“But he’s a man, he’s free from the moral obligation to be the perfect decorative object.”

That comment is misandronistic. Discussing degree truly is a much larger, very long topic.

but like the topic above I am shutting up about this one too if anyone feels the need to hear my opinion on it they can email me.

oh and thanks Kate.

To be fair, Crossbuster didn’t bring it up.

Having said that, I second that this is not the place for this discussion.

But again, we discuss this kind of thing all the time — but not on this thread, which is about an entirely different topic.

You are somewhat correct. If you’ll notice I mention the stifling as well as forcing of religion as a negative. Anti-religious efforts (to be very ambiguous) aren’t completely innocent. My sentiments aren’t exactly fueled by historic conditioning or a passing reading of Richard Dawkins and Philosophy 101, but that’s another conversation altogether.

To be short, me having The Crossbuster(TM!) as my icon is equated to someone wearing a cross around their neck. Do people wear crosses to offend people like me? Absolutely not. Do people who wear crosses care if I am offended by their cross wearing? Probably not. People wear crosses for themselves and/or their faith. In these respects I am no different.

Same for me, I don’t really care that anyone gets offended by my belief’s. I just find it surprising that someone does in this website considering the accepting nature of most of the people here (but perhaps that only applies to being fat?). Either way, insult and offense is far from the “Whole Point”.

If shock were my purpose I definitely wouldn’t be conversing this way with you. I apologize that I remind you of unreasonable people that make shallow points in an effort to promote their pseudo-intellectual agenda. If it makes you feel better those people frustrate me just as much.

I think that I’ve taken up too much of Ms.Hardings comment space with this topic so if any of you want to continue it feel free to E-mail me Luisdesiqueira@gmail.com.

PS – couldn’t find a good place to put this but… I suppose Kate, fillyjonk and sweetmachine don’t allow the thrashing of skinny people for the same reason I’d find the thrashing of Christians reprehensible.

It’s a bit different with Christianity because Christians have for so long been the privileged class – and of course the history there isn’t innocent – but consider that Kate, fillyjonk and sweetmachine don’t allow trashing thin people here. Why do you suppose that is?

Personally I’m not offended by your icon; it more just makes me tired, because teaching undergraduate theology classes mean I regularly come across freshmen who read one Richard Dawkins book and think that they have some privileged access upon the inherent value of EVERY religion that’s ever existed — usually amounting to some really well-thought-out position like “Religion is bad!” (But of course secular post-enlightenment modernity is not AT ALL historically-conditioned and has NEVER EVER given rise to ANYTHING bad, ever.) Your crossbuster icon reminds me, personally, of discussions that never rise above that level of nuance; which may not be fair to you at all. Maybe you have a more nuanced understanding of the issues involved. But my subjective reaction is as immaterial as your personal circumstances in how you came by that icon. You’re taking a symbol that a lot of people in the world cherish and see as intrinsic to their identity, and putting a circle and a slash around it. That’s what gives it its coherence and meaning — the fact that it essentially represents the sentiment, “Christianity? Nuh-uh. Bad.” And, gee terwillikers, some people get offended. At least have the integrity to admit that that was both foreseeable and the whole point.

As a guy who loves this blog for it’s FA, Feminist, and awesome writing styles i find that certain people (generally NOT the bloggers) make comments that definitely do cross the line into misandry.

example:

“#
Meowser, on February 6th, 2008 at 9:39 pm Said:

Interestingly, going by his pic Tim is bald, ugly and FAT

But he’s a man, he’s free from the moral obligation to be the perfect decorative object.
”

If you think men are free from the prejudices of aesthetics miss Meowser… you are so wrong.

I can hear the faint whispers of “Your a nice guy, but I’m not into big guys” ripping through my mind right now.

2. My “cross barred icon” is called the “Crossbuster” and it is a symbol of a band called Bad Religion, my favorite band I might add. Bad Religion and the Crossbuster are >>>NOT<<< anti-Christianity. Browse over a few song lyrics and you’ll find they are a punk band with intelligent social/philosophical/religious/anti-religious commentary.

3. I don’t hate Christians, I judge my hatred/love for people on a purely individual basis. I do hate the ideals of Christianity/Bible though, just as you hate the ideals of sin (I’d imagine).

4. I find it odd that my Crossbuster is “insulting” to you. It is after all a symbol of my personal belief structure and therefore faith. I am an Atheist and very against the ideals (in totality) of all Abrahamic religions as I’ve come to know them. The Crossbuster is no more offensive to you than a regular Cross is to me. How would you feel if I told you that your Cross/Dove/Jesus Fish was offensive to Atheists and specifically me?

5. The Crossbuster is not meant to offend you/Christian’s, it is an expression of myself. I wouldn’t confine myself into solely being an antithesis to something I believe I am larger than. I should be permitted to express myself and my ideals freely without being criticized for it lest I do in a hostile fashion correct?

6. Not once did I attack religion or your religion in particular, I simply asked a question derived from establishing a correlation between two very similar things that are treated very differently in our society therefore exposing the implicit hypocrisy within it.

But thanks for asking.

1. Religion comes into the discussion because it is a mutable quality of human beings that American society does not voraciously ask the individual to change. Being fat is also a mutable quality of which our society constantly asks us to change. My question was basically, what is the difference in the view between the two? Some say fat is unhealthy and they provide “logical” data to support this “fact”. In the days of religious persecution (whichever days you choose, even in today’s world) the main justification of forced religion whether a religion was being forced on people or banned is that it’s “for other’s own good”. Essentially both boil down to lifestyle changes that should be dissected objectively by society so the individual has enough information to make up their own minds.