walk then don't talk.
From: Halifax, NS. | Registered: Mar 2005  |  IP: Logged
audra trower williams
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2

posted 12 March 2005 09:34 PM      Profile for audra trower williams   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I'm sorry NautiGirl feels she portrays herself in a degrading way. I've only drawn attention to things she's posted herself. I'm also sorry she feels the need to refer to me as a "femenazi". That's pretty disrespectful.
From: And I'm a look you in the eye for every bar of the chorus | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
HeywoodFloyd
token right-wing mascot
Babbler # 4226

posted 12 March 2005 09:34 PM      Profile for HeywoodFloyd     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by meades:
ahem.
This would be the point you ignore, NautiGirl:
[QUOTE] I think if folks feel that picutures of women in a BATH advertising a BATH NIGHT are the same as pictures of women in a BIKINI advertising a STAPLER, then I don't know what to tell them
[/QUOTE]

I don't think you were clear enough meades.

Nautigirrrrrl et al, using sex to sell staplers is the issue at hand. Using sex to sell sex is just plain common sense.


From: Edmonton: This place sucks | Registered: Jun 2003  |  IP: Logged
NautiGirl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7707

posted 12 March 2005 09:44 PM      Profile for NautiGirl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by audra trower williams:
I'm sorry NautiGirl feels she portrays herself in a degrading way. I've only drawn attention to things she's posted herself. I'm also sorry she feels the need to refer to me as a "femenazi". That's pretty disrespectful.

Did I come to this website and call you a "femenatzi"? No. Did I even use your name on my own website? No. Please, keep your facts straight.


From: Halifax | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged
audra trower williams
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2

posted 12 March 2005 10:01 PM      Profile for audra trower williams   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
No, you called me a femenazi on your own website, with a link to rabble.
From: And I'm a look you in the eye for every bar of the chorus | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
NautiGirl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7707

posted 12 March 2005 10:15 PM      Profile for NautiGirl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Sorry Audra, I have never once used your name on my own personal website. I did make reference to this website, but I have not once posted your name or personally attacked you (unlike the way you have personally attacked me, and others on this site).
From: Halifax | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged
Radices
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8494

posted 12 March 2005 10:21 PM      Profile for Radices   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Using sex to sell anything is common sense ... being fanatical about the injustice of it all is not.

So far two wrongs haven't made anything right.

How long did it take women to have previous sexual activities excluded from rape trials? Yet here we are listening to the champion of womens causes expousing the atrocities of a catalog while slandering a fellow womans character because well ..she started it. na na nana.

Incredible (literally)


From: Halifax, NS. | Registered: Mar 2005  |  IP: Logged
HeywoodFloyd
token right-wing mascot
Babbler # 4226

posted 12 March 2005 10:34 PM      Profile for HeywoodFloyd     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Slander? Where?

You're right though. Audra should turn the other cheek when being called a feminazi. I don't know what she was thinking.

Are there any names that Audra should be allowed to respond to?


From: Edmonton: This place sucks | Registered: Jun 2003  |  IP: Logged
robbie_dee
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 195

posted 12 March 2005 10:34 PM      Profile for robbie_dee     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
To echo Anchoress, I distinctly remember a discussion we were having not too long ago about posters who come to this forum just to bait, or in this case "stir up the feminazis" as it were:

quote:
posted by audra trower williams:
Hi babblers!
Sometime in the next week or so, I'd like to add a bit to the babble rules saying DON'T FEED THE TROLLS, only probably worded better. I think it's a policy we need, so we can enforce it, because right now all I can do is plead and plead with y'all, and it seems not to be working. It's getting so toxic.

Anyway, anyone have any thoughts, or suggestions as to how to word/implement this?


In addition to trolling, sock puppetry is also against the rules "Radices."

[ 12 March 2005: Message edited by: robbie_dee ]


From: Iron City | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Radices
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8494

posted 12 March 2005 10:45 PM      Profile for Radices   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Hmm sorry was unfamiliar with the term but thanks to google I'm up to speed

Sock Puppets are extra Internet identities created for use on message boards by individuals to:

1 Agree with original individuals point of view and provide fake support, or

2 Support a point of view contrary to their own but write obnoxious and or stupid things at the same time therefore undermining the point of view espoused.

