[LAU] [Fwd: Re: Fuck your sexism]

[James Mckernon]

I think that's a fairly silly comparison. Your example is essentially
neutral: a wallpaper without sexual imagery doesn't cater in
particular to any group, at least not on gender/sexuality grounds. An
image with sexual imagery manifestly does cater more to one group than
others (albeit, in this case, probably only very slightly).

J

On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 8:55 PM, Louigi Verona <louigi.verona at gmail.com> wrote:
> "I think that including an image of a 'hot' female tacitly sends the
> message that those who are viewing it are likely to be (heterosexual)
> males, i.e., that this is a 'boy's space'."
>
>
> Using that same logic, NOT including an image that is considered "hot"
> by one sex or the other must then mean that we are tacitly send the
> message that those who are viewing are likely to be asexual, that this is
> "asexual space". And some asexual people might get offended.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Linux-audio-user mailing list
> Linux-audio-user at lists.linuxaudio.org
> http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
>