Jump to content
Sturgeon's House

Annoying Voiceover Wonders "Why Do Boobies?"


Recommended Posts



The ability for some people to deny reality is pretty surprising, at times.

Oh sure, SI is desperate, and the age of furiously jacking off into a sock while squatting over a cold porcelain toilet while trying to imagine a swimsuit model with all her clothes off is quickly coming to a close, but...

Does this annoying SJW-pandering show not realize how much men like boobies?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have the newest copy of the Sports Illustrated Swimsuit Edition in my possession. It's nice that magazine companies still send my wife's dad free magazine subscriptions, even though it has been close to a decade since he retired from being a doctor.

 

Like everything, the Internet has ruined all that is sacred and pure.

 

Once upon a time, all I'd need was Elle MacPherson or Kathy Ireland staring seductively from the cover to sate all of my rampant teenage hormonal desires. It didn't matter that MacPherson had a one-piece suit. It was the imagination of what lay beneath which is what made them wonderful.

 

Now you can find any sort of genre of porn or stolen celebrity pictures you can imagine. I don't know if you can get Elle MacPherson but you can watch her sister getting nailed which - in my trailer park - is the next best thing.

 

So this season's issue has the standard array of air brushing beauties prancing and spreading across a standard array of beaches, National Parks and Americana pop culture settings. The body paint edition is more interesting in the fact that the paint does look like actual swimsuits rather than the knowledge that the models are actually naked.

 

There are plenty of nipples to be found, covered in sand or see-through fabric. One suspects that it is only a few years off that the entire female anatomy will be put on display. After that it is only logical that the male anatomy will be introduced to the female anatomy in the photographic form for these annual magazine shoots.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The ability for some people to deny reality is pretty surprising, at times.

Oh sure, SI is desperate, and the age of furiously jacking off into a sock while squatting over a cold porcelain toilet while trying to imagine a swimsuit model with all her clothes off is quickly coming to a close, but...

Does this annoying SJW-pandering show not realize how much men like boobies?

I think you're missing the point.

 

We like boobies, but the market is saturated with free boobies. Which is why SI is losing ground on what is already their most profitable product. Which is why announcer guy wonders when they'll just call it a day already.

 

Also, is SJW going to become a thing now? Will I be forced to listen to humourless gits on both sides bang on about this till I want to kill everyone who so much as mentions it? Must we all be so terribly pedantic and dull?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does this annoying SJW-pandering show not realize how much men like boobies?

 

I never manage to figure out whether to be a bit insulted or just disappointed whenever criticism of this sort is deflected with a deft "Aha! But we men actually are subordinate to our reproductive anatomy!"

 

Sports Illustrated should probably be that. The only real selling point that issue has is more as a cultural artifact these days.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think you're missing the point.

 

We like boobies, but the market is saturated with free boobies. Which is why SI is losing ground on what is already their most profitable product. Which is why announcer guy wonders when they'll just call it a day already.

 

Also, is SJW going to become a thing now? Will I be forced to listen to humourless gits on both sides bang on about this till I want to kill everyone who so much as mentions it? Must we all be so terribly pedantic and dull?

 

This is like wondering why McDonald's still does business even though there are better fast food chains out there. It's almost like people like fast food a lot!

"How is X still a thing?" is a phrase directly pulled from the professionally-indignant-and-offended landwhales of Tumblr, so SJWs are very relevant to the topic.

Anyway, it's a new word for a very old type of individual. The problem is that now they've found spaces on the Internet to isolate and endlessly reinforce their own obnoxiousness.

 

 

I never manage to figure out whether to be a bit insulted or just disappointed whenever criticism of this sort is deflected with a deft "Aha! But we men actually are subordinate to our reproductive anatomy!"

 

Sports Illustrated should probably be that. The only real selling point that issue has is more as a cultural artifact these days.

 

Don't be a churl. Making excuses for a rapist would be arguing that men are subordinate to their reproductive anatomy. Pointing out the absurdity of a pandering HBO program that wonders how men can like boobies enough to prop up an increasingly irrelevant magazine is totally different.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the context of a world where porn is basically available where and whenever you want it, saying that just putting tits in a magazine instead of what the magazine says it is and is specialized to deliver works to get guys interested is kind of saying it if not as strong in denying agency as the way I phrased it. If I were saying it with regards to making excuses for a rapist I would've said slaves to rather than subordinate to though.

 

And honestly everyone's got shows and stuff to let them feel smug about having the right opinions, it's probably not healthy to dwell too long on what people whose opinions you hold in contempt are thinking.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the context of a world where porn is basically available where and whenever you want it, saying that just putting tits in a magazine instead of what the magazine says it is and is specialized to deliver works to get guys interested is kind of saying it if not as strong in denying agency as the way I phrased it. If I were saying it with regards to making excuses for a rapist I would've said slaves to rather than subordinate to though.

 

And honestly everyone's got shows and stuff to let them feel smug about having the right opinions, it's probably not healthy to dwell too long on what people whose opinions you hold in contempt are thinking.

 

No? I'm so confused, are you saying a magazine that combines tits and sports isn't marketable to the general male population? Not you, but men in general, mind you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, probably, although I feel there are considerably more effective delivery methods for tits, so part of the sports illustrated does non-sports things for a month issue's perceived value is that it's The Swimsuit Edition and therefore special. It's like the inverse of the articles in Playboy in that they're a sort of cultural touchstone even if what they offer isn't a huge deal or really relevant these days, or at least the people running the things feel that way.

 

Honestly, Sports Illustrated: now with 50% racier ads would likely do a better job of tits as a value add to sports.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Speaking of ads, the best part of the Sports Illustrated Swimsuit Edition was the Snickers ad on the back cover showing Medusa as a model with various different teasers about Gorgons and turning to stone. It was a clever way to incorporate the Snickers, You're Not Yourself When You're Hungry ad campaign. 

 

Although that brings up the sad subject of models with eating disorders...

 

:(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, probably, although I feel there are considerably more effective delivery methods for tits, so part of the sports illustrated does non-sports things for a month issue's perceived value is that it's The Swimsuit Edition and therefore special. It's like the inverse of the articles in Playboy in that they're a sort of cultural touchstone even if what they offer isn't a huge deal or really relevant these days, or at least the people running the things feel that way.

 

Honestly, Sports Illustrated: now with 50% racier ads would likely do a better job of tits as a value add to sports.

 

Right, but pay attention to the title of the segment: It's crude way of saying "how could this possibly still exist?"

Really? Are they so blindly self-absorbed that they are wondering about how a titty magazine could possibly still exist?

That's like Ahmedinejad saying there are no gays in Iran.

Just for some context, let's look at the titles of some of their other "How Is This Still A Thing?" segments:

Miss America

Ayn Rand

The Washington Redskins

Dressing Up As Other Races

 

Columbus Day

It's like I'm looking down the block list of a Tumblr blogger.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is like wondering why McDonald's still does business even though there are better fast food chains out there. It's almost like people like fast food a lot!

No, this is more like wondering why McDonald's is still in the burger business now that there are people handing out free food on every street corner. SI's market share is declining, forcing them to resort to the stunts that the video highlights. Thus, the question of why they are still using the same approach is perfectly valid.

 

"How is X still a thing?" is a phrase directly pulled from the professionally-indignant-and-offended landwhales of Tumblr, so SJWs are very relevant to the topic.

I have next to no fucking clue who SJWs are. All I hear about the phenomenon comes from the term being endlessly applied to people who the author of the given article does not like for whatever reason, which makes me think that it is simply a dog whistle that two parties are busy fighting over in one of your country's never-ending culture war spats. Which, given that my country only imports and absorbs the rancid dregs of your country's culture, makes me preemptively sick at the thought of Jaco down the hall (or whoever) droning on in my ear about it. 

