You know, I didn't read the article. I intentionally did not reply directly to any of your posts. I think you are being unnecessarily argumentative. I recognize the dynamic: People are arguing with you, so you argue back. They don't like you behaving X way so they do something not terribly different and just add fuel to the fire. Given that your complaints that this is off topic is the primary discussion here, this article is probably not of much interest to the crowd here. Flag it and move on is probably a better policy than arguing at length, thereby creating something akin to "the Streisand effect" of drawing additional interest to something you think shouldn't be here at all.
I probably shouldn't have replied at all myself. I'm just kind of pedantic about things like assumptions that an interest in female breasts is merely lurid. It's not. Even with a 98% male populace, I have found it perfectly possible as a woman to talk about things like breasts in a perfectly civil, logical, scientific fashion. (And even photos of breasts are also not necessarily about sex per se.) Not all men are pigs who treat women as nothing but sex objects and a majority male population does not automatically suggest a majority sexist pig population. Such implied assumptions bug me.
I suspect I will seriously regret having replied a second time as well, though my only intent was clarification: That is to say I'm not arguing with you about whether or not this is on topic. I'm merely being pedantic about an unrelated point, one that I think is a little more important than whether or not some specific article "belongs" here.
I probably shouldn't have replied at all myself. I'm just kind of pedantic about things like assumptions that an interest in female breasts is merely lurid. It's not. Even with a 98% male populace, I have found it perfectly possible as a woman to talk about things like breasts in a perfectly civil, logical, scientific fashion. (And even photos of breasts are also not necessarily about sex per se.) Not all men are pigs who treat women as nothing but sex objects and a majority male population does not automatically suggest a majority sexist pig population. Such implied assumptions bug me.
I suspect I will seriously regret having replied a second time as well, though my only intent was clarification: That is to say I'm not arguing with you about whether or not this is on topic. I'm merely being pedantic about an unrelated point, one that I think is a little more important than whether or not some specific article "belongs" here.