I'm sorry bro, I'm not updated with the times on what degree is required for something to be called sexual. I just don't find #24 sexual, if it's just my opinion, then OK. But on a more serious note, those dense JP mc's are really cancer, some people can get really offended if you compare them with it. (Not me but others might.)
Okay, I think you are just not familiar with this. That cover is actually a reference to the image of Mary Jane from Amazing Spider-Man issue #601 that was published in 2009:
Sorry. You just reminds me of them. I can understand if you can't see the more subtle ones (like the girl in the rabbit costume) but even the more on-your-face ones you still can't see them.
Interesting idea.
Um . . . Yes? . . . Throughout history? Are you seriously asking these questions?
Nice idea mate. It would also help those authors to bring their story into attention.
Too bad? Don’t you mean “good”? If you get offended by a painting, by a picture that was made by someone you never met and never will meet then that is “good” according to you? Why would you care what people who you don't care about think? I don’t think little of fiction, I just don’t take it personal. My apologies if I didn’t display enough empathy.
I'm not offended by them? I didn't take them personaly? These are just facts? They happened? I just pointed them out to you?
Hahaha well.... The majority of the user base is from NUF so yeAnd I thought people only loved hijacking in NUF~
So you are denial now. SureI’m agitated? How? I’m also getting affected by there being an opposite view? So i can’t respond to your arguement without feeling “agitated”? What kind of logic is that?
. Keep denying and pretend. That would make things go away.
What a sore loser.Oh? So you know more about what I'm feeling than I do?
Realizing he can't win with the original topic and is losing badly, he now aggressively changing the topic to his feelings and whatnot. Like, what did you feelings have to do with the original topic? None. You are just trying to distract so we will forget about what we are originally talking.
We were talking about sexual covers and fictions that are sexual, and then you brought up how some people may find a certain picture “offensive”, so I responded by asking why would people take fiction so seriously to the point they find it “offensive”, in which you replied that I am so “affected” by it and I’m “agitated”, in which I replied that I’m not feeling agitated because I don’t know what I’m supposed to feel agitated by, and then you said I’m in denial of....myself? So I responded by asking why you think you know more about if I’m “agitated” or not than I do, and then you said the quote in this reply. And now I am apparently a sore loser, did I get what went down correctly? Or am I in denial again?What a sore loser.
And I'm sure you don't want to go back to the original topic. After all, you are trying hard to stay away from it. Though it is an admittance that I'm correct and you can't take it that I was right.
Well, if want to be hypocritical and won't your take your own words about not caring about what people you don't care about think, then I'll take it instead. I really don't care about what you think about the topic and I especially don't care about your feelings and your denials. I don't want your drama. Not to mention, the topic "your feelings" is so uninteresting, dull and tedious that no one in their right mind would really want to talk about it.