Not sure I follow though ...which category have I been put in?


From: Halifax, NS. | Registered: Mar 2005  |  IP: Logged
Radices
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8494

posted 12 March 2005 10:48 PM      Profile for Radices   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by HeywoodFloyd:
Slander? Where?

You're right though. Audra should turn the other cheek when being called a feminazi. I don't know what she was thinking.

Are there any names that Audra should be allowed to respond to?


No not if she wants to maintain credibility about the issues she so deeply believes in.


From: Halifax, NS. | Registered: Mar 2005  |  IP: Logged
NautiGirl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7707

posted 12 March 2005 10:49 PM      Profile for NautiGirl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
At no time have I come to this site and violated the rules of this forum, by calling Audra a "feminazi". Nada. Not once. In fact, on my own website, I have never posted the words "Audra Trower Williams is a feminazi".

Audra however, and others, have in fact violated the policy :

You agree to avoid personal insults, attacks and mischievous antagonism (otherwise known as trolling). You will not post material that is inaccurate, abusive, vulgar, hateful, harassing, obscene, threatening, invasive of a person's privacy or otherwise violative of any law.

by invading my privacy by posting links to my personal website (which I chose, upon registering for this site, to keep private). However, as usual, there is a standard for Audra and her followers, and a standard for the rest.


From: Halifax | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged
NautiGirl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7707

posted 12 March 2005 10:53 PM      Profile for NautiGirl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by audra trower williams:
No, you called me a femenazi on your own website, with a link to rabble.

All of a sudden the words "You're so vain, I bet you think this site is about you..." popped in my head.

Sorry Audra, could not be bothered to storke your ego by adding your name to my own website.

[ 12 March 2005: Message edited by: NautiGirl ]


From: Halifax | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged
HeywoodFloyd
token right-wing mascot
Babbler # 4226

posted 12 March 2005 10:55 PM      Profile for HeywoodFloyd     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by NautiGirl:

by invading my privacy by posting links to my personal website (which I chose, upon registering for this site, to keep private).


If you wanted to keep your id private, then why did you use the same name on Rabble and Yafro?


From: Edmonton: This place sucks | Registered: Jun 2003  |  IP: Logged
meades
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 625

posted 12 March 2005 10:59 PM      Profile for meades     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I will keep doing this until NautiGirl recognizes Audra's original point

ahem.
This would be the point you ignore, NautiGirl:

quote:
I think if folks feel that picutures of women in a BATH advertising a BATH NIGHT are the same as pictures of women in a BIKINI advertising a STAPLER, then I don't know what to tell them

Also, I think it's pretty obvious you were refering to Audra, since she is one of the people you consistently target over and over and over again.

[ 12 March 2005: Message edited by: meades ]


From: Sault Ste. Marie | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
NautiGirl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7707

posted 12 March 2005 11:02 PM      Profile for NautiGirl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by HeywoodFloyd:

If you wanted to keep your id private, then why did you use the same name on Rabble and Yafro?


My ID on here is not the same as my ID on Yafro.


From: Halifax | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged
HeywoodFloyd
token right-wing mascot
Babbler # 4226

posted 12 March 2005 11:11 PM      Profile for HeywoodFloyd     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Ah. Yes, you're right.

Must be my cyberstalking software. Sorry about that.


From: Edmonton: This place sucks | Registered: Jun 2003  |  IP: Logged
meades
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 625

posted 12 March 2005 11:11 PM      Profile for meades     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
This would be the point you ignore, NautiGirl:
quote:
I think if folks feel that picutures of women in a BATH advertising a BATH NIGHT are the same as pictures of women in a BIKINI advertising a STAPLER, then I don't know what to tell them

From: Sault Ste. Marie | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
NautiGirl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7707

posted 12 March 2005 11:20 PM      Profile for NautiGirl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by meades:
This would be the point you ignore, NautiGirl:

And this would be the point you ignore meades:

quote:
Audra however, and others, have in fact violated the policy :

You agree to avoid personal insults, attacks and mischievous antagonism (otherwise known as trolling). You will not post material that is inaccurate, abusive, vulgar, hateful, harassing, obscene, threatening, invasive of a person's privacy or otherwise violative of any law.

by invading my privacy by posting links to my personal website (which I chose, upon registering for this site, to keep private). However, as usual, there is a standard for Audra and her followers, and a standard for the rest.



From: Halifax | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged
Contrarian
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6477

posted 12 March 2005 11:21 PM      Profile for Contrarian     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
The idea seems to be that it is ok to show women half naked where their male bosses can enjoy the view, but it is very bad to show women dressed seductively for their own enjoyment. Know your places, grils, we're not allowed to dress to please ourselves.
From: pretty far west | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged
meades
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 625

posted 12 March 2005 11:58 PM      Profile for meades     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
NautiGirl: You again fail to address Audra's point.
Why? I'm left to believe because you know you are wrong.

quote:
And this would be the point you ignore meades:
...
by invading my privacy by posting links to my personal website (which I chose, upon registering for this site, to keep private). However, as usual, there is a standard for Audra and her followers, and a standard for the rest.


So you bring up red herrings like this which are ABSURD, PETTY, AND MIND-NUMBINGLY CHILDISH.
Nothing you post on an easily accessed public web site is "private." It's not Audra's fault you ignored every person with a head on their shoulders that likely warned you about personal information on the internet. If you didn't want certain people to know certain things, you shouldn't have posted them on the internet! A Google search is not an invasion of privacy. Yes, I'm sure you're embarassed, but who's fault is that? It's not like you limited access to your website with passwords and whatnot that Audra cracked using her "internet stalking kit."

You made a mistake. That's YOUR fault.

so once again, you're wrong.

wrooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooong

And once again, I want to know what you have to say about this:

quote:
I think if folks feel that picutures of women in a BATH advertising a BATH NIGHT are the same as pictures of women in a BIKINI advertising a STAPLER, then I don't know what to tell them

And after I see your thoughts on that, then I'd like to know why you evaded this point for as long as you have.

[ 12 March 2005: Message edited by: meades ]


From: Sault Ste. Marie | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Radices
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8494

posted 13 March 2005 11:54 AM      Profile for Radices   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Does no-one see the unfortunate parallels here? What is the difference between saying a woman deserves what she gets based on how she dresses and saying Nautigirl deserved having her information used maliciously against her because it was available on-line. What I understood from Nautigirl's point of view is that if your a self proclaimed feminist then your held to a higher standard. Same as a police officer is held to a different standard. Who here doesn't get upset by hypocricy? Isn't feminism based in fighting double standards? Not with-standing the language; and frankly I took it more in a Seinfeld way (soup nazi),that doesn't excuse the fact that a lot of you are acting in a way that flies in the face of all your trying to promote. Intolerance of any ilk is not the way to make the world a better place. Attacking a womans character by using her sexuality is cliche'. Allowing it to happen in such a forum by a group that is supposed to be fighting these very same cliche's requires some self examination. Your either part of the solution or part of the problem. Principles are only important when you put them ahead of your own self interests. It's not about who's right and who's wrong. We've all been wrong. Thats how we grow.

Thanks for the opportunity to participate.

Respectfully, Glenn


From: Halifax, NS. | Registered: Mar 2005  |  IP: Logged
Reality. Bites.
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6718

posted 13 March 2005 12:28 PM      Profile for Reality. Bites.        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Her information was not used against her. She, like you, came here for one purpose only -- to troll.

You know Glenn, I'm not a violent person. I don't go walking around the street picking fights. Ever. But if you break into my home and start hitting me, I'm going to do my damnedest to beat the crap out of you.

The lesson? Don't invade people's places, start hitting them and expect not to get the crap beaten out of you.


