[Closed] That Maxxis "babes calendar" article...

I actually quite like the Maxxis eunuch slaves calendar

Links, man, we need links!!

Ah come on. They turn up at races and events etc. They exist. As do photos of them. Presumably it's a job one applies for (one for which I personally am not well qualified.)

So unless this thread is taking some kind of ontological turn, don't say they're fiction.

No i was more getting at the really thick neanderthal sexist closet racists who miss the most obvious of points.

Some of us are homophobes as well. You missed that out.

(Also cruel to puppies.)

They turn up at races and events etc.

Is that why they're called racists?

Ah come on. They turn up at races and events etc. They exist. As do photos of them.

Proof of Santa's existence:

[img] ?6[/img]

In all honesty. This thread could do with adding the [url= http://www.mumsnet.com/Talk/_chat ]NUCLEAR[/url] option!

Cougar - Moderator

Is that why they're called racists?

I'll race any ****er....

the really thick neanderthal sexist closet racists

Thats fine..........but what about the closet racist neanderthal sexists ??

* who also happen to be thick 😉

Actually thought bringing in eunuch slaves was a bit wierd at best.

@ Dr j apologies next time i doing a piss taking rebuke of the "other side" I will make sure i include that as well

Apologies from this sixth form[ and second rate] hand wringer

They turn up at races and events etc.

Is that why they're called racists?

Junkyard - Please explain where the racism was in this thread?

You really are the Crown Prince of the Hand Wringers.

It's actually a tradition in our house to leave out a mince pie an a mojito for when the maxxis babes come down the chimney. And a carrot. For their reindeer.

I think you may be confusing magical fantasy and the corporate hospitality/marketing/modelling interface.

I think you may be confusing magical fantasy and the corporate hospitality/marketing/modelling interface.

Someone's certainly confused about what's fiction and what's not and I don't think it's me.

As a matter of interest, when someone nicks your bike, do you seek help from millionaire Bruce Wayne ?

p.s. do reindeer actually eat carrots?

It was as extreme an example as I could think of to highlight that just because the participants were ok with it did not make it right or just.

Ok, but that's not the effect you got from it. I just viewed it as hyperbolic nonsense.

You're still passing judgement on a third party without consulting them, you may well (most likely in my view) be correct. But it still leaves the process and result flawed. And yes, that includes my view as I've also effectively passed judgement.

confused about what's fiction and what's not and I don't think it's me.

No, it is you. These are actual young women who've applied for and got a job.

Some of us are homophobes as well. You missed that out.

(Also cruel to puppies.)

You'll hate the calendar linked a few pages back then...

[img] [/img]

No, it is you. These are actual young women who've applied for and got a job.

They also have a [url=

page.[/url]

do reindeer actually eat carrots?

yes, when they get chance

These are actual young women who've applied for and got a job.

Yes - actual young women who applied for and got a job and that job is portraying fictional characters. Just like old Mr Brown down the road who applied for and got the job of Santa at the local shopping centre.

EDIT

They also have a Facebook page.

OK - I take it all back - they must be real

OK - I take it all back - they must be real

I'm glad people are finally accepting a Facebook profile as proof of corporeal existence.

that job is portraying fictional characters

No it isn't. The job involves playing a role, as do many jobs. This does not mean that the individuals or the roles they play are fictional - they are real. And so is the calendar. Now can we just carry on arguing about that please?

This thread just goes further down the rabbit-hole each time I pop in.

"that job is portraying fictional characters"
No it isn't.

Now I'm confused, and not a little frustrated. If they're not fictional, where are these Maxxis babes? I've been looking for them but all I found was some grumpy lass in sweat pants and ratty hair telling me to stop stalking her.

Now I'm confused, and not a little frustrated. If they're not fictional, where are these Maxxis babes? I've been looking for them but all I found was some grumpy lass in sweat pants and ratty hair telling me to stop stalking her.

what's so difficult?

there is a facebook page linked - the same girls appear at all their events - the punters on the page know them by name.

johnx2 - Member
that job is portraying fictional characters
No it isn't. The job involves playing a role, as do many jobs. This does not mean that the individuals or the roles they play are fictional - they are real. And so is the calendar. Now can we just carry on arguing about that please?

Does that mean the amazing rehead Kawasaki girl I had hot monkey sex with after the NEC show wasn't real?

I'm glad people are finally accepting a Facebook profile as proof of corporeal existence.

