If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(WFMY)   People complain about eyesores in their neighborhood. In this case, scantily-clad models doing a Maxim photo shoot   (wfmy.com) divider line 113
    More: Dumbass  
•       •       •

18475 clicks; posted to Main » on 27 Oct 2005 at 7:53 PM (9 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



113 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2005-10-27 06:32:23 PM  
Where?
 
2005-10-27 06:32:26 PM  
Some neighbors called police and tried to take pictures of the photo shoot as evidence.

Yeah, that's why I'd be taking pictures too.
 
2005-10-27 06:49:56 PM  
"Oh no..people in bathing suits and such. The human body is not for kids to see. Wont somebody think of the children!!??"




/Im afraid of Americans...Im afraid of the world.
//Half American
 
2005-10-27 06:51:40 PM  
get off my lawn!!!
 
2005-10-27 06:57:27 PM  
Useless without pics.

;)
 
2005-10-27 06:58:06 PM  
WTF is the issue with the female body? It's only an issue because asshats like these *make* it such an issue. If the concept of "the female body is a beautiful thing, and it's just skin for crying out loud" was the norm in this country, then no kid would even double-take at seeing a scantly clad woman (until the kid reached puberty).

I'm sick of this puritan mentality. Wasn't the result of the original sin in the garden of eden realizing that adam & eve were both nude & being embarassed by it? Our natural state is nude according to the bible. sheesh. Why is it okay for a baby girl to get changed in public, or for a woman to nurse in public, but fast forward 20 years, or to look at the woman to admire her beauty, and suddenly it's a horrible thing?

If you can't teach your kids how not to objectify women, then maybe you shouldn't be raising kids.
 
2005-10-27 07:26:16 PM  
If it was a Maxim photoshoot I would imagine their eyes were sore from all of the airborne airbrushing toxins.

I've seen photos of perfectly lovely women that I have actually met and wondered, that's weird I remember her as having pores and not being quite so tan and blurry.
 
2005-10-27 07:28:32 PM  
Sounds like a lotta people have caught the ghey.
\"Get your perfect,supple, breasts and asses off my lawn!"
 
2005-10-27 07:57:32 PM  
I think the expression we're all thinking about here is "p-whipped".
 
2005-10-27 07:57:39 PM  
The Flatline

Until religious zealots are universally seen witht he disdain they deserve, they'll continue to feel self-righteous enough to continue ruining our country.

Not that they'd stop if they actually WERE persecuted, but at least the authorities might not listen to them since they'd be recognized as kooks.
 
2005-10-27 07:57:40 PM  
 
2005-10-27 07:59:08 PM  
They never do Maxim photo shoots in my neighborhood.

Also I'm sick of parents like this. My mom is this way. Whenever there is something remotely sexual on TV she complains that kids could be watching, yet when they show drug use or violence she doesn't say a word. I would much rather have any kids I have see a boob than some guy shooting up.
 
2005-10-27 07:59:27 PM  
Tabor said he thinks police officers should "err on the side of being conservative every time."

I bet this guy is a barrel of laughs. He probably soaps up the faucet in his shower so he doesn't risk seeing himself naked in the reflection.
 
2005-10-27 07:59:46 PM  
Her kids were 1 and 2.

ONE and TWO.

Sorry. ALMOST THREE. If they saw a boob...oh god...what would a baby think of a boob? Just imagine the trauma.
 
2005-10-27 08:00:23 PM  
Let's make zealots the martyrs they wish to be and nail 'em up on some crosses already...
 
2005-10-27 08:00:57 PM  
Benn Hill came home from work one day last week and found his wife afraid to take their kids outside because of the nearly naked woman being photographed down the street.

"I do not need this trash brought to my front door," Hill said in an e-mail to City Councilman John Tabor.


Afraid to take the kids out.

I hate this farkin country.

More and more every day.

I HATE THIS farkIN COUNTRY.
 
2005-10-27 08:01:52 PM  
Yeah, I wouldn't be taking pictures of the photo shoot. I'd be fetching the whipped cream and asking if I could join in. *nod*
 
2005-10-27 08:03:24 PM  
This article did nothing but give me a location on where all those asshats that alert the FCC live.
 
2005-10-27 08:03:47 PM  
I hate naked bodies. Jesus hates naked bodies. Skin in satan. I suggest permanent clothing, seamed into our filthy perverse skin.
 
2005-10-27 08:03:54 PM  
dude, we sure know he wears no pants in that family
 
2005-10-27 08:04:25 PM  
What do you expect from a country founded by religious puritans? They even CALLED THEMSELVES PURITANS. And WE are their descendants. The only reason they came HERE was so they could be the self-righteous pricks for a change and tell everybody ELSE how to live, instead of someone else doing the same to them. Why do you think there are so many self-appointed experts on 'family values" telling everyone else how to act?
 
