@CptBedlam said:

@FormLikeRONLOTV said:

I found the statue to be in poor taste, but not offensive.

Yup, pretty much how I see it.

So, what are the ~2500 comments about, guys?

People telling other people "I'm offended and you should be too, because it's objectively offensive." And those other people replying, naturally with "I don't think it's offensive and here's why."

@2kings said:

It's a free speech thing guys. [...] You can't say that-

heh.

Where's the sexism in decapitated, arm less, legless, blood soak torso?

I agree it's nasty and distasteful, but if someone wants to buy the stupid thing let them.

Have any of you played Dead Island? I have and the entire game is about killing zombies on an island filled with bikini girls and surfer boys.

If only there was as much debate over the the gun laws that are held so dear.

@TooWalrus said:

@2kings said:

It's a free speech thing guys. [...] You can't say that-

heh.

Way to take it Completely out of context. The spirit of my post is this. When FOX news get's all upity about our hobby we get crazy upset, how is this type of rehtoric any different? Also I still beg the question, who made any of us the gatekeepers of the morally just as it applies to this type of art? I see no one disputing that so let's proceed with the fact that this is indeed art. Regardless of our feelings on what it may or may not represent, it is somebody's creation is it not. Rap music is beloved and despised by millions. You could also say that Rap music is well known for it's deliberate sexism.

We accept it as "ART". Even though it's depiction of women has been overtly objectifying for decades. I guess what I'm saying is this, sometimes you gotta take the good with the bad and hope that the market will reflect the values we hope humanity holds. Just, if you're gonna have a "standard", you gotta hold everything else up to it. Otherwise you're just a hypocrite.

So...beating people/zombies to death with clubs, axes, swords, guns, bombs, pipes, rakes, knives, bats...etc, etc. is fine, but show some unrealistic boobies..and OUTRAGE!

I honestly don't know who would actually WANT it, but its kinda a non-issue to me.

It seriously trips me out that the issue is that its a scantily clad woman's torso rather than the fact that it is a DISMEMBERED TORSO. Perspective people.

@lazyturtle said:

So...beating people/zombies to death with clubs, axes, swords, guns, bombs, pipes, rakes, knives, bats...etc, etc. is fine, but show some unrealistic boobies..and OUTRAGE!

I honestly don't know who would actually WANT it, but its kinda a non-issue to me.

It seriously trips me out that the issue is that its a scantily clad woman's torso rather than the fact that it is a DISMEMBERED TORSO. Perspective people.

That's America for you. Maximum violence and no one cares but show a nipple and it becomes a story on all news channels.

In my opinion, sexual objectification and sexism are two different things. I'd consider it sexist if a woman was denied a job position because of her sex despite being equally or better qualified, for example. But criticising sexual objectification is just denying our innate instincts. Yes, it may be the cheapest method in the world for selling a product (if you want to complain, criticize the lazyness of the approach) and in this case it's utterly tasteless, too, but I wouldn't call this statue sexist.

Write something else and get this bloody torso off the frontpage.

<p>The point is they would NEVER make a perfectly sculpted male torso, you dipshits.</p>