[WestIndianArchie]

http://jezebel.com/were-offering-10-000-...1502000514

Please Return of Kings writers tackle this pressing issue.

[samsamsam]

From the article

Quote:

The final images are gorgeous; there's a 99% chance that the originals are, too.

Cough, cough, bullshit, cough, cough...

[RandalGraves]

They have $10,000 to toss around?

[Daddy]

(01-16-2014 06:21 PM)RandalGraves Wrote:  

They have $10,000 to toss around?

The real question is, do women have a word?

[stg devil]

(01-16-2014 05:44 PM)WestIndianArchie Wrote:  

http://jezebel.com/were-offering-10-000-...1502000514

Please Return of Kings writers tackle this pressing issue.

I have a feeling they are shooting themselves in the foot here

[dads]

(01-16-2014 05:47 PM)samsamsam Wrote:  

From the article

Quote:

The final images are gorgeous; there's a 99% chance that the originals are, too.

Cough, cough, bullshit, cough, cough...

These pre-photoshopped images could reveal Lena Dunham to be a pimply faced aids-infested elephant and they'd still call her BEAUTIFUL.



Also love this bit:

Quote:

Dunham embraces her appearance as that of a real woman

A real woman in the sense that she... exists?

[Peregrine]

(01-16-2014 06:21 PM)RandalGraves Wrote:  

They have $10,000 to toss around?

Parent company Gawker Media was estimated to have made 30MM in 2009. So yes, yes they do.

[Bacchus]

Didn't know she was so hairy.

[Ziltoid]

What a truly ugly being.
I'd happily fuck a chubby bitch if she has a cute face, and some tits and ass come with the package... She has the curves of a fridge.

[commiejoe]

I would bang her, she's got them linebacker curves.

[Suits]

RVF fundraiser?

[Handsome Creepy Eel]

I don't get it. What are they trying to prove? Lena Dunham is ugly with photoshop and without it, and no one sane needs to contest that.

[funkyzeit]

So, why don't we take original pictures, put some subtle disgusting shit on them (pimples, folds of fat, bags under eye, slight moustache, crotch bulge, leg hair, armpit hair, slightly crossed eyes, whatever) and send them from some fake account?

[Statsi]

First comment is a feminist calling Jez out for it's bullshit and hypocrisy.

[tmason]

(01-17-2014 04:41 AM)Statsi Wrote:  

First comment is a feminist calling Jez out for it's bullshit and hypocrisy.

I jus LURV LURV LURV this quote:

Quote:

And this is just a sampling. This is what Vogue does — and yes, we already know in general what all of these magazines do — but now, on its cover, Vogue has a woman who rightfully declares that her appearance, with all of its perceived imperfections, shouldn't be hidden and doesn't need any fixing. Lena Dunham has spoken out, frequently, about society's insane and unattainable beauty standards. Dunham embraces her appearance as that of a real woman; she's as body positive as they come. But that's not really Vogue's thing, is it? Vogue is about perfection as defined by Vogue, and rest assured that they don't hesitate to alter images to meet those standards. It doesn't matter if any woman, including Lena, thinks she's fine the way she is. Vogue will find something to fix.

To be very clear: Our desire to see these images pre-Photoshop is not about seeing what Dunham herself "really" looks like; we can see that every Sunday night or with a cursory Google search. She's everywhere. We already know what her body looks like. There's nothing to shame here. Nor is this rooted in criticism of Dunham for working with Vogue. Entertainment is a business, after all, and Vogue brings a level of exposure that exceeds that of HBO.

This is about Vogue, and what Vogue decides to do with a specific woman who has very publicly stated that she's fine just the way she is, and the world needs to get on board with that. Just how resistant is Vogue to that idea? Unaltered images will tell.

If Vogue had their best photoshopper do this shit and THIS was the best they could come up with then

[Trim]

It's amazing how a feminist website can offer $10000 for some photographs and still claim women are obsessed.

[j r]

(01-16-2014 05:47 PM)samsamsam Wrote:  

From the article

Quote:

The final images are gorgeous; there's a 99% chance that the originals are, too.

Cough, cough, bullshit, cough, cough...

Among a certain crowd, the words gorgeous and beautiful no longer have any meaning. "Every woman is beautiful!"

[soup]

Ha Bacchus who is that ?

[samsamsam]

(01-17-2014 08:27 AM)j r Wrote:  

(01-16-2014 05:47 PM)samsamsam Wrote:  

From the article

Quote:

The final images are gorgeous; there's a 99% chance that the originals are, too.

Cough, cough, bullshit, cough, cough...

Among a certain crowd, the words gorgeous and beautiful no longer have any meaning. "Every woman is beautiful!"

Good point, they are the same fuckers who use the word "amazing" to describe everything lol.

[dads]

(01-17-2014 08:27 AM)j r Wrote:  

(01-16-2014 05:47 PM)samsamsam Wrote:  

From the article

Quote:

The final images are gorgeous; there's a 99% chance that the originals are, too.

Cough, cough, bullshit, cough, cough...

Among a certain crowd, the words gorgeous and beautiful no longer have any meaning. "Every woman is beautiful!"

"Beautiful" is now synonymous with "alive".

[runsonmagic]

Oh look, women body shaming other women and paying money to women's magazine do to it for them and then paying other women to make those women look bad, so they can feel prettier than the prettiest girls because pretty is just a social definition, and lena dunham is pretty because she isn't conventionally pretty. Yay feminism! #teamgirl

[commiejoe]

Do you think they paid the bounty?
http://jezebel.com/here-are-the-unretouc...1503336657

[darklightdispatch]

I still never understood why ugly chicks are more "real" than attractive ones. Reality affixes itself to you more strongly if you don't exercise and mark yourself up with nasty tattoos?!? lol

One big reason the manosphere is NOT the male version of feminism is that sites like rvf encourage men to improve themselves and take responsibility for the quality of their lives. Jezebel and every other feminist site does the exact opposite: reinforces weak, self-indulgent behavior and says everything is someone else's fault. They are extremely effective at encouraging their readers to be the worst version of themselves possible.

[WestIndianArchie]

Concern trolling!

[j r]

Word. I'm never trying to be real. I'm trying to be unreal.