Wednesday, December 4, 2013

Breast Cancer Survivor Picture "Controversy": Grow Up, People

It seems like the main topic of discussion in my mind, lately, is just how hyper-sensitive society is becoming.  It seems like no one can say anything without being called offensive or a bigot.  Hell, apparently it is racially offensive for white girls to dress up in a geisha outfit without first asking for permission from . . . well, I guess from every person of Japanese descent?

But now, the "controversy" is coming from a picture featured in a headline article in the New York Times.  The article was about raising awareness of the high risk of cancer in Israeli women, and their lack of access to gene testing.  That seems like a fairly noble topic of discussion, but the prudes and childish weirdoes got all upset over this photo:


Oh my god!  Women have NIPPLES?!  Why the hell would the New York Times let that cat out of the bag?!  I thought we were all supposed to just pretend that there is nothing but a void underneath women's clothing!

This image was not presented for the purpose of objectifying the woman's breast.  This picture is of an actual breast cancer survivor.  On her left breast is a scar from a lumpectomy.  The picture was meant to be provacative, but not in a sexual way.  But of course, some asshats didn't see it that way.  Some are arguing that the image does objectify this woman because it doesn't show her face (nevermind the fact that the woman wished to remain anonymous).

There are even some people who are claiming that it is offensive because of her star of David tattoo because it "reminds them of the Holocaust."  The woman is proudly Jewish, and she got the tattoo in order to express pride in her heritage.  This is all the better considering the article is about Israeli women (calm down, Jersey, I know that not all Israeli women are Jewish).

But of course, the main controversy is over the fact that her nipple is almost exposed.  Three words:  Jesus.  Fucking.  Christ.  For the life of me, I can't understand why some elements of American society are so uncomfortable with the notion of sexuality that their delicate sensibilities can't even handle a partial breast exposure.

"But Jack, think about the children!"  C'mon, can we please stop pretending like kids have never, ever seen boobs?  Every single one of us can remember a time when we saw a pair of boobs that we probably weren't "supposed" to see.  And as far as I can tell, we're not all a bunch of sexual deviants out to rape each other.

I am all about teaching our children the virtues of being responsible with their sexuality, but I would argue that America's attempt to make children ashamed of their sexuality is harmful.  Instead, we need to teach our children that the human form is a beautiful thing.  The image above is not pornographic, and it is not meant to make its male readers have ants in their pants.  The image is meant to show the beauty of the human form despite nature's best efforts to destroy it.

American society needs to stop acting so damn prudish.  Shying away from a partially exposed breast is beyond childish.  To those whose delicate sensibilities are offended by that photo I say this: Grow up.

10 comments:

Anonymous said...

Just can't get away from tits, can you?

Okay by me, bub. I love 'em.

Philander Best

micky said...

Yeah, I hear you.
I too am growing increasingly impatient with these fucking weenies always looking for some justice thats not needed.

During a typical left vs right race debate some moron moonbat uttered
"Whites with powder cocaine go to treatment.
Blacks with crack go to jail."

As part of my own sensitivities I got pissed because because I perceived this statement as saying;
"The evil white conservative prude wants to lock up as many blacks as he can and let as many whites off the hook as he can".

Point n case, while I find these daily accusations of racism being loosely tossed at me very fucking offensive, the same shithead who said this gets his panties in a bunch every time I curse or call someone an asshole.
Seriously, imho its the left that bestows upon us some of the most offensive shit I've ever seen and heard.

Jack Camwell said...

Welcome back, micky =)

What is truly troublesome is that with the scenarios you mention, it seems as though there is a push to create a mode of discourse in which white people are allowed to be criticized for anything, while people of color are not allowed to be criticized.

Stereotypical "bad traits" of white people are permissible, while even mentioning stereotypes of people of color is deemed impermissible and "racist."

The basic message is that white people should not be offended when they are criticized as a group, and those same whites who may criticize people of color should be shunned.

And those whites who are offended shouldn't be, because whites "historically oppressed people of color," and now it's "our turn."

The sad part is that 99.99% of liberals won't be able to understand why these are bad things.

Anonymous said...

Jacob Marley said

Time to wean yourself away from tits and start decking your balls with sprigs of holly, ivy, hemlock and arbor vitae, then place a garland around your neck with a locket filled with mistletoe swinging gently above your cock. Place a crown of gold studded with jewels on your head, if it's cold where you are put on an ermine cloak lined with scarlet velvet, ride in on your clean white ass with a tray full of brandied eggnog, and let the Christmas Cheer begin.

micky said...

Jacob...

Wean yourself away from tits and decorate your balls ?
I noticed you didnt mention just what gender these sexual aesthetics would be advantageous to.

Silverfiddle said...

I share your distaste for the professional offense-takers and the perpetually offended, but having said that, what was the purpose of showing an exposed nipple? Generate some buzz around a flagging 'news' organization that has lost its mojo for all but the most liberal-lefty indoctrinated?

I understand your point, and this is not earth-shattering, but people also defecate, it's natural, so why not show that as well?

This is a fading old grey lady trying to lift her sagging sales.

Micky said...

"I share your distaste for the professional offense-takers and the perpetually offended, but having said that, what was the purpose of showing an exposed nipple? "

What would be the purpose of "not" showing it ?

Anonymous said...

Coprophagia Dallyway said

What is the purpose of not showing a hairy ass taking a shit all over the face of naked babe tied to a table shouting, "Give me more. I love the taste of your shit, man. It makes me come. Bring your friends. I want to die trying to eat my way through a mountain of steaming, freshly laid turds!"

Micky said...

Uh, shitting on babies is more offensive than nipples ?
I'm just guessing ?

Matter of fact, even babies like nipples better than being shit on.

Kind of ironic how people are upset over the supposed shock value of a nipple and then post stuff like yours.

Seriously, breasts are primarily a function that nurtures young humans into childhood, a feeding mechanism.
Only in America are we so sexually fucking deviated that the breasts sexual implications prevail over their real purpose.

Anonymous said...

Dicken Balz said

Given the choice I'll take TIT instead of TAT any day.