A Facebook profile, a calendar or an electricity bill less than 6 months old (not downloaded from the internet).

That will stop a lot of arguments.

You're still passing judgement on a third party without consulting them, you may well (most likely in my view) be correct.

* only an example that you will misconstrue as hyperbole :wink:[quote=hels ]This thread just goes further down the rabbit-hole each time I pop in.

It does doesnt it

hyperbolic nonsense.

My spidey senses are telling me Scotroutes is about to be accused of whataboutery.

<mod>
I think I'm going to close this shortly. It's run its course and wandered well off topic, the last few pages have just been meta-bickering. If you've got any game-changing insights then get them in now.
</mod>

I especially liked the idea that the greatest threat to the future wellbeing of our female offspring is the result of a rubber company sponsoring a charity calendar.

I think I'm going to close this shortly. It's run its course and wandered well off topic, the last few pages have just been meta-bickering. If you've got any game-changing [s]insights [/s] insults then get them in now.

Exits thread to avoid hammer

<genuine question>
Is there a shortage of internet? Why can't the thread be left to either drift off into an existential haze? It might right itself, and return to the point in question? Do things have too stay on topic, otherwise they take a trip to a farm upstate?
</genuine question>

To be fair, there's been a lot of that in this thread.

To be fair I've not read much of it. As it just seems to be men determining what's right and wrong for women largely without female contributions.

*runs away*

It's run its course and wandered well off topic

Bit late for that, that happened about 1100 posts ago.

Does that mean the amazing rehead Kawasaki girl...

Definitely not real...

Can I just stay that locking this thread would be the sort of thing hitler might do? And the nazis? (christmas godwin.)

the last few pages have just been meta-bickering

One man's meta-bickering is another man's WHOLE POINT - which is that claiming that the Maxxis babes are a threat to the human race is a bit daft, since they don't exist beyond the roles played by a bunch of models. Men can (mostly) distinguish between reality and fantasy, and recognise that they cannot take real world decisions and actions based on fantasy characters.

Men can (mostly) distinguish between reality and fantasy, and recognise that they cannot take real world decisions and actions based on fantasy characters.

claiming that the Maxxis babes are a threat to the human race is a bit daft,

No one has claimed this.

since they don't exist

But they do exist

beyond the roles played by a bunch of models.

Erm yes. That role being an annoying one in the view of some of Maxxis' customers.

lets not mention the viral video of the girls singing christmas carols whilst sitting on a sybian that seems to be going around atm

Religion would say otherwise.

Good point - the totty is just to distract us from the emergence of a Maxxis caliphate 🙂

That role being an annoying one in the view of some of Maxxis' customers.

"Being annoying" is not a crime in anyone's book as yet.

(I'm hoping ...)

Don't be a spoilsport Cougar, we are all having such fun. Closing this thread just because we are talking nonsense??
Since when is there a law against that? Banning talking nonsense will be a sad day indeed.
Don't you see the beauty of the thread going off topic? It is called evolution.

"Being annoying" is not a crime

Aaaand who said it was?

Some of us might be serving, as well as typing, very long sentences.

[quote=DrJ ]Men can (mostly) distinguish between reality and fantasy, and recognise that they cannot take real world decisions and actions based on fantasy characters.

I did think of asking for evidence for that assertion when you first made it, as you appear to be basing your argument on that, but other posters have since proved the point for me.

If some men are incapable of recognizing the calendar is fantasy, then would it contribute to them objectifying women in general?

It would seem somewhat bizarre to close the thread at this point - it has wandered and got silly, but TBH it's a lot more friendly than it was 10 or so pages ago when it probably deserved to be executed.
<resists suggesting why that might be>

41 Pages!!!!!!!!!!!!

There's only so many times a scab can be picked before it turns into something nasty and pus-filled.

Not to mention the long term effects of [s]scarring[/s] banning.

Is there a shortage of internet? Why can't the thread be left to either drift off into an existential haze? It might right itself, and return to the point in question? Do things have too stay on topic, otherwise they take a trip to a farm upstate?

It was less that the thread had drifted and more that it's been arguing about what merits a logical fallacy for several pages. From experience, the next step is full-on arguing, reported posts and bans, and it's Christmas and I really can't be ringed.

Don't be a spoilsport Cougar, we are all having such fun. Closing this thread just because we are talking nonsense??

Fair enough. Cart on. Just keep it civil or I shall be mildly vexed.

Vexed? Sounds almost exactly like s....

but other posters have since proved the point for me.

By claiming that the Maxxis babes are real?

I really can't be ringed.

Is that some sort of horrible euphemism?

Is that some sort of horrible euphemism?

Or a challenge.

Although, we would have to find out exactly what disgusting act was being described by aforementioned euphemism.

By claiming that the Maxxis babes are real?

I've seen some in the flesh

I've seen some in the flesh

Really? And were they sexually available to you, and the other event visitors? And when they left the event did they still wear their outfits while sitting in their lounges watching TV? Or were they perhaps *actresses*, who went home to their suburban houses and suburban boyfriends?

[quote=sputnik ]Don't you see the beauty of the thread going off topic? It is called evolution.Indeed. I predict that by the 3,000th post this thread will have become sentient (which is more than can be said for most of the contributors).

[quote=DrJ ]were they sexually available to you, and the other event visitors?

Are you suggesting that appearing sexually available is part of their act?

Really? And were they sexually available to you, and the other event visitors? And when they left the event did they still wear their outfits while sitting in their lounges watching TV? Or were they perhaps *actresses*, who went home to their suburban houses and suburban boyfriends?

yes really as part of my old job as a photographe and no they were not sexually avilable to me or anyone else. They enjoyed the job and went home as you said. They didn't feel objectified or felt their job was sexist which is the important part and nullifies what that woman wrote in her blog article

Are you suggesting that appearing sexually available is part of their act?

I'm not suggesting anything, just repeating what was said ages ago, with regard to the "bum sticking out" pose of one of the girls.

@poah - that's sort of what I expected. I'd also guess, from obervation of similar events, that the "punters" were quite aware that they were watching a show, and not reality.

I'm not suggesting anything, just repeating what was said ages ago, with regard to the "bum sticking out" pose of one of the girls.

[img] [/img]

I assume she's illustrating her tyre fitting technique?

That move can be seen at any gymnastics event. The Olympics for instance.

Tyres? Are there tyres in that picture?

Yup, the Mazi Drift .

(which is more than can be said for most of the contributors).

Ooooof!

[img] [/img]

OH! So thats [s]who[/s] what she had for breakfast...

They didn't feel objectified or felt their job was sexist which is the important part and nullifies what that woman wrote in her blog article

No, not at all - the writer isn't concerned for the babes themselves, she's concerned about other women and possibly herself.

Anyone else hoping for a tyre calendar for Christmas?

Nah - I've still got the redheads number 😈

Currently watching the 198x Morecombe and Wise Xmas show. Suzanne Danielle in a skimpy outfit with backing dancers in equally skimpy gear.

Wonder what the panel think of that?

No, not at all - the writer isn't concerned for the babes themselves, she's concerned about other women and possibly herself.

so **** the babes even though they enjoy what they do just because she thinks its sexist. The author needs to get a life

Where have you been poah - we did that on about page 1. Let's try an analogy (it's an analogy, not a strawman) an actor takes part in a photoshoot for an advert which promotes smoking to children. The actor enjoys what she does, so presumably there is nothing wrong with that?

Does the actor set fire to the straw man?
[url= https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5492/9332486165_ff7e89c27a_b.jp g" target="_blank">https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5492/9332486165_ff7e89c27a_b.jp g"/> [/img][/url][url= https://flic.kr/p/fdFqZT ]Obviously excited to see such a great bike[/url] by [url= https://www.flickr.com/photos/druidh2000/ ]Colin Cadden[/url], on Flickr

Nothing wrong except that it's illegal because it has demonstrable serious health effects, whereas the Maxxis babes aren't and don't. Other than that, excellent analogy.

actor

Sexist.

.

[quote=DrJ ]Nothing wrong except that it's illegal because it has demonstrable serious health effects, whereas the Maxxis babes aren't and don't. Other than that, excellent analogy.

So it's possible for something to be unacceptable even if the actors involved enjoy it and don't have a problem doing it?

The harm and legality is irrelevant, the suggestion appears to be being made (again) that it's only the opinions of those involved in production who matter, something I was exploring.

Of course. But now you're mixing up a tyre advert with Jihadi John.

[quote=scotroutes ]Does the actor set fire to the straw man?

No, but I bet Jihadi John would

so **** the babes

What? **** them how?