moblog uk

phoenix's moblog

by phoenix

user profile | dashboard

« older newer »

follow phoenix/eyebeams at http://twitter.com


Recent visitors

The Kiss

(viewed 7774 times)
Bookmark and Share
22nd May 2006, 15:16   | tags:,

Advert

Dhamaka says:

awww....

22nd May 2006, 15:16

GoogleBot says:

What's that, girl on girl, lesbian action?

GoogleBot loves hot girl on girl lesbian.

22nd May 2006, 15:19

Euphro says:

I think that this might get a couple of views :)

22nd May 2006, 15:20

ooo hello girl on girl lesbian action there. this is a turn up for the books! didnt know you were in to this! :)

22nd May 2006, 15:20

seaneeboy says:

"Phwoar"

22nd May 2006, 15:21

daz says:

a match made in heaven... ;)

22nd May 2006, 15:22

spinboy says:

43 and rising :). No doubt 100+ by tea time.

22nd May 2006, 15:23

Euphro says:

A few more comments like the above and this is going to go ballistic :D

22nd May 2006, 15:23

nige says:

i dont normally get turned on by this sort of thing, but...

22nd May 2006, 15:23

Gael (AKA the middle-aged, middle-classs housewife says:

So that's why you wouldn't sleep with me!

22nd May 2006, 15:23

bronxelf says:

Gods, and geo doesnt have net access today from work.

22nd May 2006, 15:24

bronxelf says:

gael- well I did sleep in her bed...

(she wasnt IN it, but I did sleep there)

22nd May 2006, 15:24

bronxelf says:

gael- well I did sleep in her bed...

(she wasnt IN it, but I did sleep there)

22nd May 2006, 15:24

Euphro says:

You mean by afternoon tea time, i.e. 16.00, at the rate it is already going :D

22nd May 2006, 15:24

Euphro says:

73 already :D

22nd May 2006, 15:27

so you say we should stop saying girl on girl lesbian action?

oh i tought it would be more fun to keep saying girl on girl lesbian action!

22nd May 2006, 15:28

spinboy says:

Roger, no more mentioning of hot girl on girl lesbian action from me.

22nd May 2006, 15:28

spinboy says:

How about sizzling womanly embrace though?

22nd May 2006, 15:29

Euphro says:

92 now :D

22nd May 2006, 15:31

shinygemma says:

91 now...I must admit I clicked just to read the comments!

22nd May 2006, 15:31

spinboy says:

105 :D

22nd May 2006, 15:31

Gael says:

High Light it quick, we need more lesbian highlights ... this site is far too hetero-sexual ...

22nd May 2006, 15:32

Euphro says:

You mean 109 :D At this rate it will be more like 1000 by tea time!

22nd May 2006, 15:32

Euphro says:

There, that should do it :)

22nd May 2006, 15:33

Euphro says:

Looks like it. I think that Phoenix is on the way to his most viewed image ever :D

22nd May 2006, 15:34

122 now and you have highlighted the girl on girl lesbian action, i think it may shoot up a bit

22nd May 2006, 15:34

bronxelf says:

*facepalm*


I shudder to think what would have happened had we kissed even more convincingly.

22nd May 2006, 15:34

Euphro says:

I can't believe how quick GoogleBot is :)

22nd May 2006, 15:35

ROFL Well done, that mod

22nd May 2006, 15:35

daz says:

but hot lesbian girl on girl action are SUCH common keywords... ;)

22nd May 2006, 15:35

Euphro says:

I just missed it by a second, although I got a very nice "moment after" shot, which I shall post :)

22nd May 2006, 15:36

spinboy says:

I think more 100+ from simply people commenting and checking to see if there was anymore comments made. Or are views binded to an IP address?

22nd May 2006, 15:36

spinboy says:

http://moblog.co.uk/view.php?id=150505
/>
Thats the only moblog post that Google seems to have lindexed with the keywords lesbian and kiss at the moment. :S

22nd May 2006, 15:38

Euphro says:

No, I think it's per view. I can up the view count number by hitting refresh.

22nd May 2006, 15:40

Euphro says:

173 now, wow!

22nd May 2006, 15:40

spinboy says:

Almost two hundred. 150 views in 25 minutes :D

22nd May 2006, 15:43

Groovicron says:

I second that "phwoar"

22nd May 2006, 15:43

200 in under half an hour!

22nd May 2006, 15:44

Euphro says:

If I go to an old, dead, long-cold post of another moblogger, I can up the view count by hitting refresh.

22nd May 2006, 15:44

alot of this is us coming back in to see if the count has gone up.

22nd May 2006, 15:47

puddlepuff says:

How is that possible,.. I thought there was only one gay in the village,.... :)

22nd May 2006, 15:47

Gael says:

Phoenix has returned to Moblog with a bang ...

22nd May 2006, 15:47

Dhamaka says:

indeed

22nd May 2006, 15:48

Euphro says:

232 already :)

22nd May 2006, 15:50

Euphro says:

Yes, bmal, that is a good point. I daren't Google it :D

22nd May 2006, 15:51

daz says:

It's not on google yet... The pron industry's competition is just too strong. ;)

22nd May 2006, 15:57

OJ says:

Both beautiful and feisty women but a big :rolleyes: for the "faux" action/re-actions.

Moblog reveals itself to have the beating pulse of a sweaty adolescent locked in their bedroom. Dammit.

22nd May 2006, 15:58

im not gonna google it as im at work and it might be a bit sus!

but i do think we may need to say girl on girl action, and sometimes lesbian shocker and things klike that a few more times to gain google status!