From: Gone for good | Registered: Aug 2004  |  IP: Logged
Jesse Dignity
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7131

posted 13 March 2005 12:37 PM      Profile for Jesse Dignity   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
This thread is bordering on hilarious.

The only person who wants to talk about the content of Naughtigirl's "private" website is Naughtigirl.

Everyone else (with the additional exception of Radices) is trying so hard to bring the discussion back on track to being about the difference in standards between different contexts, but the very brink of hilarity was approached when Naughtigirl directly responded to Meades by saying the real issue in this thread was that her privacy had been violated.

Sorry dude, this is not a thread about your privacy, no matter how hard you try to make it into one. No-one is interested in either violating or discussing your privacy. I think that knowing thy foe is a pretty sensible response when being attacked on the internet - you never know why someone might have an agenda against you or even have a worthy frame from which to be arguing what at first might appear to be a crappy argument. I think if more people used the basic tools of the internet to find out what their opponent is all about before engaging in debate, things might go a little more smoothly. It's hardly muckraking. Maybe indeed Audra uses her government name more candidly than you do on the internet, but if you go everywhere calling yourself Naughtigirl then you aren't keeping shit separate from shit. Just because you thought you had the advantage of being more familiar with her than she was with you, you're taking umbrage that you're not impossible to research.

You got caught out there bragging that you were baiting "feminazis". No-one said you violated the rules of the forum and brought the language here, but it blows your skirt up. I guess that's why you've abandoned actually trying to have this argument - you've been exposed as a troll. So now you're just trying to do damage control on that.

I'd suggest that if you want to salvage any credibility as a serious contributor to discussion around here, you'll drop the crybaby routine and make an earnest response to the actual flow of the argument, not this operatic meta-fight.

For the record, lest I come off as one of those oft-rumoured brainwashed followers of Audra, I don't find the ads terribly offensive to my sense of justice. I can see merit to the grounds for complaint, but I certainly, for my part, have no interest in condemning them.


From: punch a misogynist today | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged
Jesse Dignity
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7131

posted 13 March 2005 12:40 PM      Profile for Jesse Dignity   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by RealityBites:
Her information was not used against her. She, like you, came here for one purpose only -- to troll.

You know Glenn, I'm not a violent person. I don't go walking around the street picking fights. Ever. But if you break into my home and start hitting me, I'm going to do my damnedest to beat the crap out of you.

The lesson? Don't invade people's places, start hitting them and expect not to get the crap beaten out of you.


Do you really think Radices is trolling? I think he's just more sympathetic to Naughtigirl's position and is taking her side over a perceived insult.

I really did think he was a sock puppet for a second, when I looked at the post times, but in his defense he does link to a personal site from his profile and it seems like a lot to set up just to have a sock puppet come to your defense on a board.

Plus I imagine Audra would have checked the IPs by now...


From: punch a misogynist today | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged
Reality. Bites.
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6718

posted 13 March 2005 12:45 PM      Profile for Reality. Bites.        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Jesse Dignity:
Do you really think Radices is trolling? I think he's just more sympathetic to Naughtigirl's position and is taking her side over a perceived insult.

I think he's trolling, but I didn't wish to imply he's a sock-puppet.


From: Gone for good | Registered: Aug 2004  |  IP: Logged
Jesse Dignity
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7131

posted 13 March 2005 11:45 PM      Profile for Jesse Dignity   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by RealityBites:
I think he's trolling, but I didn't wish to imply he's a sock-puppet.

Oh I know you didn't imply that, just someone earlier suggested as much.


From: punch a misogynist today | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged
James
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5341

posted 14 March 2005 12:02 AM      Profile for James        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by NautiGirl:

My ID on here is not the same as my ID on Yafro.


She's right, Heywood, she dropped all the vowels on Yafro. And on HotorNot its different yet again, both profiles, not to mention ....

But, let's get back to her "real" point, ie., the objectification of women ....


From: Windsor; ON | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
NautiGirl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7707

posted 14 March 2005 12:23 AM      Profile for NautiGirl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by James:

She's right, Heywood, she dropped all the vowels on Yafro. And on HotorNot its different yet again, both profiles, not to mention ....



