Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


1 posted on 10/01/2010 8:50:03 AM PDT by rhema
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-32 next last
To: Caleb1411
Julia Baird harrumphs, "Has she no shame?"


2 posted on 10/01/2010 8:52:22 AM PDT by rhema ("Break the conventions; keep the commandments." -- G. K. Chesterton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: rhema

Oh for heaven’s sake. How silly to worry about the number of female characters in a cartoon.


3 posted on 10/01/2010 8:52:52 AM PDT by MEGoody (Ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: rhema
One in five female characters were "portrayed with some exposed skin between the mid-chest and upper thigh regions."

Heck, that's nothing: The female fish "Dori" in the movie Finding Nemo was COMPLETELY NAKED throughout the entire film! How outrageous is THAT?

4 posted on 10/01/2010 8:53:35 AM PDT by WayneS (Respect the 2nd Amendment; Repeal the 16th)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


5 posted on 10/01/2010 8:54:08 AM PDT by rhema ("Break the conventions; keep the commandments." -- G. K. Chesterton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: rhema
Baird was especially upset that cartoons might exaggerate the female physique: "One in four women was shown with a waist so small that, the authors concluded, it left 'little room for a womb or any other internal organs.' Maybe we could carry them in our purses?"

Strange. I had this Baird woman pegged as someone who would support a woman's right do whatever she wanted to with her womb, INCLUDING having it removed and carrying it around in a pocket. Maybe she's not as big a proponent of women's rights as she thinks she is...

;-)

6 posted on 10/01/2010 8:58:17 AM PDT by WayneS (Respect the 2nd Amendment; Repeal the 16th)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: rhema

women form 17 percent of crowd scenes in family films.

What a dunce. It is so obvious even I can see the reason.

You can’t go running off to every crowd scene when you are barefoot and pregnant, now can you. Sheeeesh.


7 posted on 10/01/2010 9:01:20 AM PDT by wita
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: rhema

“...the Geena Davis Institute on Gender in Media”

Seriously??


8 posted on 10/01/2010 9:01:23 AM PDT by Hacklehead (Note to Leftists- We Will Bury You (politically)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: rhema

Liberalism is a mental disease.


9 posted on 10/01/2010 9:02:01 AM PDT by reagan_fanatic (Obama, Pelosi and Reid - the Trio of Twits)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: rhema
There's more. One in five female characters were "portrayed with some exposed skin between the mid-chest and upper thigh regions."

I found one of our heroines who seems to be completely unclothed. Hubba hubba.

10 posted on 10/01/2010 9:08:08 AM PDT by GreenAccord (Bakon Akbar!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: rhema

Grievance-mongers such as Baird are, uniformly: terribly unhappy people who seek to validate their misery by tearing at the joy of others.


11 posted on 10/01/2010 9:08:56 AM PDT by andy58-in-nh (America does not need to be organized: it needs to be liberated.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: rhema

“There’s nothing wrong with seeking more female directors, producers or major characters in Hollywood — they’re supposed to be feminist enough to have already imposed “affirmative action.”

I don’t know about the movie business but of you watch commercials you would think that white males make up about 10% of the US population, and that 50% of those are hen-pecked, morons, or both.


12 posted on 10/01/2010 9:09:09 AM PDT by Hacklehead (Note to Leftists- We Will Bury You (politically)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: rhema

Without looking, I will say I am sure she is a hideous looking beast striking back at the world for not getting asked to the prom.


13 posted on 10/01/2010 9:11:03 AM PDT by Personal Responsibility ("In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act" - Orwell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: rhema

So a woman who found fame for her looks starts an institute that funds women to do studies showing cartoons tend to have good looking female characters...anyone else think that seems silly?

Or is it that since Davis has porked out, she wants company with fat cartoon characters?


14 posted on 10/01/2010 9:11:53 AM PDT by Mr Rogers (When the ass brays, don't reply...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: rhema
Hottest cartoon character...


15 posted on 10/01/2010 9:12:28 AM PDT by socal_parrot (I hate to say I told you so, but...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: rhema

“The Incredibles” had a great example of a Mom and Wife. Maybe that wasn’t on her Netflix list.


18 posted on 10/01/2010 9:23:14 AM PDT by Anitius Severinus Boethius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: rhema

This is why Newseak - the entire business - is worth less than a dollar.

No one cares what inane stuff their leftists post.

Although the last few sentences should have been first - Newseak was so worried about sexualizing women that they put Palin on their cover in her running gear.

Joke.


21 posted on 10/01/2010 9:27:54 AM PDT by Eldon Tyrell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: rhema
Worse than that, Baird the Angry Feminist protested, "The female characters were also more likely than men to be beautiful."

And how many of those "ugly men" were portraying the villain or some idiot comedic supporting role?

24 posted on 10/01/2010 9:54:49 AM PDT by a fool in paradise (Ask yourself,where does Saudi Arabia fit on a scale of "passive" to "moderate" to "extremist" Islam?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: rhema

This is BS.

Even if this is true in terms of stats, regular films more than make up for it.

I am so tired of seeing tiny non-muscular women flipping huge guys or knocking them out with one punch. That is not reality. We are flooded with this kind of crap. All the tv and movies in other categories have the guys being stupid, always needing women’s help to do anything. It’s just crazy.


25 posted on 10/01/2010 9:58:03 AM PDT by Secret Agent Man (I'd like to tell you, but then I'd have to kill you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: rhema; Revolting cat!; The Comedian
Baird was especially upset that cartoons might exaggerate the female physique: "One in four women was shown with a waist so small that, the authors concluded, it left 'little room for a womb or any other internal organs.'


26 posted on 10/01/2010 9:58:15 AM PDT by a fool in paradise (Ask yourself,where does Saudi Arabia fit on a scale of "passive" to "moderate" to "extremist" Islam?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: wagglebee
Baird even claimed "another study" found "women in G-rated films wear the same amount of skimpy clothing as women in R-rated films."

Pravda Media + Academic Bias BUMP

28 posted on 10/01/2010 10:00:23 AM PDT by a fool in paradise (Ask yourself,where does Saudi Arabia fit on a scale of "passive" to "moderate" to "extremist" Islam?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-32 next last

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson