Log In

Home
    - Create Journal
    - Update
    - Download

LiveJournal
    - News
    - Paid Accounts
    - Contributors

Customize
    - Customize Journal
    - Create Style
    - Edit Style

Find Users
    - Random!
    - By Region
    - By Interest
    - Search

Edit ...
    - Personal Info &
      Settings
    - Your Friends
    - Old Entries
    - Your Pictures
    - Your Password

Developer Area

Need Help?
    - Lost Password?
    - Freq. Asked
      Questions
    - Support Area



Sevoi ([info]sevoi) wrote in [info]fandom_wank,
@ 2004-05-20 16:18:00


Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend!  Next Entry
Current mood:*sporfle!*

Wank alert on uk.media.tv.angel!
Google groups link here or if you want to see the newest developments (cos it's still growing, folks) point your newsreader at the "New Whedon series?" thread.

It all starts out innocently enough with a vague rumour of a new series. Then kim turns up and more or less immediately starts wanking. Firefly characterisation is argued about, in a mostly civilised way at first, but then "Nathan Fillion's firmly sculpted bee-hind" (thanks Mattia!) is brought up, prompting the comment that jump-starts the whole of the rest of this thing:

kim: This is an american network show, not dutch. Homo-erotic nudity may be acceptable for european audiences but they are certainly not in the USA.

This prompts the question "So you class any male nudity as homo-erotic? Doesn't that presume that none of the audience is female?"

We then have kim replying:
Just because men like to look at naked women there is no reason why women would want to look at naked men and It became fashionable in the USA a few years ago for women to pretend to like looking at naked men and what Americans do everyone else is eventually forced to follow suit. Most sane, sober women (ie: not drunk at a hen party) find the sight of naked men extremely repulsive whether they admit it or not.
Note: kim is male

Naturally, this sparks some "Wuh?" reactions and assertions from female members of the newsgroup that they do indeed like looking at nekkid men, thankyouverymuch. Kim continues wanking. And says that women are only attracted to babies and "have no sex drive as such." Really, it all just gets better from there. Not only does he manage to repeatedly contradict himself on various points, he gets heartily mocked in the process. But still he Just. Won't. Stop.

Additional wankage from kim here on uk.media.tv.buffy-v-slayer in the thread "any mention in BtVS why slayers only females?" where he goes on about Joss Whedon being a "mysogenist" and having a mother complex... Not as good as the first, but still some definite spooge there.

Note interior cross-referencing between the two :)

Edit: My stealth interweb badgers, while taking a break from deleting porn, have discovered something about kim.



(Read comments) - (Post a new comment)


(Anonymous)
2004-05-21 02:59 am UTC (link)
Someone who shall remain nameless on IRC pointed out that Kim appears to post (from another address at a different ISP (http://groups.google.com/groups?q=author:KIM%40ntscuser.freeserve.co.uk&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&c2coff=1&safe=off&start=40&sa=N), but similar user-name) on uk.rec.models.rail (http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&safe=off&c2coff=1&q=author%3AKIM%40ntscuser.freeserve.co.uk&btnG=Search&meta=group%3Duk.rec.models.rail).

* Desperately tries to avoid drawing any conclusions from this.

(Reply to this)


(Read comments) -

 
   
Privacy Policy - COPPA
Legal Disclaimer - Site Map