to think that this is brilliant trolling?

[toweraboveyou]

Here (taken for a dating site troll)

Oh well StrandedBear - you would obviously feel exactly the same if someone chose to ridicule your profile photos on here then wouldn't you seeing as you have chosen to post so many of you - Or would it be somehow different and not quite so funny if it was you on the receiving end of having your personal appearance picked apart for fun on the internet?

A few people have pointed out that it's the fact that the pictures were intended to be seen by their unwitting subjects - it wouldn't be as bad if they'd been drawn for the amusement of others only, and would be even less bad if the subjects had asked to be drawn. As was said so well upthread, there's a distasteful "let's take this bitch down a peg or two" undertone both to the pictures and the egging-on that accompanies them.

Ssly if you're someone who needs it explained to you why those pictures are wrong, I doubt you'll ever agree. I don't think empathy can be learned, once you get past your teenage years. We're probably all on a sliding scale, with total sociopaths at one end and people who can't cope with mild peril in Mary Poppins at the other. Some people will look at these pictures and cringe in sympathy for their target. Other people will think it's funny because it's not happening to them. Others still will laugh in a "know it's wrong but can't help myself" sort of way.

I am sure though that neither the original artist nor the copycats he spawned would approach a woman in the street, or a woman they knew, with a picture like that. "Hi! Here, I drew you this picture. Look, I put your head on Jabba The Hut's body. In a dress. Because, you're, you're, a bit fat. Do you see. It's just...yeah. Anyway, I worked pretty hard on the detailing and everything". Or "Hello! I think you look a bit like Chris Eubank, you know - the boxer? So - here. I did this for you. I hope you like it". It's easier to do from behind a screen, when you don't have to deal with your victim's reaction - partly because you can hide, partly because a little part of your monkey-brain doesn't believe there's a person at the other end anyway.

I have spent far too long thinking about this - but it has been bothering me today. This and that story on the news, the one about the guy who (alledgedly) shot the Indian student in the street, whose dad had to find out about it on Facebook? Who strutted into the courtroom today and called himself "Psycho" Anderson or whatever. The pistonheads thread and that story have sort of curdled together into a "people are shits" angry cloud in my head, which I accept is not the most rational way to approach things.

I don't see where one can derive moral justification for sending another person hurtful messages, simply because their image is in the public domain.

perhaps, as a little experiment, we should take that pic of SB with her pretty white dress, draw some great big love handles on it, then pass it around us all for a good laugh

then make sure it gets picked up by other assorted websites, populated by even funnier people who will photo shop a big merkin on the front of it and make comments like "wouldn't touch her with a bargepole, she has fat thighs and a bush like beyonce's wig"

and another where someone is bound to say "and her baby is ugly"

or summat

that could be dead funny, what say you ?

we wouldn't be laughing at ourselves, nor laughing with you, we would be laughing at you

that's the point

and we wouldn't be asking you first. and we wouldn't be your friends (even MN 'friends'). We would be people who have never even spoken to you, and think you're an idiot purely based on your photographs.

Would that still make you laugh or would you feel even slightly pissed off?

Oh...and we would send them to you with a message saying how pretty you look, and that we wanted to fuck you.

Some people get offended by things that others don't. Some people find Family Guy or South Park offensive, the success of these shows indicate that a lot of people don't. StrandedBear is correct to say that a SOH isn't wrong just because it's different to yours. Perhaps if we tried to draw a pic of Spero, we wouldn't have space on the page for both her AND her pedestal.

I will admit, when I first laughed I was under the impression that the women had genuinely asked him to do their pictures, which does make a difference. But only to whether I should laugh, IYSWIM, I still did laugh.

I also laugh when people fall over. And I laugh when I fall over. Even when I bloody hurt myself

2012, if people didn't laugh at the misfortune of others, You've Been Framed would not exist. They PAY people to have their mishaps laughed at.

But would you want people to push you over, so that you could be amusing for others who were watching? That's the difference.

You've Been Framed is another piece of horrendous crap, I refuse to have it on in my house.

Plus OP - you can't really use that as an argument for these pictures, unless the women volunteered themselves for it and were paid.

You've been framed only exists because some people are money grabbing cunts and most of it is set up anyway.

I can't believe people are defending this - it is indefensible in my eyes. It seems that some idiotic people seem to want to insist that things like this are funny, in order to not be seen as some humourless old hag, or something.

The whole thing where the pistonhead moron drew pictures of the blonde girl and passed them round to the other juvenile morons to do the whole rolling smiley thing, all whilst hassling her for a RL date - how can anyone see that that is even remotely amusing. It is hideously sad at best, and downright nasty, stalkery and the sign of a complete woman hater at worst.

It is not looking at women as being human, but reduces them to the status of things to be mocked and scorned in the most cruel way.

NONE of those sad wankers would ever be 'man' enough to say these things to the women's faces. They are puny minded and weak little twats.

Stranded, you've clearly more self esteem than a lot of people. Aren't you lucky. It wouldn't be water off a duck's back if someone did it to me (but then, people have done similar to me in the past and it fucking hurt, so I know)

tower yes, they consent to it by sending the footage in to YBF themselves

you don't see the difference ?

I never said the rest of the thread was funny, I said the pictures were. And by that, I meant the original ones on the first page. And in my opinion they were.

Good for you, OP. Can I ask you if you accept that the actions of these people were unacceptable? And can you understand WHY? If you cannot see that then I don't think you can call yourself intelligent.

so tower you admit that what came after was "not funny" ?

you don't see a connection with the first page and what came after ?

The very first post shown on the forum says "hey pretty girl, would you like me to sketch you". I assumed from this that he had asked all of them and they had all agreed. That would be consent, wouldn't it?

and furthermore - just picture this taking place in your child's secondary school.

A group of the lads have got hold of the girls' photographs and are drawing ugly versions of them, and sending them to the girls with accompanying lewd messages about how 'pretty' they are.

The girls are really upset.
Would you want the teachers to step in and put a stop to this harrassment and bullying, or would you consider it just fine, even if it was your daughter being bullied?

I think really a secondary school is the only place where this kind of behaviour can be expected, (not accepted) and only because teenage boys can be incredibly stupid and really vile. They would need to be educated out of it, and made to apologise.

Grown ups doing it is pitiful.

Okay, if StrandedBear's sense of humour isn't wrong because it's different. Right I can accept that. But wouldn't the same principle apply to the senses of humour owned by the victims? Their hurt and outrage isn't silly, just because SB wouldn't be offended.

Did the "artists" involved send questionnaires to check what kind of sense of humour each woman had, first?

No, Jessie, because they didn't give a shit. It would have spoiled their joke if the girls involved had found it funny and not minded.

The whole intention was to hurt. (I don't know this but I surmise it)