General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region Forumsdoc03
(35,338 posts)bigtree
(85,996 posts)forget 'em.
hlthe2b
(102,277 posts)Her butt-- and the rest of her-- are in proportion. She isn't a photoshopped, air-brushed anorexic celeb/model-- that some seem to (inexplicably) celebrate.
to you, Michelle
fascisthunter
(29,381 posts)because her butt isn't big, it's feminine.
holy april fool
(4 posts)You must have really meditated upon the spiritual essence of Michelle's...booty...
Oh and thanks for really seeing a woman's worth!
Ikonoklast
(23,973 posts)Is everything done so shoddily these days, or is it just me?
There are still a left few here that just skirt the TOS and stay within bounds, and at least are mildly amusing in their gyrations, but, these latest ones are so artless, so gauche, so....sad.
trollhouse cookies
(14 posts)Response to Ikonoklast (Reply #15)
Warren DeMontague This message was self-deleted by its author.
fascisthunter
(29,381 posts)...get over it.
uponit7771
(90,339 posts)...think it is
I'm so proud of them all. Love those REAL smiles!!
lunatica
(53,410 posts)Shakes it up a little.
Fawke Em
(11,366 posts)SwissTony
(2,560 posts)she just exudes intelligence, dignity, grace...the list goes on.
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)The most elegant FLOTUS since Jackie Kennedy.
She was a classmate of mine in law school, though I didn't know her.
MineralMan
(146,308 posts)is really irrelevant. Yes, she's a good-looking woman, but I'm not sure how or why that matters, really. As for being "hot," that's even more irrelevant. She's the wife of the President of The United States, not someone to lust after, IMO. Just my opinion.
pangaia
(24,324 posts)trumad
(41,692 posts)But thanks for your concern.
Response to trumad (Reply #18)
Post removed
Logical
(22,457 posts)trumad
(41,692 posts)Now why don't you join the other 5 in this thread crying about this.
You can for a group.
Boring.
trollin in the deep.
(5 posts)I'd hit that and I'm a woman. Mmmm....
DutchLiberal
(5,744 posts)Your post doesn't make even the slightest bit sense.
MineralMan
(146,308 posts)That's not really the issue, is it?
DutchLiberal
(5,744 posts)So I'm asking you: why is that, in your mind, a criterium for not lusting after her?
MineralMan
(146,308 posts)is, well, in awfully bad taste, I think. You can do it, if you like, and I can say it's in bad taste. Saying that the First Lady is "hot" is in bad taste. If you like, you can show bad taste anytime you wish. It's really up to you. But, I can say it's in bad taste here, too.
BTW, a "criterium" is a type of bicycle race. A "criterion" is a basis for an opinion.
DutchLiberal
(5,744 posts)Is lusting after ordinary women in public bad taste? Or lusting after celebrities? Or just when it's the First Lady?
No, it's not. It's your opinion of "bad taste". You don't get to decide for others what's bad taste and what's not.
Interesting... when a woman on DU would say Barack Obama is "hot", you can bet NO man, not a single man, would make a fuss over it.
You write a post in perfect Dutch first, then come back to correct me.
MadrasT
(7,237 posts)(that's the sound of male privilege going right over head)
Response to MadrasT (Reply #56)
Warren DeMontague This message was self-deleted by its author.
DutchLiberal
(5,744 posts)Ah well, you can't win every time...
helloimustbegoing
(6 posts)I thinked that was funny!
DutchLiberal
(5,744 posts)Ugh, the ignorance of some people...
MineralMan
(146,308 posts)Last edited Mon Apr 2, 2012, 02:16 PM - Edit history (1)
If I spoke and wrote Dutch, I would be thankful for information on that language from a native speaker. That is the way one improves his or her use of a language.
But, never mind.
