Having looked at exactly one picture of her, E.G. Daily looks like Janice from Dr. Teeth and the Electric Mayhem.
I would probably not want to have sex with her, solely from the fact that my unit is nowhere the size of Tommy Lee’s…as Patton Oswalt said, it would be like dropping a golf pencil into a mine shaft.
Quote:
| Originally Posted by FrankCobretti Diva, you’re a Ph.D. candidate in psychology, right? Surely you’re aware that the ancient Greeks believed that one’s inner life is irrelevant. What one does and says, according to this train of thought, defines what one is. Consequently, if you think these people who thought up democracy have a point, comments about her behavior are comments about her as a person. |
I don’t subscribe to this theory.
Quote:
| Originally Posted by DaveB On the other hand, I don’t think her sexual history is quite as damning as, say, Charlie Sheen’s. Sure, she’s been involved with some pretty scuzzy guys (and who knows how monogamous each relationship was?) and the idea that she offered sex to pay off gambling debts is fairly sleazy (although I get the impression she fancies herself sort of funny - perhaps her assessment of the situation was supposed to be a comedic exaggeration?); but Sheen fucked multiple porn stars and hookers in all kinds of configurations and doesn’t really get slammed the same way. It probably has a little to do with the fact that, onscreen, he’s not trading in on his sex appeal, but also a little to do with the fact that he’s a guy. |
As usual, DaveB says more eloquently what I was trying to say.
Quote:
| Originally Posted by The LD Having looked at exactly one picture of her, E.G. Daily looks like Janice from Dr. Teeth and the Electric Mayhem. |
You don’t know Dottie from Pee Wee’s Big Adventure???
She was also the lead singer at the school dance in Better Off Dead!
Quote:
| Originally Posted by DaveB I find it hard to begrudge anyone judging Anderson on her looks, since that’s essentially what she does. She’s not a good actress, she doesn’t seem very bright, and she lacks charisma, IMO. |
I’d also argue that Pam has a little charisma. Or maybe “fun personality” is a better way of putting it. I’d party with her (I mean, if I wasn’t a married father).
Quote:
| Originally Posted by Diva As usual, DaveB says more eloquently what I was trying to say. |
What are you talking about? Dave was talking about relative perceptions of her actions, with no degree of judgment one way or another. You told us we can’t judge her on her actions. They’re not even related to one another.
Quote:
| Originally Posted by DARKMITE8 You don’t know Dottie from Pee Wee’s Big Adventure??? |
No kidding? I’m young enough to not remember it well. I did love Dottie, though.
Quote:
| Originally Posted by DaveB Wes Anderson would be incredibly boring looking if not for the augmentations and, with them, he looks bizarre. |
sig
Quote:
| Originally Posted by The LD What are you talking about? Dave was talking about relative perceptions of her actions, with no degree of judgment one way or another. You told us we can’t judge her on her actions. They’re not even related to one another. |
No. I said judge her actions, not her as a person. The point of this thread is that she whored herself out for money. If you find that despicable, feel free to call her out on it. But the comments in here have been personal attacks on her physical appearance (which really has no bearing on whether or not you find trading sex acceptable or not), her age (again, would it make it better if she were 20 instead of 40?), and on her past romantic relationships (to which I – and DaveB – point out that the kinds of comments directed at Pam are not directed at males with similar backgrounds).
Quote:
| Originally Posted by Feral Akodon sig |
That’ll probably merit some explanation down the road in other threads…
Quote:
| Originally Posted by Diva No. I said judge her actions, not her as a person. The point of this thread is that she whored herself out for money. If you find that despicable, feel free to call her out on it. But the comments in here have been personal attacks on her physical appearance (which really has no bearing on whether or not you find trading sex acceptable or not), her age (again, would it make it better if she were 20 instead of 40?), and on her past romantic relationships (to which I – and DaveB – point out that the kinds of comments directed at Pam are not directed at males with similar backgrounds). |
To be fair, I also pointed out that evaluations of her personal appearance are kinda valid because of the way her fame was achieved, though perhaps not in the context of this conversation, which has less to do with her looks and more to do with her sexual proclivities. Still, there’s even some crossover there, since some of her, like Paris Hilton’s, notoriety also comes from her sexual history.
I think this is one unfortunate facet of modern pop culture (esp. see reality TV). A lot of our icons are famous for little more than being who they are, thus critiques of all areas of their lives are uncomfortably more open to discussion. It’s more difficult to figure out what’s fair game without being a dick about it.
In any case, I’m not sure if Sheen gets let off the hook because he’s more talented, because he’s less sexualized generally, or because he’s a guy. Are there any guys who only get by on looks and sexual history?
I actually want you to find me those attacks on her physical appearance or age. Nobody did it. The closest I can find is:
Quote:
| Originally Posted by Timothy225 She’s 49? Damn - must look great when all her make-ups off (yeesh). |
Moreover, her sexual history has EVERYTHING to do with this.
Quote:
| Originally Posted by DaveB To be fair, I also pointed out that evaluations of her personal appearance are kinda valid because of the way her fame was achieved, though perhaps not in the context of this conversation, which has less to do with her looks and more to do with her sexual proclivities. Still, there’s even some crossover there, since some of her, like Paris Hilton’s, notoriety also comes from her sexual history. |
Agreed. But on the flip side, people’s perceptions of her appearance are being influenced by their judgments of her sexual past. As others have already pointed out in this thread, if any other women looked like Pam Anderson they wouldn’t be making the type of comments they have. Objectively speaking, Pam is physically fit and quite attractive by standards of society at large. Now I’m not saying personal preference doesn’t play a role. You described that you don’t personally find her attractive. But if we look at the spectrum of attractiveness that is present in our society, Pam Anderson would rate well above average, and I would argue pretty much near the top.