22nd May 2006, 15:59

Euphro says:

268 now, at tea-time :D

22nd May 2006, 16:04

anonymous says:

crap highlight, again

22nd May 2006, 16:07

Euphro says:

I highlighted it, mr/ms anonymous, in the spirit of the many comments and views. You can easily find my contact user button if you seriously have an issue.

22nd May 2006, 16:13

bronxelf says:

anonymous wanker, again.

Euprho- seriously-- anonymous cowards are so not worth the time.

22nd May 2006, 16:14

daz says:

You can view the IP, yes? Go and compare it to you-know-whose... :)

22nd May 2006, 16:14

bronxelf says:

Which you-know-whose?

email me.

22nd May 2006, 16:16

Euphro says:

I realise that's what Spinboy meant, but 100 seemed to be coming up really rapidly :D

22nd May 2006, 16:17

Euphro says:

How do you view the IP?

22nd May 2006, 16:17

OJ says:

I'm not mr/ms anonymous and I think I've made my views known above. But I can see their point.

Is it a good photo because the people in it are popular here? (I'm not sure this is a good reason and I'm seeing lots of highlighting like this at the moment)

Is there something inherently good about the photo that would interest any viewer? Just for the sake of argument any viewer without a hard-on.

And how exactly would you characterise the spirit of the many comments and views Euphro - I would call the multiple phwoars and refs to HGOGA pretty insulting, chauvinistic and cheap.

This is why I would hesitate even considering moblogging a picture of me and my partner together, let alone tagging it with the L word.

22nd May 2006, 16:20

g says:

i am mr anonymous. one maybe two crap highlights cool, but five? give me a break come on. what OJ says too. jesus

22nd May 2006, 16:24

daz says:

I KNEW IT!

22nd May 2006, 16:25

g says:

pat yourself on the back columbo

22nd May 2006, 16:26

daz says:

Funny thing is, here's what bronxelf just said about you:

"It's not like him to do things anonymously, though. Hes an asshole but he's not a coward."

I guess she thought too highly of you.

22nd May 2006, 16:27

g says:

nice

22nd May 2006, 16:29

Euphro says:

I see your point OJ. Perhaps I've been a bit blind to the possible offence the comments could cause. It just seemed to be a bit of fun centred around playing with GoogleBot and maximising the number of hits.

I think it is a good photo. The subjects have been friends for eight years. They have only met twice, this being the second time.

I would hate to think that members and non-members saw Moblog as some sort of cliquey club where only the mates of the site owners and mods got highlighted. There have been more than usual in the past couple of days, but that is because of Geodyne's party. It should settle down after this.

The thing that really attracts me to Moblog is the community and how welcoming and non-judgmental it is. The last thing I'd want to do is make it seem any other way.

22nd May 2006, 16:29

bronxelf says:

OJ - I knew you werent the anonymous commentor. You at least, have the spine to stand up behind your own words.

MBUK has never tried to pretend it's an artsy photographic community, though we do get some fine photography here. The people who highlight do so for their own reasons, and those reasons are varied. I highlighted both the photo of Joe and Shoes and the sunset with the wires right afterwards-- I assume youd only think the one of the sunset should get a highlight. Fortunately for me, Im not answerable to anyone save Alfie and Mat for what I highlight and neither is Euphro.

If anyone has a right to be insulted by the comments, it's me and Geodyne. Neither one of us are.

It was a fun photo taken by friends of friends at a party. It's not a political statement. And of course, no one would dream of asking you to post photos of anything you don't feel comfortable posting.



22nd May 2006, 16:32

OJ says:

daz, good of you to concentrate on feuding with g rather than addressing any of the quite serious points I made above! Mind you you've not actually said phwoar so...

Ps. Just seen Gael's remark above (missed it in a sea of phwoars, sorry) and I'd agree except that I'm not sure if this is a lesbian pic or a HGOGA-playing-to-the-porn-audience pic. And they ain't the same thing.

I'm not having ago at the two women pictured, I genuinely am not sure because of the context of the comments.

Also not sure why I'm having this conversation with myself as most other people don't seem to care as long as it gets hits...

22nd May 2006, 16:34

Euphro says:

Couldn't have put it better myself (sorry OJ, I'm responding to Bronxelf and we are listening).

22nd May 2006, 16:34

daz says:

OJ: I'm sorry you got offended, but I'm not getting into a debate of political correctness, nor do I feel that anyone should have to defend what they choose to highlight, so I chose not to address your points. I'm sorry you got offended by that, too.

EDIT: Plus, I was there. It's been like that all weekend. You might have collapsed had you heard all the cheap, chauvinistic sex jokes going on that weekend. ;)

22nd May 2006, 16:38

OJ says:

Scrub the last thing I said - cross posted with Euphro and Bronxelf, who have actually responded.

Euphro, I have met Joe and Shoes and I really like both. But that picture wouldn't have been highlighted if it'd been someone's anonymous mate. It's all about balance and the site is feeling very cliquey at the moment - since before this latest party IMHO but I can't put my finger on it as I haven't exactly been conducting a study.

The HGOGA issue is totally different. I don't have a problem with Bronxelf and Geodyne kissing, photographing it or blogging it. I *do* have a problem with the HGOGA thing which I find simultaneously sexist and homophobic.

I see what Bronxelf's saying but feeling insulted isn't something that one earns as a right. Though if it were, I would say I have earned it since I have to deal with homophobic crap on an ongoing basis. I'm a member of this community too and I think that gives me "rights" to challenge it.

