More Smutty Than You: TSR's Hall of Shame

[Phelim]

(... enough of the side notes)

But side notes are fun!

I think one of my most shocking moments (as an adult) was when my mother (who had never in my hearing said anything worse than damn or hell) got really pissed off in the parking lot of a major theme park and said 'fuck' in front of me.  I actually gaped.  Then we all had a good laugh, and she occasionally drops it again when she's really annoyed.

At any rate, regarding those skins, I'm more concerned with the odd shading around the crotch and down the back inner thighs.  The suggestive images I'm getting are not pleasant.

The suit itself... meh.  No frontal support, and the bottoms are a bit racy in the back for that site.  Well, and they look a bit off-center.

[calalily]

I understand society isn't the point. I was just making the point that with today's standards, if we are going to find smutty tsr creations they should truly be smutty. Not to be rude, but I don't see issues with swim suits unless they are see-through with sex tattooed all over the body, or like I said, thongs for toddlers. 

I don't think those swimsuits qualify - I stated that here:

While I don't think that the swimsuit in question is quite as bad as what we're supposed to be picking here;

But we can't use social mores to rate anything - we have to go by the standard TSR has set for themselves and for all other sites (as far as allowing links). 

(as a side note on harry potter: I don't know if you live where I live cala but there actually was protests against the book and the movie by christian right groups saying they were practicing and encouraging witch craft. Then they also protested spongebob, saying that spongebob supported gays... enough of the side notes)

I'm in Australia, and have no idea what fundamentalists were doing. 

[dietofworms]

I don't mean to split hairs, but the bikini exposes about the same amount of skin and other body parts as the outfits posted on the first few pages of this thread.   It's a subjective judgment, of course, but I think the bikini is equivalent to those outfits on the smuttage meter for a PG-13 site.

Shortly after Thomas took over, I had a conversation with one of the  TSR admins about PG-13 standards and what they meant, and the person replied that they would remain as they always had been and that the kinds of outfits we've been posting here would not be allowed.  This person said that he felt that his own child was safe on TSR, and wouldn't be if standards changed.  I guess it's not too hard to figure out what has happened in the interim.

[kenmtl]

Ya this thread is not really about what is or is not smutty, it's about what is or is not hypocrisy. I mean honestly most of the stuff I look at and think "Meh, I've seen worse" But it's not about what I find offensive or slutty because I don't in any manner proclaim to be PG13. They do, and they're not. So I think it always needs to be looked at from that context otherwise it just becomes an exercise in personal boundaries. Some peoples are going to further than others. It's always about TSR and nothing else.

As for the fundies calalily, they're doing just fine. They're just chugging along thinking about the gays, and talking about the gays, and worrying about the gays, being obsessively concerned about the gays. They just embrace all things gay. Apparently war/hunger/poverty/death/injustice pales in comparison. It's makes us feel speshul.

And the thing about SpongeBob is actually true. He's a big mo.

[Panthpirate]

I saw that episode where Spongebob and Patrick raise a baby (oyster? clam? I forgot) together. OMGGAYCOUPLE   

What? I can't admit I enjoy an occasional cartoon?

[calalily]

As for the fundies calalily, they're doing just fine. They're just chugging along thinking about the gays, and talking about the gays, and worrying about the gays, being obsessively concerned about the gays. They just embrace all things gay. Apparently war/hunger/poverty/death/injustice pales in comparison. It's makes us feel speshul.

Well, what gay people do in the name of love is soooo fascinating particularly to these bizarre people The good thing is no explicit right to free speech and anti-vilification laws stop them from doing a lot here. Come to Australia where less of that shit happens............now if I can just convince Snarky and Mando, the other funniest phorum goers, I'll have the set.  

I don't mean to split hairs, but the bikini exposes about the same amount of skin and other body parts as the outfits posted on the first few pages of this thread.   It's a subjective judgment, of course, but I think the bikini is equivalent to those outfits on the smuttage meter for a PG-13 site.

I wasn't meaning to have a go. I wouldn't have said anything but for the assertion that social mores should play a role.   Frankly, I'm not sure of the ins and outs of American/Swedish ratings systems, so I don't say anything because I could be wrong.  

[SoggyFox]

I don't know - -smut- isn't so much how much is covered or not, but more -how- it covers.  A full body suit is 'smutty' if its got holes in a few spots.  On the other hand, a bathing suit of undies are not going to cover nearly as much as most daily wear, even shorts and a halter top.

Its a matter of what sort of clothing it is as well.

[dusdeedawn]

I always thought that the definition of gay was to have sex with someone of the same gender. And so, I find it rude that children make fun of other children for being gay, when, at 10 years old, they shouldn't be having sex at all!
So, I guess my point is, are Spongebob and Patrick doin the nasty? Well, I can tell you, I'm an avid Spongebob watcher, and I have never seen them kiss, fondle, or screw. Each other or women. Thus, they are... sponges and starfish. Nothing more, nothing less. 

[Millie]

I disagree.

It's the whole 'attracted to the same sex' in general that makes a person gay, IMO. No sex needed, necessarily.

[dusdeedawn]

Yeah, Millie, I was going to put that in there but I posted before I thought. 
But still, how does a 10 year old know who he's attracted to? And what has Spongebob ever been attracted to but jellyfishing and blowing bubbles?
I think Spongebob has a more "kid at heart" thing to him, rather than a "gay partner for life" thing. Personally, I think he's neither straight nor gay. He is a sponge, after all!
The Spongebob-is-gay argument has always driven me nuts. It bothers me that people feel they have to put a label on stuff, even when one may not be needed.

[meowbark]

I saw that episode where Spongebob and Patrick raise a baby (oyster? clam? I forgot) together. OMGGAYCOUPLE   

What? I can't admit I enjoy an occasional cartoon?

Which will probably explain that one picture of Patrick kissing Spongebob. T~T

Now it makes sense why they are always hanging out together!

[Paden]

Do sponges and starfish even have sex and if they do, why should we even give a damn?? And cala, who all is in this set you've been collecting? I seem to remember falling off of the shelf one day and running about freely ever since.

[Paleoanth]

Sponges are asexual reproducers.  They bud off. 

[Paden]

That is what I thought but am feeling too icky from the heat to spend the energy on using my google-fu... Thanks, tomato!

[Missbonbon]

Wow I come home to a conversation about spongebob  awesome lol.

I wasn't meaning to nit pick either. Just over in America, Maybe our standards are a bit looser than Australia's but by our standards that isn't over pg-13

"If a movie is rated PG-13, then it may contain violence, some sexual content, and/or strong language. Children under 13 should have parental guidance; however, parental guidance is not legally enforced."

I know that's about movies, but I also don't know if Australia is a bit different But usually here, if something is rated pg-13 it's no biggie. It becomes a question when it hits NC-17, or rated r.

I work in retail, and when I worked with video games, I honestly only talked to maybe 10 people about game ratings. Because they asked. And I remember one lady specifically refusing to buy pokemon because I think it was rated pg-13 or E10+ one of the two, and her child wasn't old enough. I couldn't help but wonder:

A. Why pokemon has such a high rating.... I mean yeah there's simulated violence, but all it is with the video games is the pokemon thrust at each other and the other's health goes down
B. What was so wrong with it? I mean it's not like pokemon taught kids how to do crack, or buy prostitutes.

But that's another tangent for another conversation..... back on topic!!



Maybe this should go in the ugly creations but when I first saw this I thought of flash dance, then I though of 80's strippers