Lusting after women in private is one's own business. When it becomes a public statement, then it is something that can be commented on in public. When I say that something is in "bad taste," I am expressing my opinion. That is the case with almost all statements I make here that do not contain simple data. I do get to decide what I think is in bad taste and I get to comment on it here. You can disagree with my opinion, of course. DU is a public forum, and both statements are equally allowed. I believe that suggesting a desire to have intercourse with the wife of the President of The United States seems to me to be in bad taste. And what else is being suggested when that person is referred to as "hot." There is no doubt that Michelle Obama is a good-looking woman. The President is lucky to have found her. I do not have any sexual thoughts when I see her, or when I see other women who may be attractive but who are married to others. It's just not how I think.
As for women on DU, I do not remember any of them voicing that opinion of Obama. Someone may have, but I don't remember it.
Expressing sexual interest in public figures is just common. And by common, I don't mean that such expressions are frequently made. I'm using one of the secondary definitions of the word. Specifically, definition 6 in the entry below:
adj. com·mon·er, com·mon·est
1.
a. Belonging equally to or shared equally by two or more; joint: common interests.
b. Of or relating to the community as a whole; public: for the common good. See Usage Note at mutual.
2. Widespread; prevalent.
3.
a. Occurring frequently or habitually; usual.
b. Most widely known; ordinary: the common housefly.
4. Having no special designation, status, or rank: a common sailor.
5.
a. Not distinguished by superior or noteworthy characteristics; average: the common spectator.
b. Of no special quality; standard: common procedure.
c. Of mediocre or inferior quality; second-rate: common cloth.
6. Unrefined or coarse in manner; vulgar: behavior that branded him as common.
Response to MineralMan (Reply #57)
Warren DeMontague This message was self-deleted by its author.
MineralMan
(146,308 posts)post that. I don't read 100% of what is posted on DU. I believe that's what I said in the post you replied to, actually. I did not say no such post existed. I said I couldn't remember such a post. I also said that didn't mean that nobody said that. I'm pretty sure I wrote clearly.
Response to MineralMan (Reply #85)
Warren DeMontague This message was self-deleted by its author.
MineralMan
(146,308 posts)Response to MineralMan (Reply #89)
Warren DeMontague This message was self-deleted by its author.
Rex
(65,616 posts)+1000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000
DutchLiberal
(5,744 posts)And I didn't see anybody say they wanted to have sex with Michelle Obama. All they said was that they thought she was hot. Any additional connotations and suggestions are all your words, not those of others, so maybe you shouldn't put them in their mouths.
But even if they meant that, I still don't see how that's in bad taste. I think it's in bad taste to comment negatively on womens' appearances. E.g. to say "I'd never do HER" or "my god, she's fugly" or something like that. That would be in bad taste. But to compliment a woman...? I don't see why. Unless you think sex is something dirty and disgusting. Otherwise, I wouldn't know why.
On Barack Obama: I said "if". IF a woman on DU said Obama is "hot", nobody would make an issue out of it. Not a man, at least. Not one, not a single one. In fact, I've seen videos posted on DU during the election of 2008 of the so-called 'Obama girl' who was constantly singing about how hot the guy was, supported by pictures of a bare-chested Obama in swim gear. I don't recall one man making a fuss about it.
Oh, puh-leeze! Whether or not somebody is married doesn't change her physical appeal. You are either attracted to somebody or you aren't. You're not telling me that when you see a woman whom you think is attractive, suddenly, magically, becomes unattractive to you once you see her wedding ring. Impossible.
Response to DutchLiberal (Reply #52)
Post removed
DisgustipatedinCA
(12,530 posts)You and this other poster talking about...the bending over thing. Jesuschristonastick, what's wrong with you? In your attempt to be King Prude of the Unrealistic Realm, you engaged in a back-and-forth that was filthier than most anything I've seen at DU. Sure, I've seen worse at other sites, but we don't typically allow sex threads here, and therefore we don't see "bend her over" language here. Really and truly, in your zeal to stop anyone from talking about what you don't want talked about, you engaged in a conversation far worse than the innocent (and accurate) OP. I have to completely agree with the post that (at the time of this writing) occupies the last spot in this thread. This is the same sort of disgust I feel when I think of Rick Santorum exhorting us not to think of the EVILLLLS of SEX. Fucking gross, dude. Really gross.