As I say, I will think twice about what I'll post about my personal life in the future. I wouldn't want to place any reference to my or my friends' lesbian and gay lives in the context of adolescent wanking.

eta: daz, it's not "political correctness" it's people's lives. Imagine walking around being forced into being either a political issue or someone's porn fantasy, sometimes both at the same time.

22nd May 2006, 16:42

daz says:

We would never do the "adolescent wanking" thing if we weren't sure that the people in the picture thought it was funny. That is the point you're missing.

22nd May 2006, 16:44

OJ says:

I accept that daz, but the people in the picture aren't the only viewers of the comment.

I'm going to change my username to That Humourless L******" (name changed to avoid the googlebot)

22nd May 2006, 16:47

OJ says:

I think this should be the last I say on the subject as I've said my piece.

But Electric Sheep, your point really only stands up if the site is a clique read by people in the know. I hope it isn't.

Evidently the irony was lost on me - a regular user - too.

22nd May 2006, 16:51

Euphro says:

OJ, I don't really want to comment on other people's highlights. I highlight quite rarely. As B'elf says, it is a personal thing. There is a useful Moblog UK forum discussion on it which is worth reading. It would be a shame if it was perceived to be devalued by the majority of users.

On the subject of personal life, I think you are right to protect it, whatever your sexual proclivity. I hardly ever post pictures of my family and if I do, they are anonymized. The HGOGA issue has taught me a lesson about sensitivity. Thank you.

22nd May 2006, 16:55

Geodyne says:

I've just walked home from a day without internet access, to find this. Talk about turning a bit of light-hearted fun into a chip-on-the-shoulder pissing match!

I find this whole argument fascinating, because I do not consider myself to be one of the most popular users, nor part of a clique. There were a lot of popular users at the party, it was also a group of genuine friends.

I don't wish to fuel the argument as I feel Elf and Euphro have addressed the issue well. This was a light-hearted kiss between two very good, entirely heterosexual friends. Elf and I have known each other for more years than moblog has existed.

EDIT: this photo had nothing to do with lesbianism or the lack of it. People's sexual orientation are irrelevant to both Elf and I. There is no political content in this photo (by the subjects or the highlighters), that is added by the viewer as they see fit.

To be frankly honest, I'm a little embarrassed by the both the comments and the thought that this picture is on a public forum in the first place. But I was also uncontrollably laughing at the early comments, and certainly didn't find any of the comments insulting, chauvenist, sexist or cheap.

But Daz and Gael? I am going to *kill* both of you.

22nd May 2006, 16:59

phoenix says:

sigh! I wish people would read the tags ;)

22nd May 2006, 17:05

Geodyne says:

Context is not a lot of people's strong points, Pheonix.

Oh, btw? Could I have a high-res of this please? It's a great shot. :)

(and thanks so much for coming)

22nd May 2006, 17:07

phoenix says:

Will post

22nd May 2006, 17:11

spinboy says:

Hmm, its times like these when I think to myself its just teh internet. You don't have to read the comments, or look at the pictures. You don't have to post pictures you don't want to, or you could protect your moblog so only users can view it.

With regards to this so called clicheness, I'll often click on a picture if its interesting. I want to see the story behind it and often the sotry can be a whole lot more interesting. I only knew one person at the party but I didn't realise they were there until a few pictures in. I looked at the pictures because they look interesting, a bunch of people having a good time and enjoying their company.

To me that is the purpose of Moblog, sharing things that just can't be explained in anything better than a picture.

But meh, that's just my opinion.

22nd May 2006, 17:11

OJ says:

I'm a bit sad now, I have to admit. I would defend Geodyne and Bronxelf's (entirely heterosexual) right to kiss wherever they like. But I have a chip on my shoulder and am having a pissing contest for objecting to "hot girl on girl action" comments? That's nice.

I'm going to be thinking twice about a lot of stuff...

22nd May 2006, 17:13

spinboy says:

Oh and phoenix I saw the tags originally, my eyes keep fooling me and I keep thinking its saying "grills kissing"

22nd May 2006, 17:13

Hurricane Magnet says:

Working as I do with fourteen year old children, I dare say that they're likely to act more mature than some of the comments I've seen to this picture.

How sadly jejune. Whether the kiss was strictly platonic of the beginning of something else entirely, who cares? It's two people kissing. It happens. Don't any of you with the witless comments have access to soft-core pornohraphy rentals? The Suicide Girls website? Maybe a copy of National Geographics?A cup to catch the drool as it spills from your lips in Pavlovian response to the prospect of seeing something you'll toss off to and yet never, tragically, be a part of?

I might be cheap, and love my thrills that way, but at least I can pretend to be adult at times.

22nd May 2006, 17:17

phoenix says:

HI spinboy - I knew someone who wrote a poem called "two answerphones in love" once - ;), actually I didn't put that tag but it is exactly the description of the photo I guess

22nd May 2006, 17:29

Helen says:

I feel let down phoenix, no puns?!?

22nd May 2006, 17:31

Geodyne says:

OJ, I think what happened here is that you were not in a position to understand an in-joke and took offence without understanding the context behind it. Without the back story, I can see how that would happen.

The "pissing contest" and "chip on the shoulder" comments were not directed at you. I apologise if you saw them that way.

22nd May 2006, 17:32

phoenix says:

no on this thread it would be too coarse(t)

22nd May 2006, 17:34

Geodyne says:

*groans*

22nd May 2006, 17:36

Euphro says:

Everything has been a bit too staid.

22nd May 2006, 17:41

OJ says:

Thanks for the clarification Geodyne.