Quote:
| I think this is one unfortunate facet of modern pop culture (esp. see reality TV). A lot of our icons are famous for little more than being who they are, thus critiques of all areas of their lives are uncomfortably more open to discussion. It’s more difficult to figure out what’s fair game without being a dick about it. |
Agreed.
Quote:
| In any case, I’m not sure if Sheen gets let off the hook because he’s more talented, because he’s less sexualized generally, or because he’s a guy. Are there any guys who only get by on looks and sexual history? |
It’s unlikely because we live in a gendered society that condemns people who deviate from what our culture prescribes for them – women are communal, men have agency. A man who relied on his looks to get by would be really devalued in our society. I’m reminded of Zoolander and how his father and brother turned their backs on him because he wasn’t masculine enough, as well as the popularity and sudden backlash against metrosexuals.
As for Pam just getting by on her looks, this is where I think her public persona hurts her. Having seen interviews with Pamela outside of a sexualized setting, she is quite smart and comes off as using her sexuality as a tool for success. She’s not just some dumb blonde who has no idea where she is or how she got there (read: Anna Nicole Smith). She translated her image into a popular brand. Now, I’m not trying to set Pam up as some sort of mastermind here, but she’s smarter than people give her credit for.
You should pick your feminist battles more carefully, Diva. Pam isn’t being singled out here for being sexually empowered or even promiscuous; it’s mostly because of the guys she’s slept with that she’s being mocked. And her resume in that regard is mind-boggingly gross; she’s been with 2 guys who would have to be placed on anybody’s Top 5 Scuzziest Men On Earth list, and that’s not even counting the Motley Crue and Poison alumni.
If the lady doesn’t want people’s perceptions of her colored by her sexual past, she should stop making sex tapes with greasy, marginally talented rock stars and not announce to a talk show host that she traded sex for a gambling debt with a guy who’s only known for going behind the back of his blonde ditz of a girlfriend to sell a tape of them having sex.
Do women face unfair standards when it comes to their sexuality? Sure. Is there any standard by which this kind of behavior is not downright nasty? I don’t think so.
Quote:
| Originally Posted by DaveB Are there any guys who only get by on looks and sexual history? |
Um…Rick Salomon?
Quote:
| Originally Posted by DaveB Are there any guys who only get by on looks and sexual history? |
The late Pope John Paul.
Fun Facts:
-
The reason we’re making fun of her looks is that we’re men. We notice what women look like. In fact, it’s just about all we think about. One of the main things we never think about is what men look like. I couldn’t even tell you what colour my best friend’s eyes are. We don’t give a shit about Rick Salomon or Charlie Sheen’s augmentations or biohazardous penises, because we don’t spend minutes on end staring at them, so we don’t make fun of them. We CAN’T make fun of them. It doesn’t even cross our minds to make fun of them.
-
I’d have sex with Rick Salomon for 250K.
I’m not even sure if my best friend has eyes. You’re a little gay, dude.
I think you are barking up the wrong feminist tree here Diva. The criticism of Pam’s sexuality and looks are completely valid in the context of her career and this story. “Pam Anderson” is purely a fictional creation. She has created this “Pam” fabrication based on her looks and Hollywood and society’s bias for attractive women. She is a marginal actress and has done nothing of real note, or substance with respect to her life in general. She is famous for being attractive and fucking sleazy rock stars, nothing more.
If she was a an ordinarily looking girl she would be an accounting clerk in Omaha married to a mail carrier. By sheer genetic luck of the draw (and lots of surgical help) she looks the way she does. She has been able to use those looks to climb the ladder of success and become rich and famous. Comparing her to Charlie Sheen is a red hearing. He was vilified in the press when he married Denise Richards, and it was even worse when they separated. His raunchy drug-fueled past was all over the news and soundly condemned. But in he was able to overcome these issues because he is actually a talented actor.
Quote:
| Originally Posted by Schwartz You should pick your feminist battles more carefully, Diva. Pam isn’t being singled out here for being sexually empowered or even promiscuous; it’s mostly because of the guys she’s slept with that she’s being mocked. And her resume in that regard is mind-boggingly gross; she’s been with 2 guys who would have to be placed on anybody’s Top 5 Scuzziest Men On Earth list, and that’s not even counting the Motley Crue and Poison alumni. If the lady doesn’t want people’s perceptions of her colored by her sexual past, she should stop making sex tapes with greasy, marginally talented rock stars and not announce to a talk show host that she traded sex for a gambling debt with a guy who’s only known for going behind the back of his blonde ditz of a girlfriend to sell a tape of them having sex. Do women face unfair standards when it comes to their sexuality? Sure. Is there any standard by which this kind of behavior is not downright nasty? I don’t think so. |
And as DaveB pointed out, Charlie Sheen has fucked some of the scuzziest females on earth and he’s not talked about with the same disgust that some of people are talking about Pam. Even the thread on CHUD about Tom Sizemore was more jokey than hostile. I don’t know, it just rubs me the wrong way to laugh it off as just some crazy shit when a dude has sleazy sex, yet label a chick who does the same as contaminated.
Quote:
| Originally Posted by Frylock Comparing her to Charlie Sheen is a red hearing. He was vilified in the press when he married Denise Richards, and it was even worse when they separated. His raunchy drug-fueled past was all over the news and soundly condemned. But in he was able to overcome these issues because he is actually a talented actor. |
Well, this gets to the heart of DaveB’s question. If Pam had more talent, would her sexual indiscretions be more forgivable? What about Magic Johnson? He has HIV because of his sexual past, yet he’s not considered damaged goods. What differentiates his actions from Pam’s?
I don’t sense any hostility.