WillyT
(72,631 posts)Sorry...
lillypaddle
(9,580 posts)And her husband's not to shabby either!
roguevalley
(40,656 posts)La Lioness Priyanka
(53,866 posts)applegrove
(118,659 posts)La Lioness Priyanka
(53,866 posts)Tarheel_Dem
(31,234 posts)Texasgal
(17,045 posts)How about your are beautiful and dressed well?
trumad
(41,692 posts)DutchLiberal
(5,744 posts)Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)Nothing.
Number23
(24,544 posts)But who is that woman on the left? And what in God's name is she wearing??
Lex
(34,108 posts)I had that same outfit for my Barbie, circa 1975.
That's EXACTLY what she looks like too. An old, incredibly OLD, Barbie doll. Wonder if that ensemble comes with powder blue eyeshadow??
renate
(13,776 posts)She was THRILLED by what Taylor Swift said about how she's always wanted to meet Mrs. Obama and how it was an honor to get the award from her--or words to that effect (I wasn't taking notes).
I've always thought Taylor Swift seemed like a sweetie, and now I have another reason to like her.
But that's OT... Michelle did a great job presenting the award, and I love how she seemed like a natural choice to be there. I don't dislike Laura Bush but she just would not have made the same connection.
NoMoreWarNow
(1,259 posts)vaberella
(24,634 posts)I'm all over those pants and shoes.
NoMoreWarNow
(1,259 posts)keep her looking good. But it's nice to see a first lady with a more modern sense of fashion.
trumad
(41,692 posts)NoMoreWarNow
(1,259 posts)but clearly she has several people who help her to look good. Not saying that there is anything wrong with that.
uponit7771
(90,339 posts)NoMoreWarNow
(1,259 posts)madokie
(51,076 posts)Nothing as wonderful as an intelligent person who is also beautiful to look at.
Personally I think she is the most beautiful first lady this nation has ever had, bar none.
n2doc
(47,953 posts)They really aren't far off from the RW'ers threads on Palin. She is Mrs. Obama, the first lady, after all. Can't we just complement her on her fashion sense without making things sexual?
trumad
(41,692 posts)Do you really think that just because a couple of DU'ers hit the feinting couch because I call Michelle Obama hot, that I'll stop saying she is hot?
Again--- if you feel dizzy when reading things like this---then don't fucking read it.
DutchLiberal
(5,744 posts)HappyMe
(20,277 posts)Smart as hell besides.
The lady on the left should have chosen a plain black skirt. I don't like the bedazzled look, but that's just me.
redqueen
(115,103 posts)DutchLiberal
(5,744 posts)Why does everything always have to be sooooooo black and white in your view? Why does saying a woman is hot cancel out respect for said woman, in your mind? It doesn't in my mind. In my mind, an intelligent, strong woman can be hot. Hot women can be intelligent. I don't have any less respect for a women that I find hot. Why is complimenting a women on her beauty a bad thing? It's almost like YOU don't respect beautiful women.
Like women never refer to men as 'hot'...
trumad
(41,692 posts)I knew when I posted this thread there would be a couple of members---usually the same---who would come in and get all huffy because I dare say the First Lady is Hot.
Ms. Obama was hot before she was the First Lady---she was hot before she was a Senators wife--- and she was hot before she became Mrs. Obama.
What these few dissenting members want us to do is to eliminate the word hot as a description for a beautiful woman.
What these few dissenters want to do is control what is said here on DU.
If it was left to them this place would be as dull as paint.
DutchLiberal
(5,744 posts)I'm still waiting for the other two...
By the way, I don't think she's so hot.
I wouldn't kick her out of bed, though.
^ How many alerts would that comment get me?
