Originally posted by KENobi™
But you don't take professional photos of your dog and have them placed in magazines...do you?
True, but neither did you specify that professionals who post pictures of dogs in a magazine are sad people. In which that too would be an even more ignorant statement, as some people find entertainment at looking at the cross bred and pure bred of animals. I happen to look at magazines with dog pictures in it (at times the magazine isn’t just all about dogs, because it’s hard to find one completely of dogs, but never the less). And besides, she does have a point, what difference is it between your professional taken picture of women and that of a professional picture taken of dogs. The purposes of the people may be different but the purposes magazines are the same: to entertain.
Originally posted by AOR
True, but neither did you specify that professionals who post pictures of dogs in a magazine are sad people. In which that too would be an even more ignorant statement, as some people find entertainment at looking at the cross bred and pure bred of animals. I happen to look at magazines with dog pictures in it (at times the magazine isn’t just all about dogs, because it’s hard to find one completely of dogs, but never the less). And besides, she does have a point, what difference is it between your professional taken picture of women and that of a professional picture taken of dogs. The purposes of the people may be different but the purposes magazines are the same: to entertain.
I find it hard to see how someone can derive entertainment from looking at someone elses dog in a magazine. You're staring at a picture, probably for 30 seconds or less, and move on to the next one.
With women in magazines, it's more of a carnal desire.
You can't be serious saying that pictures of naked women and pictures of dogs are the same.
Originally posted by Inspectah Deck
Ha, no wonder you failed HistoryLet me elaborate. You went from being gothic to an animal lover. That's what we call in the english language a paradox 😱
Originally posted by AOR
I take pictures of my dog. I mean, I don't get him point blank and show him off, but certainly you shouldn't be so ignorant as to say "sad people" take pictures of their dog....
Originally posted by KENobi™
I find it hard to see how someone can derive entertainment from looking at someone elses dog in a magazine. You're staring at a picture, probably for 30 seconds or less, and move on to the next one.With women in magazines, it's more of a carnal desire.
You can't be serious saying that pictures of naked women and pictures of dogs are the same.
The same could be said about women....
With dogs in magazines, it's more of a desire to see something cute and fluffy, or something well built and posing....
If by both are forms of entertainment, than yes. But other than that they are quite different.....
Originally posted by ILoveMyDaniel
Okay, let me explain this to you. You may not understand it. GOTHICS ARE PEOPLE TOO. I like ****ing dogs, whoopty doo! You act like Gothics are the center of the suicidal universe we live in or something. Let me give you a hint. You know NOTHING. Just because I like freaking dogs doesn't mean jack dude. I don't like going off on people, but when it comes down to it, you really are stereotyping a group of people who you've probably never got to know or have just stood back, watched them, and judged them for your own self. That really pisses me off.
😂 When did I say Goths are the center of suicidal universe?
Your funny
Originally posted by Inspectah Deck
😂 When did I say Goths are the center of suicidal universe?Your funny