22nd May 2006, 17:42

Helen says:

: )

22nd May 2006, 17:42

spinboy says:

Oh I love that metaphor phoenix. At least I think its one of those. Its quite cute indeed.

22nd May 2006, 17:45

phoenix says:

I could refer to the fact that some people might whale bone each other another time but that could be taken the wrong way again!

22nd May 2006, 17:48

spinboy says:

I thought corsets are starting to be made out of steel and carbonfibre these days?

22nd May 2006, 17:53

Geodyne says:

The bones have been made out of steel for a long time.

22nd May 2006, 17:55

phoenix says:

I know but it wouldn't be as good a pun - well OK - you'd have to steel yourself

22nd May 2006, 17:56

Hurricane Magnet says:

I'll direct this to the Elf, because I'm not sure if the double entendre will be lost in Transatlantic translation, but in keeping with the puns, have you noticed how special this line of dialogue has become?

22nd May 2006, 17:58

spinboy says:

I'm sure there could be a slightly less dodgy joke about bonding too.

22nd May 2006, 17:59

daz says:

Geodyne says:
But Daz and Gael? I am going to *kill* both of you.


But whyyyy? :)

*looks innocent*

22nd May 2006, 18:49

alfie says:

Ok, I think there are a lot of interesting elements to this conversation, but I'm only going to add to one of them

This image is not a highlight worthy image, but not for the reasons of 'cliqueness' posited above; it's just not a particularly well shot image (although we love it for all the reasons we do!).

I can understand that some modders added more images over this weekend of shots that they ordinarily wouldnt to celebrate belfs graduation in their own way, so there's no reason to have any bad feeling about it.

22nd May 2006, 19:07

lifeofreilly (jonathan_reilly-at-yahoo-dot-com) says:

This is all for fun and games- right? Fun? Happy?

Is there some sort of ego thing about not getting your photo highlighted that I missed? Does this G guy not get his stuff highlighted and he's jealous?

It was a party. The people who run the damn site were there. There were shenanigans and hijinks and they decided to highlight the photos. BFD.

This isn't an Art Gallery. It's for *pictures that people take with their phones*. And I love it. But some people apparently take this too seriously.

Some people will always find a reason to get their privates in a twist about something, or piss on something to which they weren't invited, or just generally spread the crap around.

Grumpy people. This "G" guy. Whatever. He's cranky. He thinks things aren't being done the way they should be. If he feels strongly enough he'll start his own moblog site.

Or you know, he'll keep complaining. As is his right. A right to leave a floater in the pool. A right to alienate people. Good times. Go Him.

Let him be cranky. This thing has a /ignore function somewhere- right?


I *loved* the photo. But then again- you'll find that kind of stuff ALL over my moblog. Because I'm that guy. :)

Congrats Av! Have a hell of a good time. Have MORE of a hell of a good time. For once, Alfie- I'm jealous of one of *your* parties... :)

22nd May 2006, 20:50

phoenix says:

you know what I don't give a toss if my photo is highlighted or not - I really don't - I like the fact someone has chosen to - but it's not the be all and end all of my world

22nd May 2006, 21:02

bronxelf says:

Jon-

Nail.
Hit.
Head.

22nd May 2006, 21:06

Geodyne says:

Er....Jon?

Not his party. ;-)

22nd May 2006, 21:20

phoenix says:

he he

22nd May 2006, 21:25

g says:

alfie: 'this is not a highlight worthy image'

if you disagree bronxelf take it up with your boss. whether i get a HL has zero to do with this. get that. i'm looking out for my many moblog brothers and sisters who have taken HL worthy pictures and don't get recognition for that. mods seem to get irked everytime someone mentions cliqueyness but at the same time you fail to see that you are perpetuating the claim. i don't care how many enemies i make standing up for what i believe in either so expect more of the same and to suggest that moblog employee pictures have more worth is an insult to every single person who uses this fantastic site

22nd May 2006, 21:41

bronxelf says:

As usual, the point has gone sailing over your head like a Boeing aircraft, so I will use small words.

I dont care that the photo was highlighted.

I don't care that it was de-highlighted.

I couldnt care less either way.

But the only person who was whining about it being highlighted (and bonus points for being an anonymous coward about it) was you.

That was the nail. Hit. Head.

You enjoy making everything into a political statement. "my moblog brothers and sisters" my. ass.

Spare me.

I did not say that mbuk employees photos have more worth. You do make a rotten habit of putting words in the mouths of others.

All I did say is that the only people Im answerable to for what I highlight are Alfie and mat. And for the record? I am not employed by MBUK anyway. And just to make this clear: I didn't highlight this image. Euphro did.


And further? I am the wrong person to whine to about cliqueyness, since I couldnt possibly care less if it is or it isnt. I am not of the school that believes that everyone should get a gold star so no one feels left out. I'm sure other people care about that. I don't. Never have, and I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for me to start, either.


Nice try though.

22nd May 2006, 22:03

lifeofreilly says:

"(Moblog) politics are vicious precisely because the stakes are so small."

Hank Kissinger

(It's 'Merica over here and I'll call him Hank if'n I wanna)

So- you are getting all butt-hurt out of solidarity with your moblog brothers and sisters who are hurt when *their* photo's aren't highlighted? It's not you?

You are taking one for the team? Who are you- the Che Guevara of the online photo set? Is there a hew and cry coming from antenna-tops of mobloggers all over because their photo didn't get highlighted?

ORLY?

Look man- It's MOBLOG. Anyone who's feelings become that hurt over something as utterly insignificant as a way to show you friends your drunken antics in an email link- needs a goddamn twinkie and a nap.