Anyway, it's a new word for a very old type of individual. The problem is that now they've found spaces on the Internet to isolate and endlessly reinforce their own obnoxiousness.

This could refer to literally any subculture that uses the internet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Right, but pay attention to the title of the segment: It's crude way of saying "how could this possibly still exist?"

Really? Are they so blindly self-absorbed that they are wondering about how a titty magazine could possibly still exist?

That's like Ahmedinejad saying there are no gays in Iran.

Just for some context, let's look at the titles of some of their other "How Is This Still A Thing?" segments:

Miss America

Ayn Rand

The Washington Redskins

Dressing Up As Other Races

 

Columbus Day

It's like I'm looking down the block list of a Tumblr blogger.

 

1) So that South Africans can feel good about winning Miss World for a millisecond. Thanks, Rolene!

 

2) So that my 18 year-old self can feel smug about being superior to the sheeple for a month. This is an important market, and I'm glad it's still being served by the writings of a bitter ex-Russian serial philanderer.

 

3) So that South Africans can have yet another reason to point and laugh at America's quaint version of rugby.

 

4) So that South Africans can have a valuable point of comparison with the U.S. when our first-year university students dress like maids and then post the photos to their Facebook feeds.

 

5) So that South Africans can wonder, yet again, why we can't just call you guys Columbians and save on having to remember about the existence of a country.

 

See, perfectly valid answers to society's burning questions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is like wondering why McDonald's still does business even though there are better fast food chains out there. It's almost like people like fast food a lot!

No, this is more like wondering why McDonald's is still in the burger business now that there are people handing out free food on every street corner. SI's market share is declining, forcing them to resort to the stunts that the video highlights. Thus, the question of why they are still using the same approach is perfectly valid.

 

"How is X still a thing?" is a phrase directly pulled from the professionally-indignant-and-offended landwhales of Tumblr, so SJWs are very relevant to the topic.

I have next to no fucking clue who SJWs are. All I hear about the phenomenon comes from the term being endlessly applied to people who the author of the given article does not like for whatever reason, which makes me think that it is simply a dog whistle that two parties are busy fighting over in one of your country's never-ending culture war spats. Which, given that my country only imports and absorbs the rancid dregs of your country's culture, makes me preemptively sick at the thought of Jaco down the hall (or whoever) droning on in my ear about it. 

Anyway, it's a new word for a very old type of individual. The problem is that now they've found spaces on the Internet to isolate and endlessly reinforce their own obnoxiousness.

This could refer to literally any subculture that uses the internet.

1. SI has been doing the swimsuit issue long before the Internet was invented. I'm not saying magazines aren't having problems now that the Internet has basically obsolesced them, but wondering why, within that larger scope, do titty rags exist is pretty banal and stupid.

2. No, the word you're looking for is "Nazis". SJWs are very, very well defined. Be glad you don't know of them.

3. Yep.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Encyclopedia Dramatica, really?

 

Anyway, I'm sure I will hear all about it when Stephan (or whoever) gets off his libertarian kick and starts telling me how all of his problems are due to feminists or something. So, yeah. Looking forward to that.

 

What, you don't get your internet drama news from a bunch of neckbeards whose sole purpose in life is to loathe another group of neckbeards who edit another, more respectable wiki...

 

Actually, when I say it like that, your reaction makes perfect sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hilariously, humans are one of the few examples of sexual selection on both genders: men have oversize penises and more physical dymorphism (debated) while women get overlarge boobs and hip/buttock fat.

There are functional aspects to this (eg: fat deposits indicating reserves needed for reproduction) but like a lot of sexual selection it runs on its own logic.

We like boobs because we like boobs, basically.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pronounced breasts for reasons other than lactation are a very very weird thing.

 

It wants you to reproduce with the things that have boobies, X.

 

That's not me. Strangely enough I am keenly aware of the glories of female anatomy, and my monkey brain loves to remind me of this. I'm just not over-fond of the damned thing on general principles.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...