2005-10-27 08:06:29 PM  
Who the..Why would anyone make a compla...Oh wait, it's the South.
 
2005-10-27 08:08:13 PM  
Maybe we could find a way to prevent our kids from seeing both gratuitous nudity AND drug use?

I don't subscribe to the theory that "Hey there's lots of violence on TV, there should be lots of nudity too!"

Not that I have any issue with nudity, but I think it has its time, place and context. Most of the nudity that parents are trying to shield their children from is that which is presented in an adult, sexual context. There might not be anything wrong with your kid catching a glimpse of some ween when you're getting out of the shower, but you should probably not let young kids wander into the room when the ol' lady's playing "gargle the bag", either.

And this is just me saying so, but I think a certain amount of violence - again, in the proper context - is healthy, even necesary, for boys to become men. "Violence" doesn't always mean people getting blown up or shot in the face. Self-defense is still violence.
 
2005-10-27 08:08:19 PM  
They can use my lawn instead!

/the weather is kind of "nipply" this time of year
 
2005-10-27 08:08:26 PM  
Dear Maxim,

mi casa es su casa.

I think thats how you spell it anyway. But uhm my neighbors would welcome you with open arms, at least while they are all at work.
 
2005-10-27 08:08:54 PM  
Finally, we have something that fundamentalist Muslims and Christians can agree about.
 
2005-10-27 08:09:07 PM  
ArthurPhilipDent:
...what would a baby think of a boob?

Dinner?
 
2005-10-27 08:09:18 PM  
rainbow5ive

Who the..Why would anyone make a compla...Oh wait, it's the South.

Clearly you've never been to the South. I've seen so many boobs hanging out of overalls as Wal-Mart and asses out of daisy dukes and cutoffs...
 
2005-10-27 08:09:25 PM  
jwrebholz
They even CALLED THEMSELVES PURITANS. And WE are their descendants.

Well, maybe YOU'RE their descendent ... but not the majority of us. And I'm fairly certain that our country was, in fact, founded upon principles counter to the Puritans' wishes.

I get your point, but the problem isn't that there WERE Puritans here - it's that there STILL ARE.
 
2005-10-27 08:10:58 PM  
The US is one of the more repressed industrialized countries.

Why are my fellow Americans so frightened of naked people?
 
2005-10-27 08:11:33 PM  
I mean, naked people with chainsaws I would understand.
 
2005-10-27 08:13:23 PM  
Tabor said he thinks police officers should "err on the side of being conservative every time."

The shoot was legal. So this guy thinks being conservative means the police should have enforced a non-existant morality laws and broken up the shoot?
 
2005-10-27 08:14:00 PM  
jwrebholz - the founding fathers and framers of our constitution were not religious men. Pretty much every one of them was solidly against religion - christianity in particular. Hence the way our constitution was written, what with the freedoms and all that jazz.

At the time of our country's founding, only something like 10% of the population of the colonies believed in god and went to church.

It always bothers me when I hear people say, "This country was founded on Christianity!" because no, no it wasn't. Not at all.
 
2005-10-27 08:15:47 PM  
I'm German, dammit! No puritan in me whatsoever!
 
2005-10-27 08:16:35 PM  
"At the time of our country's founding, only something like 10% of the population of the colonies believed in god and went to church."

HAHAHAHAHAHA was that a troll? Get your fact's straight.
 
2005-10-27 08:17:01 PM  

WTF is the issue with the female body? It's only an issue because asshats like these *make* it such an issue. If the concept of "the female body is a beautiful thing, and it's just skin for crying out loud"


now, I think we are all being a bit obtuse here.

the naked female form is a thing of beauty, but it is not beauty that Maxim is using to move product, it's sex. The whole hawt bathing suit pics are meant to imply sex, not just beauty. sex in the service of merchandising.

when Maxim opens some naturist resorts for families, I'll believe the rhetoric of natural beauty


does Maxim show regular women doing regular things, in the beautiful nude ?

now, I'm a BIG fan of porn, and I'm also a part-time naturist, and I know the difference.
 
2005-10-27 08:21:27 PM  
Teucer - My bad. I was being a bit conservative in the estimate. It was more like 7 percent.

From http://www.postfun.com/pfp/worbois.html

"These founding fathers were a reflection of the American population. Having escaped from the state-established religions of Europe, only 7% of the people in the 13 colonies belonged to a church when the Declaration of Independence was signed."

Of course I was going off the top of my head and didn't look a bunch of stuff up before posting and semantics worked against me in that case. I should have said that most people at that time were Deists, rather than Theists. Theism, such as Christianity, is wholly different from Deism - and as such, theists would probably not recognize the beliefs of deists as belief in god at all.
 
2005-10-27 08:21:51 PM  
2005-10-27 08:17:01 PM dbaggins
does Maxim show regular women doing regular things, in the beautiful nude ?

They do have that column where they feature a hawt young lady stripping at her job...
 
2005-10-27 08:30:02 PM  
holy crap! an almost-three-year-old seeing women in bathing suits!

what's that gonna do to the kid? nuffin! jeez.
 
2005-10-27 08:30:34 PM  
So I guess they never take their kids to the beach, in case they might see a young woman in a bikini?
 
2005-10-27 08:31:40 PM  
If they were my neighbors, I'd shiat in their mail boxes for a year.

It's obvious a higher power intervened by providing the boobage.

Then some fark up has to go and throw it all away...
 
2005-10-27 08:35:55 PM  
MrBelvedere: To be technical his claim was not that "only 10% of Americans back then believed in God". It was "only something like 10% of the population of the colonies believed in god and went to church". A much different claim. It keeps out those bad holiday-only Christians, if you know what I mean....right?
 
2005-10-27 08:37:07 PM  
Hooray!

Charlotte NC is another place in the US that I never need to visit!

/Not sayin' where else. No need to start a flame war
 
2005-10-27 08:40:14 PM  
MrBelvedere - read my follow-up post, if you'd be so kind. I admitted an error of semantics.

Most of the people during that time frame did believe in god, but not in the theistic (christian) manner. They were, by and large, deists.

As I said before, the deistic belief system is so very different than the theistic belief system that most theists would not recognize deism as a belief in god at all.

So yes, what I meant did not come out right. But my point was that the people in that tmie period were not "christian" in the sense that most americans today concieve of the religion, nor did they believe in god in the same way.

From http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/farrell_till/myth.html

"As for the religious beliefs of the general population in pre and post revolutionary times, it wasn't nearly as Christian as most people think. Lynn R. Buzzard, executive director of the Christian Legal Society (a national organization of Christian lawyers) has admitted that there is little proof to support the claim that the colonial population was overwhelmingly Christian. "Not only were a good many of the revolutionary leaders more deist than Christian," Buzzard wrote, "but the actual number of church members was rather small. Perhaps as few as five percent of the populace were church members in 1776" (Schools They Haven't Got a Prayer, Elgin, Illinois David C. Cook Publishing, 1982, p. 81). Historian Richard Hofstadter says that "perhaps as many as ninety percent of the Americans were unchurched in 1790" (Anti-Intellectualism in American Life, New York Alfred A. Knopf, 1974, p. 82) and goes on to say that "mid-eighteenth century America had a smaller proportion of church members than any other nation in Christendom," noting that "in 1800 [only] about one of every fifteen Americans was a church member" (p. 89). Historian James MacGregor Burns agrees with these figures, noting that "(t)here had been a `very wintry season' for religion every where in America after the Revolution" (The American Experiment Vineyard of Liberty, New York Vintage Books, 1983, p. 493). He adds that "ninety percent of the people lay outside the churches."
 
2005-10-27 08:40:54 PM  
Mr Belvedere

so his point is just too crazy to take seriously, but you provide as little evidence to the contrary. In fact, less.

I've seen very good records that indicate that roughly 50% of the original american colonists attended any form of religious service. While most of these people would not register themselves as church members (only about 5%).

today it is much more common to claim a church membership (around 60%), while attendance is not seen as all that critical.

neither early or latter state would convince me that this is a christian nation as the rhetoric would imply.
 
2005-10-27 08:41:51 PM  
That was just a few miles from here.

It wasn't just a Maxim shoot, okay? It was a total freakshow. Glass eaters, blood drinkers, trannies (THERE'S a "female form" for ya). If the local alt-weekly's website didn't suck rocks, I could link to a much more detailed story for yas, but suffice to say this was NOT just "chicks in swimsuits." I don't know that people were right to get so worked up, but there was more going on than the linked "Greensboro" story implies (BTW, G'boro is two hours north of here).
 
2005-10-27 08:42:20 PM  
Some neighbors called police and tried to take pictures of the photo shoot as evidence.

Right. Evidence. I call shenanigans.
 
2005-10-27 08:43:59 PM  
Benn Hill came home from work one day last week

WTF?!?!? His name was BENN HILL and he had a problem with scantily-clad women? Is this Bizarro world?

 
2005-10-27 08:44:42 PM  
dbaggins - yes, crazy. In the sense that referenced historical data is crazy.
 
2005-10-27 08:49:08 PM  
I just wish I could in-line post the benny hill theme tune.

Go on.. you know you can hear it. Muhahahaha
 
Displayed 50 of 113 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report