Let me drop in to the vernacular for
this one:

"Yo man, Don't be Hatin'!"

Take a step back.

Take a deep breath. Have that Twinkie (or MARS Bar or whatever you people have over there). Take a nap. Realize that no one is trying to victimize anyone. People are having fun.

Please tell me that you aren't so uptight that you are opposed to people having fun? I know that that is the typical Brit stereotype, but the photos I've spent the morning looking at completely dispel *that* myth...

I don't know you well enough to like or dislike you. I am sure you don't care. This makes two of us. But really? *Really*? No one likes a whiner. Or is that Wanker?

22nd May 2006, 22:11

lifeofreilly (jonathan_reilly-at-yahoo-dot-com) says:

Oh- and Geodyne? NICE party... :)

Well done indeed!

22nd May 2006, 22:12

bronxelf says:

"Back off man, he's a scientist."


(reference to lifeofreilly, who is, in fact, a scientist.)

22nd May 2006, 22:15

phoenix says:

Hey everyone step away from the pixels and go and do something else - it's time for a break from all this surely ;)

22nd May 2006, 22:17

Rich says:

What the fuck


I dunno, I turn my backs for five minutes and look what happens.

Anyway, if you'll all look on page 74, subsection C paragraph 3 of your moblog orientation booklet you'll see the rules governing highlights during times of massed moblog gatherings/parties/meets. If i could draw your attention to the line beginning "All bets are off during this time". Yeah it's not a great picture but partly moblog is about capturing the moment and sometimes the moment is people's response to it. You dig? I know you dig. And in this case the response is, predictably, LOLesbians.

And seeing as lesbians are the best of all the ians, who can blame them.

To sum up: You're all twats.

22nd May 2006, 22:33

Rich says:

If anyone's mislaid their copy of the moblog orientation manual please request it by the usual telepathic channels.

22nd May 2006, 22:35

GregErin says:

boing!

22nd May 2006, 22:37

anonymous says:

I just walked in the door and am now laughing my quite sizable ass off. Thank you lifeoreilly, rich and b'elf. :)

22nd May 2006, 22:44

daz, not logged in, says:

Sorry, the above was me.

22nd May 2006, 22:45

phoenix says:

Jeez Rich (the beast with two backs) :) glad to hear you are better (perhaps?) :)

22nd May 2006, 22:49

ookiine says:

uNF!

22nd May 2006, 22:55

Rich says:

oh yeah

i'm a twat too!

22nd May 2006, 23:20

lifeofreilly (jonathan_reilly-at-yahoo-dot-com) says:

Always glad to help.

But I do agree. The poor guy got absolutely jumped. We've all shot off our mouths before and then realized that it was a bad idea- right?

Time to make nice nice

22nd May 2006, 23:27

lifeofreilly (jonathan_reilly-at-yahoo-dot-com) says:

"Time to make nice nice"

I realize that this is not within the vocabulary of one Bronxelf. Just agree to kill him later. Much Much later.:)

22nd May 2006, 23:28

Lee(leeinlimbo-at-gmail-dot-com) says:

Just looks like two charming ladies having a bit of a mock-snog to me. What's all the bloody noise about? You'd think you'd never seen non-partner girlfriends kiss before.

22nd May 2006, 23:32

bronxelf says:

Baby, not only is it not in my vocabulary, I doubt it's in Rich's either, and I KNOW it's not in Hurricane Magnet's.

However your Che comment beats "how depressingly jejune" only by a hair.


I think I broke something laughing.

XX.

I have to visit you soon.

22nd May 2006, 23:33

yourhermione says:

what makes a photo highlight-worthy? Seriously.

22nd May 2006, 23:41

nige says:

yh, still thumping the hornets nest with a massive stick. hehe!

;)

22nd May 2006, 23:43

bronxelf says:

crap, comment posted to wrong post.

pay no attention... move along..

22nd May 2006, 23:43

bronxelf says:

Sorry I had posted it to the wrong photo. :)

Sorry, sorry,,

22nd May 2006, 23:47

Rich says:

No come on, I like G, on the whole he's on the side of the angels. He just has his own ideas about stuff, is all. And that's no bad thing.

Anyway, what nakes an image highlight-worthy? Personal taste of the mods. I'm sure we've all got unwritten rules in our heads that would all just about match were you to scoop them out of our brains with a mind-spoon. The graph on page 17 explains everything clearly. Also please note appendix 4.

22nd May 2006, 23:50

yourhermione says:

My appendix went bad and was removed. Dangit.

22nd May 2006, 23:55

nige says:

*rofl at al of rich's comments* feckin' hilararious!

22nd May 2006, 23:58

puddlepuff says:

Hey I missed a tread,.....

23rd May 2006, 08:28

FilbertFox says:

i missed it too

23rd May 2006, 08:45

puddlepuff says:

Well looking back on it,.. I don't think we missed shite :)

23rd May 2006, 08:46

Steve says:

Ooh now I'm extra gutted that I missed it. (The party and the thread)

Just a thought wasn't OJ more complaining about the objectification of lesbians rather than the subject matter? I still have trouble deciding whether or not some of the shots I see and take are just pretty or exploiting. I think that the above is in the pretty and fun category, but I can see how the comments could easily drag it down into the realm of adolecent wank fantasies. But does this mean that we should never take these shots? should we censor ourselves or just rise above it?

The only "minority" that I am part of is being vege, so I doubt that I have the capacity to know just how hurtful things like this can be.

23rd May 2006, 11:16

OJ says:

Yes, that's exactly the point I was making Steve, thank you for recognising it.

I would not advocate censoring ourselves from taking these shots at all - just the opposite.

But I would point out that you have to view a moblog shot within the context of the whole page - and that context includes the tag "faux girl on girl action" and the objectionable wanking comments (the latter aren't necessarily Phoenix's responsibility, the former is).

It's interesting that both Bronxelf and Geodyne picked up on the "faux" element in completely the opposite way to the way I view it. Both - in a conciliatory fashion it must be said - were at pains to point out their heterosexuality. As if that mitigates everything else that's going on. And in many people's eyes it does - the straight women posing as if they were lesbians, but with the essential understanding that they are not, purely for the benefit of salacious male viewers has become relatively commonplace (apparently). That's something I am always going to critique and have a grown up conversation about.

Almost incidentally it's now clear that's not what's happening in this picture - because the context of Geodyne and Bronxelf's friendship and kiss was subsequently explained. And for what it's worth, I think that's a lovely story and a lovely picture and a shame it was masked by all the HGOGA. However that's *not* the context it was presented in in the first place. Look again at how it's tagged.

I'm not sure that this site is ready for such a conversation though - when some comments show that people haven't got past Gay People 101 ie. Jeer salaciously at the gays and they'll be aggrieved.

[applysarcasmfilter]Because as we all know real lesbians are dour humourless whingers, far better the faux lesbians who'll put on a floor show for you.[/applysarcasmfilter]

I hope these rather lengthy comments will be taken in the spirit of thoughtful debate that they are intended. I don't fancy being blacklisted as a jealous killjoy.

23rd May 2006, 12:02

Steve says:

Well some of my best friends are lesbian... well imaginary friends... I guess that's the kind of comment that plays into the objectivication arguement. It's hard to break social programming, but that's no excuse not to try.

23rd May 2006, 12:07

Joe says:

OJ, your intelligent,measured and creative input into this entire community, would always ensure that, even if there was a "blacklist", you would never be on it.

Thanks for putting accross your views in a manner that opens this subject for debate.

alas there will always be the people who comment before they properly think it through.

23rd May 2006, 12:12

OJ says:

What a nice thing to say Joe, thank you.

23rd May 2006, 12:23

phoenix says:

Well I guess I should change that perhaps - it was in response to the joky comments and faux joke comments I suppose. The tag two girls kissing has disappeared now as well and that wasn't put up by me but a more truthful description I reckon. There were double ironies going on in some cases in my case but I don't want to get into this debate. I am almost 50 and have been through that dialectic in the 70's in spades - it isn't new OJ - really isn't OK. If it has offended or misrepresented in any way then mea cupla mea culpa mea maxima culpa. The fact that this whole debate is allowed to happen on Moblog and people are willing to engage in and reflect on it in different contexts shows that things have moved on a little bit however I suppose...

23rd May 2006, 12:51

OJ says:

Thanks for responding Phoenix. I wouldn't make such lengthy critical comments on someone else's blog lightly. And don't I know that some of these arguments have been going on since the 70s. Don't know whether to laugh or cry about that in these supposedly postmodern times.

Whatever double ironies there are for you, are sadly lost on me as I don't know you. You are under no compulsion to talk about them.

23rd May 2006, 13:04

Geodyne says:

Pheonix, Joe, I agree with both of you.

As I said before, a little light-hearted fun got out of hand. To be honest, I think that the mere fact that people feel able to make such jokes is a sign of acceptance of people's different life choices. Whether Elf and I are hetero, gay or pink with purple polka dots is irrelevant to the issue at hand.

23rd May 2006, 13:06

phoenix says:

Ohh Geo I really don't think argument stands up - people are different - it's the case - wether you celebrate that or condem it is always going to be the case. When people choose to ignore it on the basis that it is trivial is the way forward i.e it has not become contentious anymore in anyone's eyes is the ideal. But we ain't there yet I guess...

23rd May 2006, 13:17

Rich says:

I attempted to make a similar point last night but hit delete in the end as it'd have got mangled going through the badjoke filter. And yes, it's all just a lot of jokey fun amongst friends and whatnot it's always good to be reminded that on in a public forum as wide as the interweb a throwaway larky comment isn't necessarily as throwaway or larky as it might first appear.
All women are dirty whores.

See? That's bad. I'm going to go away and think about what I've done now.

23rd May 2006, 13:18

Geodyne says:

Good points both, Pheonix and Rich.

I have to admit that I'm all about vive le difference and feel that a person's life choices are none of my business. I just don't grok closed-minded people who can't celebrate diversity.

23rd May 2006, 13:22

phoenix says:

Rich - thanks - there's the double irony really - you wanker...

I suppose anything that promotes stasis - is for me the enemy in these considerations. I'd rather be damned out of context - or even in context - than be damned totally without recourse to a comeback. I still think that there are many residuals in society based on a core or carapace of misconceptions that people are carrying around as intellectual baggage - the only enemy is ignorance for me.

23rd May 2006, 13:30

OJ says:

Phoenix, that last remark was so oblique I'm not quite sure what you're talking about.

I'm not sure I do agree with the nice liberal sentiment that when people can make jokes or not care anymore, it's all okay. People have always been able to make jokes - and to dismiss others as being "too PC" when they are challenged on it.

23rd May 2006, 13:36

phoenix says:

Follow it through - when the rules change - when society changes - then people need to revise their opinions - then notions of PCness needs to shift like all else. Otherwise you get stuff like thoecratic fascism rearing its ugly head as in the states. Now the Danish cartoons were a point in case as also conversations I have had about Jerry Springer with fundamentalist christians. Sometimes humour is a debunker of conflict as well as a compounder of ignorance.