You have waaaaaaaaay too much time on your hands. Funny, how I would never think to come here and start searching the bowels of the internet and googleing posters here, but it seems to be the MO of the majority of the folks here. Hell, you would think I am running for public office. And yet people accuse ME of trying to make this thread about me?????Whatever! Y'all are the ones who won't let it go.

I can't believe how whacked some of you can be, and how damn personally you take it when someone expresses a difference in opinion (which is what originally started this whole thing--I expressed a difference in opinion, and an issue with a double standard, which lead to others taking things to a more personal level). Yet again, I am done trying to have a rational, logical debate with irrational, illogical people.

[ 14 March 2005: Message edited by: NautiGirl ]


From: Halifax | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged
meades
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 625

posted 14 March 2005 12:35 AM      Profile for meades     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
What were your thoughts on this again? I forget?
quote:
I think if folks feel that picutures of women in a BATH advertising a BATH NIGHT are the same as pictures of women in a BIKINI advertising a STAPLER, then I don't know what to tell them

Oh right, it's cause you didn't address it yet!

From: Sault Ste. Marie | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
James
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5341

posted 14 March 2005 12:37 AM      Profile for James        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by NautiGirl:

when someone expresses a difference in opinion (which is what originally started this whole thing--I expressed a difference in opinion

No, let's be accurate. You came over here a while ago on a little "raiding party", thought you had taken some scalps, which you took home and then proudly displayed around the web for your own glorifucation. That seemed like fun, so you decided to try it again. This time you were captured, and riduculed. Simple as that.


From: Windsor; ON | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
Radices
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8494

posted 14 March 2005 03:27 AM      Profile for Radices   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by James:

No, let's be accurate. You came over here a while ago on a little "raiding party", thought you had taken some scalps, which you took home and then proudly displayed around the web for your own glorifucation. That seemed like fun, so you decided to try it again. This time you were captured, and riduculed. Simple as that.


Yes lets be accurate ..the original post

===========================================

To: [email protected]
From: [email protected]
Subject: Harass THIS, moron.

Hi there!

I just wanted to let you know that your Ale House ad is utterly vile, and I feel that if sexual harassment had ever affected any woman close to you, you'd know that.

Not that I imagine women are clamouring to get close to someone who finds their oppression funny, so I suppose that's a moot point.

Yours in scorn,

Audra Williams

===============================================
Nautigirls first response....

I'm sorry, I just don't see anything in that advertisement which encourages people to go into the Alehouse and sexually harass women. I could perhaps almost understand being upset if the waitresses were adorned in Hooter-like uniforms, but that is not the case here. Clearly, they are playing up on the period costumes the waitstaff wear, with some humour (or not, depending on your sense of HaHa), and not advocating sexual harassment.

The controversy has done more to make this pub a recognized name across the country, than the billboard alone ever could. I am sure the owner appreciates the publicity.

I am repulsed by the personal attacks on Mr. Keevill. I would hope more people would not jump to snap judgements on folks based on a silly billboard advertisement. I really don't see the need to make those types of comments, particularly when you have not met the individual of whom you speak.

I find it interesting that someone suggested that we should first make sure a woman didn't design the campaign: do I understand correctly that from that perspective, it is acceptable for a woman to produce such material, but not for a man? Talk about a double standard! To me, feminism and equality is about eliminating double standards period, not just the ones that don't suit your own agenda.

Peace out.

=================================================

[ 14 March 2005: Message edited by: Radices ]


From: Halifax, NS. | Registered: Mar 2005  |  IP: Logged
Jesse Dignity
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7131

posted 14 March 2005 05:55 PM      Profile for Jesse Dignity   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Whoah, thanks for posting that, I missed it the first time around.

That post sure did miss the point by a mile.

Her posts in this thread were like, light years ahead of that until they stopped being about anything but herself.

[ 14 March 2005: Message edited by: Jesse Dignity ]


From: punch a misogynist today | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged

All times are Pacific Time  

Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | rabble.ca | Policy Statement

Copyright 2001-2008 rabble.ca