Texasgal
(17,045 posts)Oh please.
You are just itching for an alert and a jury so you can go into H&M and whine and freak out over it.
I won't give you the pleasure.
trumad
(41,692 posts)Did I attack you?
Oh and BTW---trust me--- I'm certain that I have been alerted on in this thread by the usual alert nannies.
MineralMan
(146,308 posts)I don't imagine any jury would have locked it. Now, there was one further down in the thread that did get locked, but your OP would survive a jury, I think.
Personally, I'd rather comment on it within the thread and point out that lusting after the First Lady is in bad taste. But, then, I don't alert on posts very often.
The Straight Story
(48,121 posts)Every interaction must be well planned and thought out so as not to offend someone.
Du is like that Windows Mine sweeper game at times.
"Wow, she is really pretty/hot!"
"Why did you say that about her? Do you call men pretty/hot? Why do you hate women and want to oppress them??"
What should probably have been said was:
(While sipping some good 'hot' tea perhaps with your pinky in the air)
"I say, I was noticing the first family today and how elegant they all appeared in their attire. They are indeed quite the fetching family. Why it was just yesterday it seems like the Holiday Greeting card with that green tree in the background made the rounds (can't say Christmas, an oppressive cracker holiday) and I had thought to myself at the time that the first family could not possibly look more radiant and elegant. It appears I was mistaken in my earlier analysis."
(reads through DU and sees this thread)
"Oh my dear. Martha, come look at this awful internet and the brutish treatment of the first family. I must say, I am not shocked at such foul language. Had the bloody Americans not broken away I dare say they would have some proper manners. Here is a person complimenting someone using their own vernacular - the nerve of such people! I am hoping dearly that the poor first lady has not looked in upon such a horrid thread, it would probably bring her to tears being called such horrid words."
Martha: "Oh my goodness yes. I think I should call a bobby around if someone referred to the queen as 'hot'. And on the internets of all places? The whole world will see how uncouth such louts are. Can you alert on the bloke and maybe some jury with common sense will knock him a round?"
Kaleko
(4,986 posts)I'd actually love to see more of that sort of comportment henceforth on this site. Well spoken, Straight chap. That's a sure-fire DUzy. LOL.
Scout
(8,624 posts)so perhaps it's not a compliment for a stranger to say they think she's hot.
if i don't know "you," i could not give a flying fuck if you think i'm hot or not. i feel good about myself whether i get "compliments" from strangers or not.
why do so many people put so much stock in whether or not other people think they are hot and fuckable? especially strangers?
let's see, how long before i'm accused of being ugly, jealous, fat, feminazi, and against sex ... waiting for the usual slurs from the usual suspects
DutchLiberal
(5,744 posts)See, no problem here. So why make it one?
I don't know that you're jealous. The only thing I know is that you have major problems with pretty women and men complimenting pretty women. This is not the first time you throw a "fucking" tantrum over something benign relating to beauty. The minute a man expresses appreciation for female beauty, you throw a fit. I don't pretend to know why, I can only guess...
Scout
(8,624 posts)"you have major problems with pretty women and men complimenting pretty women" but you don't think i'm jealous, oh what a relief.
LOL, what major problems would that be?
opiate69
(10,129 posts)obviously.... as evidenced by the miniscule size of the fashion and beauty-aids industries...
MineralMan
(146,308 posts)Response to redqueen (Reply #42)
Warren DeMontague This message was self-deleted by its author.
Scout
(8,624 posts)whether or not men, especially the ones they don't even know, think they are "hawt" and "fuckable." and if you don't care, well you must be one of those sex-negative feminazis!
and everyone, men and women, is supposed to care deeply and wonder continuously, "who does trumad think is hot?"
DutchLiberal
(5,744 posts)By the way, it's really an achievement to break down an argument when you first built up the argument yourself. Trumad never said any woman should care. YOU say that he said women should care. YOU built a strawman and then use misplaced sarcasm to tear it down. But whatever floats your boat; if that's what you need to feel all superior... go ahead!