23rd May 2006, 13:44

phoenix says:

And OJ - of course it's not that simple - your argument is a straw man argument because it states its premise and then answers it - I'm all for debate - once debate is stifled then that is far more dangerous than any flaunting or confirmation of ways of living...

23rd May 2006, 13:46

OJ says:

I thought a straw man argument was one that misrepresented an opponents viewpoint, just to oppose it.

I can't see where I did that. Rhetoric is not my strong point. Respect is.

My reference to PC-ness didn't assume that it's some notion which needs to progress - I think it's a fallacy propogated by the status quo to silence dissenting voices.

23rd May 2006, 13:53

teflon says:

OJ: I was going to try to make this point yesterday but wasn't sure I'd be able to make it as succinctly and obscenely as Rich. As the third comment points out, the HGOGA comment tends to attract Google's attention, and it was a jokey attempt to try to pump up the number of pageviews for this image. I'd say the amount of commenters has managed to do that fairly well though.

yourhermione: there's a thread about 'what should be a highlight' on the forum which may (or may not) answer your question...

23rd May 2006, 13:56

phoenix says:

Ah right I thought you were setting up the ideal liberal to knock them down that's what I meant by that. You see just setting up a "liberal" is a stereotype as well.

What the PCness or the notion of PCness progressing.

I don't believe in anything to do with PCness - I do think that an open no holds barred debate is good though - I'd really like to get away from PCness altogether - I have been through all that personal is political stuff before and seen it really damage quite a few people who have been slapped down and it was fascistic in tone - at that time and inthat context it was extreme - but it did an immense amount of damage. Debate yes - by all means but thou shalt not - noo - it's negative energy in my book.

23rd May 2006, 13:59

Rich says:

Good point Teflon! And now of course any onanist on the hunt for photographic representations of the pure and special love that can only be expressed between two women for the purposes of furthering their hobby will hopefully read this, and...

continue their search for real porn.

23rd May 2006, 14:01

OJ says:

I did "get" that Teflon but the extent of the irony was quite ambiguous.

I guess it all comes back to context and to that thorny issue of in-jokes and to what extent you have a right to be offended if your failure is not being part of the in-crowd.

And I don't think my contention about the fact that the picture looked like a setup-girl-on-girl posing-pornographically in a pron fashion is a straw man at all. That was how I perceived it for reasons I've already stated, without the benefit of my injoke-specs.

edit: And I have emphatically *not* said Thou Shalt Not.

23rd May 2006, 14:02

Geodyne says:

Rich, I love you.

23rd May 2006, 14:13

Rich says:

Final word from me: OJ: you have seen the skoobies thread or sexy boy, come here dave, right? In the light of those two threads the irony is pretty unambiguously laid out. I'd gladly bet a small amount of money that in six months this thread'll be full of googlemong comments along the lines of woah hot or CAN AI TUCH UR BUM? People were more anticipating this thread's afterlife with the HGOGA comments. You become part of that "clique" simply by recognising that X could become like y.

Is all. Peace out, homies!

23rd May 2006, 14:16

Gael says:

Time for me to climb off the fence. Cos I was there, and understood the context, I initially thought this was 'just a bit of fun.' But in hindsight, someone has been hurt and i feel really bad about my part in it. We can all pat ourselves on the backs and say we applaud debate, blah, blah but the fact is that it is still really hard to be out in the UK in 2006. I've friends who've been spat at for just holding hands, all the posters for LGBT awareness week at my Uni were ripped down, I could go on and on. I pride myself on my sense of humour and broad-mindedness, but frankly i think this whole thread has run its course now.

23rd May 2006, 14:28

bronxelf says:

Sorry I'm in on this late, I was asleep. My body steadfastly refuses to get off of NYC swing shift time, so I seem to miss everything.

OJ- The thought of this being a problem didn't and doesn't occur to me, largely because in my life, it's a non-issue. At least a full 50% of my friends are not your standard issue "straights". Gay, bi, poly, kinky, furry. and terminally strange in ways that I can't even begin to describe. Many of them post to moblog and some even HAVE moblogs. And they can, do, and will, act however they think best both in public and in private. I couldn't care less about either. I love them all the same.

I am *by far*, not your standard-issue straight myself, but at I refuse to make this a political statement about anything.

The real irony is that the *true* in-joke of this is known by perhaps four people, two of whom are in the image, and was started by Caine, whom I can vouch for not being a standard-issue anything.

All that being said however, Im glad that a) you understand it now, OJ, but also b) I really want to make it clear that in the end, I absolutely refuse to feel sorry for what other people (this really is NOT directed at you OJ, please read this disclaimer thoroughly) feel is some kind of charsmatic contest, that (boo hoo!) they arent in on.

In the vernacular: Fuck that noise.

Back in 1998, after going through (yet another) similar experience on usenet (the true wild west of the internet back then) I wrote something on my website which still holds up and I still back it.

It's too long to post the entire thing, but I do want to insert this little bit-- it's as true for me now as it was then. Some things? Never change:

In the end, intelligent people judge you by the strength of your personality and the traits therein. Not by the colour of your skin, or the length of your hair. But by how much your *personality* clicks with their *own*. And I will not apologize for thinking that not *everyone* is created equal, in that respect. Because not everyone is.


