On 05/03/2015 01:15 PM, Dominik George wrote:
Freedom is about as little censorship as possible (except extreme cases). Freedom is what we should be protecting even if it leaves someone offended. That is the price and it is just not possible to please everybody with censorship.Dmitry, do you remember over a year ago when a game was proposed that had the end goal of raping and torturing women?? We ALL went ballistic on that one. The reason? It was illegal, at least in this country. Since Debian is hosted in the US, then US laws had to be upheld. Yet, we didn't censor the game. We didn't have to. It was plainly illegal to distribute it here. And, the majority of opinion was from men.That is correct. So I ask you, are women in bikinis illegal in the US? I fear not.
It's not the last time I looked! :) But, we do have various factions who would have that be so. Remember in the 60's when the Beatles stormed the US?? People went CrAzY over the long hair. THEY LOOK LIKE WOMEN! Heh, so what?? One bridge that supported TRUE sexism was burned. Men could wear their hair like women, and women could wear their hair like men. Great! People could look any way they wanted to.
But, as soon as the argument here failed to include bisexual and homosexual women, they lost any discussion regarding "sexism". It is just as sexist to omit them from the list of potential "offenders". To my perspective that is far worse than the 'teen in a bikini" issue when examining ~real~ sexism issues, to direct the diatribe at men only.
Miriam, you set the movement back many years. To be equal, you need to BE equal. Yet, you cannot accuse another woman of being potentially "eye gaze" offensive/abusive. What? Isn't that sexist?? :) Ric
-- My father, Victor Moore (Vic) used to say: "There are two Great Sins in the world... ..the Sin of Ignorance, and the Sin of Stupidity. Only the former may be overcome." R.I.P. Dad. http://linuxcounter.net/user/44256.html