Scout
(8,624 posts)so you're quite wrong.
and i don't "need to feel all superior" ... i already know i am no worse and no better than your average human.
but you keep on trying your amateur analysis on me! whatever floats your boat, go ahead!
DutchLiberal
(5,744 posts)If it's not to feel superior, then why?!!!
Response to trumad (Original post)
Post removed
LynneSin
(95,337 posts)Taylor Swift looked genuinely honored to meet the first lady. I'm sure the right-wing will mock her for that.
Hell Hath No Fury
(16,327 posts)Do you wanna bend her over and do her doggie style?
MineralMan
(146,308 posts)Calling someone "hot" has a sexual connotation that can't be mistaken. It does, indeed, prompt the question you asked. That's why it's in bad taste, at a minimum, and worse, if you really think about what is being said. It's just short of calling the First Lady a MILF, in my opinion. Now, that would get hidden. I'm not sure I see that much difference between the two terms, really. Both make me think that the poster is thinking about things I'd rather not imagine.
Hell Hath No Fury
(16,327 posts)"Hot" is about fuckability.
There are many, many ways a man can compliment a woman in a much classier way.
MineralMan
(146,308 posts)and that's an asset. She is, though, married to the President of The United States. "Hot" isn't a word that I'd apply to her ever. But, then, I don't use that word to describe any women, actually. When I see a woman, the first thing I think about is not that I'd like to have intercourse with her, whatever her appearance. Calling a woman "hot" implies that thought, really, so it's really inappropriate, except, perhaps, when the woman in question is clearly presenting herself as an object of sexual desire.
Beautiful, elegant, charming, attractive, striking...those are good adjectives that don't bring sex into the discussion. Michelle Obama is all of those things, and her husband no doubt appreciates that very much. I think she's an asset to the country in many ways. I do not fantasize about her, though, and so "hot" simply isn't an adjective I'd use for her.
trumad
(41,692 posts)or as you would say ----LOL---have intercourse with her?
Intercourse? Intercourse?
My wife just the other day called a guy who walked by her in the mall "Hot"?
Should I imply that she wants to have intercourse with him--- or as I would say---Fuck him.
The guy was hot... Hell I even I thought so. Does that imply that I want to have intercourse with him.
Do you hear how outdated you sound?
MineralMan
(146,308 posts)Do you not recognize that use of the word "intercourse?" How about "coitus?" I could have used that instead, I suppose.
You voiced your opinion about the First Lady. I voiced my opinion about your post. This is DU. We both get to post.
I am not interested in any way in who you would or would not like to fuck. Not in any way. I hope I've made that clear.
trumad
(41,692 posts)she wants to fuck him?
MineralMan
(146,308 posts)Perhaps she did mean that. Or perhaps not. You'd be better able to make that judgment than I would.
trumad
(41,692 posts)"When I see a woman, the first thing I think about is not that I'd like to have intercourse with her, whatever her appearance. Calling a woman "hot" implies that thought, really, so it's really inappropriate, except, perhaps, when the woman in question is clearly presenting herself as an object of sexual desire".
MineralMan
(146,308 posts)Yes, that is my opinion now, as it was when I posted it.
trumad
(41,692 posts)So what you're telling me is if a woman says a man is hot she wants to have intercourse with him?
Correct?
MineralMan
(146,308 posts)It's an assessment of the sexual attractiveness of that person, man or woman. There is a sexual component in that description.
If you say that someone is handsome or beautiful, it can mean anything. It might mean you'd like to have a conversation with that person. If you say someone is "hot," it has a very different meaning. Think about it.
trumad
(41,692 posts)You backing off?
OK--so if your wife said someone was hot, you'd be worried?
MineralMan
(146,308 posts)bothered. Both of us have identified people we found attractive. Neither of us has ever acted on such a thing. We're quite happy with each other. That does not mean that we are not attracted to others. That's biology. We just don't do anything about it.
