Thinking again about what I posted, making some threads image-able (as in, the pictures are embedded in thread, not linked) would make a specific area of the site change in tenor, so if you have bandwidth or passing off as work issues, you could ignore that thread, or turn images off (my style sheet forces them off, for instance).
I think it would really change the feel and usefulness of b.org for me. Things do change though.
Personally, I am not in favor of having images embedded. This is the one place I can read casually wherever I am and not worry if someone glances over. And I used that functionality a lot when I had a job too. Especially a thread like Beep Me that I click as soon as I see there is a message but I'd be very wary of doing that if images were a possibility. We're not Tumblr. I kinda hope we never are.
If we want an image thread, that's easy enough for me to not subscribe to but if we're adding images to other threads, less easy to avoid.
but I do love our clean uncluttered text look.
I both like it and like being able to choose to follow links.
His response? "Tonight. I'm ugly right now". WTF?
I don't know whether I hope it's a mistype of "on it" or he really thinks being ugly is a reason for not making deadlines.
So, the art display was large (2.5 x 3 feet) close-up photographs of vulvas, large enough that it was clear that's what they were from 100 yards away. I did not divert from my course to read the artistic/polticial statements or whatever that were placed next to the photographs. (I was not shocked; I went to a college where we had Clitoris Awareness Week. But I did wonder how many poor innocent Ohioans were shocked.)
Sigh. When it comes to aesthetically unappealing parts of the human anatomy, i think vulvas and scrotums (scroti?)top the list.
I went to a college where we had Clitoris Awareness Week.
That's probably helpful in college.
Today I walked across a university campus and saw, from a distance, a public art display that made me think 1) ah, college, and 2) what is it with the modern abhorrence of pubic hair. Anyone want to guess what it was?
I heard about that on the news the other night, because the Students For Jesus or some group was trying to prevent it from happening. Also the news called them "vaginas," which I pretty seriously doubted without even needing to see the exhibit.
(People really need to stop substituting "vagina" for "vulva," because, DAMN, there is a WORLD of difference.)
(People really need to stop substituting "vagina" for "vulva," because, DAMN, there is a WORLD of difference.)
For real, though. I'm afraid that ship has sailed, and blame Eve Ensler.
For real, though. I'm afraid that ship has sailed, and blame Eve Ensler.
I know, damn it, but I really want people to get my anatomy right. I feel like if you can't name it properly, you don't need to be hanging out in close proximity to it.
It's wrong, yes, but I think the vagina / vulva ship has really sailed.
Though the vulva ship might be more of a submarine...
Little clitoris periscope...