All of it (and all of it actually goes directly to what I think about this thread) can be found here(linky)

*kisses Geo again, because I can.*

23rd May 2006, 15:18

OJ says:

I am loath to reply to this because I'm sick of the sound of my own (metaphorical) voice on this subject and I've made my point! But it would be rude not to respond to Bronxelf's thoughtful reply above.

I don't disagree with what you have to say about groups Bronxelf - my beef was specifically with the objectification issue. And yes, I'm glad you don't see me as a victim as I certainly don't see myself as that either! I do however have an opinion and no compunction about expressing it, as you can see.

Tell you what though, I may not be a victim I get pretty sick of being "the lesbian" and only that in some online circles as soon as I raise my voice on a gay subject. Let's hope that I turn out to be unremarkable in the spectrum of gay-bi-poly-kinky mobloggers.

23rd May 2006, 15:58

bronxelf says:

This is IN NO WAY offensive-- HONEST:

You are already.

BELIEVE me. *LMAO*

In my mind? You are *by no means* "the lesbian". Or even "a lesbian". My world is *far* too full of people who are not standard issue to just look at you as anything more than OJ. Just you. No more than that.

And that, in the end, is all you ever need to be.

23rd May 2006, 16:01

phoenix says:

"And I don't think my contention about the fact that the picture looked like a setup-girl-on-girl posing-pornographically in a pron fashion is a straw man at all."

I didn't say that - that was not what I said in the context of straw men - I qualified it later...neither did I set it up...

Gael - debate is important - despite prevailing conditions. Ripping down posters is the opposite of debate surely.

I give the final word to Danah Boyd (someone who I hold in high esteem on the net at them moment) who I will quote from a post she made recently in the context about corporate lockdown of spaces for youth:


"This legislation will not protect minors, but it will continue to erode their (and our) freedoms. There are so many amazing things that teens do with social technologies. To lose all of this because of the culture of fear is terrifying to me. I found out about my alma mater talking to strangers online in the 90s. I learned about what it means to be queer, how to have confidence in myself and had so many engaging conversations. Sure, i found some sketchy people too, but i learned to ignore them just as i learned to ignore the guys who whistled and honked from their cars when i walked to the movie theater with my best friend. We need to give youth the knowledge to know the risks of their actions, the structures to be able to come to us when something goes wrong and the opportunity to grow up and connect to their peers. Eliminating cultural artifacts because we don't understand them does not make our lives any safer, but it does obliterate so many positive interactions."

That about says the debate issue for me - read the post in context at :

http://www.zephoria.org/thoughts/archives/2006/05/11/antisocial_netw.html

My point being there's a whole space out there that didn't exist before in which you decide by the quality of interactions on how you judge people. People are complex - but the peer to peer thing and those interactions can create value above and beyond the "perceived" structures. People are far too complex to be "the anything" these days is my point I suppose.

And I think Moblog is still a great place because it exists and everything can be explored and turned over on here...



23rd May 2006, 16:54

OJ says:

You may well ask Swamprose!

Hot Girl On Girl Action. I was trying to avoid repeating it but what the hell....

I'm off to kick Daz's arse for saying the word "panties" to me. ;-)

23rd May 2006, 17:14

phoenix says:

in fact I am pretty cut up about all this and am a hairsbreadth from totalling my blog once again - I think I have been accused of lack of respect when all I was doing was trying to lessen a situation that I perceived as getting out of hand despite the in-jokes - no Phoar however ironic from me. I was asked to take the photo for a specific purpose - the comments then came thick and fast and then I put up "faux" to try and say hey wait a minute - this was not the intention - so people miss each other again and again and we have a great big debate about the whole thing - i am very near to imploding the whole thing at the moment - the only reason I'm not is that the issues raised are important but I feel pretty minced at the moment for no other reason than I posted and then tagged - context is all - and decontexualised posting and tagging to an outsider without the full story is one of the things I do worry about

23rd May 2006, 17:57

OJ says:

I'm really, genuinely sorry that you're cut up Phoenix as I feel quite responsible for that.

I don't want to perpetuate the conversation if that makes you feel worse so I'm not quite sure what to do. Please don't total your blog (I wasn't aware that you had done so before).

23rd May 2006, 18:27

phoenix says:

it's OK - I just wobbled out of orbit for a second there

23rd May 2006, 18:34

bronxelf says:

Oh HELL no.

I don't think you should take down a *damned thing*. Fuck that.

You have *NOTHING* to apologize for.

23rd May 2006, 23:13

phoenix says:

I am not going to take anything down at all...

23rd May 2006, 23:16

alfie says:

Darn tootin' - No-ones cut up about this if you look at the comments closely, it's just people talking, and the medium of words on screen is one prone to misunderstanding at the best of times. Lets all chill out and like, smoke drugs and watch lesbo porn or something.

23rd May 2006, 23:23

bronxelf says:

thanks, Phoenix. You know I think youre just fabulous.

xx


Alf-- thanks honey. I appreciate that.

23rd May 2006, 23:34

Rich says:

I believe the drugtaking/pornwatching regulations are covered in volume 2.
Unfortunately thanks to my constant substance abuse I can't remember where it is, and my wanking-impared vision means I can't look for it.


Carses.

23rd May 2006, 23:44

lifeofreilly says:

My advice to you all is to take a lesson from BronxElf and become much more comfortable with Offending People. Work on adding STFU to your daily dialogue. Don't promote the stodgy stereotype... :)

Look at us- we Americans are GREAT at that.

Wait- maybe not the most shining example...

25th May 2006, 21:14

Add a comment


(P) what's this?

Track updates to this post with rssthis rss feed