But, if she says someone is "hot," it means she things he's sexually attractive. If she says someone is "good-looking," that means something else. That seems pretty standard stuff, really.
There's a difference between attraction and action. Action doesn't have the first four letters. Have a nice day, and it's OK if you think President Obama is hot. No need to explain.
I've seen people type petty shit just to piss off their most hated thread starter...but that (smoking hot = doggie style) is about the most pathetic attempt I've come across on DU3 in the 3 months it's been around.
You must be doing something right to piss off all the RIGHT people!
trumad
(41,692 posts)Oh my---we wouldn't want that now would we.
MineralMan
(146,308 posts)Or, at least, I wouldn't. I'll leave that to you.
JonLP24
(29,322 posts)DutchLiberal
(5,744 posts)OP: makes a post to compliment Michelle Obama on her looks
Hell Hath No Fury: distasteful and explicit descriptions of sexual act with Michelle Obama
Yep, tells a lot more about you and your own thoughts and preoccupations than it does about the OP.
Ironically, Mineral Man, who was so concerned about the word "hot", didn't find your post a tad disturbing at all! But then again, pointing that out would only get in the way of you both wringing your hands and delight and revel in your 'maturity' and complimenting each other about your holier-than-thou attitude.
Rex
(65,616 posts)Is that what popped into your head after reading 'smoking hot'? IF so then that is really sad.
closeupready
(29,503 posts)K&R
AtomicKitten
(46,585 posts)Response to trumad (Original post)
Warren DeMontague This message was self-deleted by its author.
Texasgal
(17,045 posts)What thread are you reading?
Or is it just you being dramatic again.
Response to Texasgal (Reply #88)
Warren DeMontague This message was self-deleted by its author.
Texasgal
(17,045 posts)I don't see it.
DutchLiberal
(5,744 posts)You just pretend not to.
Texasgal
(17,045 posts)But whatever.
Seems the offended are more offended than the offended.
redqueen
(115,103 posts)and in another forum, we see whining about not being allowed to say something despite juries allowing it to be said.
Odd. Very odd.
Response to redqueen (Reply #118)
Warren DeMontague This message was self-deleted by its author.
trumad
(41,692 posts)What I have learned from members in your group--- or a member is---
If you say a woman or a man is hot---that means you want to have "intercourse" with them?
Would you agree with that?
trumad
(41,692 posts)Yep...
I guess all those years in Freeperville makes things go limp.
DisgustipatedinCA
(12,530 posts)MineralMan
(146,308 posts)trumad
(41,692 posts)and they're always the same.
DutchLiberal
(5,744 posts)You know, with all the "thinking about sex is in bad taste", "I don't think about women in a sexual way" and all that shit I thought this thread was overrun by people who share Rick Santorum's views on sexuality: something gross and distasteful... that you only save for the person you marry.
callous taoboy
(4,585 posts)callous taoboy
(4,585 posts)Thanks for your tireless efforts.
DisgustipatedinCA
(12,530 posts)I won't use some of the vile language that others used in this thread in an attempt to discredit it. It was very telling, by the way, to see the gutter-mouth language employed by those who have decided their job is to sit in judgment of the rest of us.
But yes, she's extremely attractive...sexy. What kind of fucked up place would this be if you couldn't state that simple and obvious fact?
do the hustle
(10 posts)Breakfast tray with Wonder Bread sammich filled with Spam. You're in a tank top and boxers and your tank has grease stains all over it.
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)in particular those who give off a trollish stench - to attack long-time DUers.
Enjoy your stay.
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)trumad
(41,692 posts)Rex
(65,616 posts)You trolled poorly and are now swimming through a sea of failsauce.
callous taoboy
(4,585 posts)Smokin hot, in my book, means not only physically attractive, but also having the air of high intelligence and uncompromisingly good taste.
And as a confirmed heterosexual male, may I just add that the President is, also, smokin hot.