Barbara Moore: Playboy Playmate and DanceSport Competitor

tsb

Well-Known Member
#41
Michelle DiMascio said:
Subjects for flippancy, sarcasm, facetiousness and head shaking abound in the article and this woman's life.

The first time I laughed all day was at Alemana's post, thanks!

I have so much to say about that article AND THE PICTURES that I don't even know where to start.

Well, actually, I do. The photo of her in the red costume is inappropriate. It shows way too much of her, um, lack of dance pants. While I would assume that someone in her line of work is more than comfortable with revealing that side of herself, it doesn't work in ballroom dancing. Competing 101: wear appropriate undergarments. This isn't the Champagne Room at the Cheeta Club. Cover it up, please!

I've actually seen her dance in person, several years ago. I felt that I was looking at a Barbie doll. It was at a competition on the East Coast and the collagen lips, silicone boobs and all the rest of it was just too much. And out of place that far from Hollywood. Even for ballroom, and you know that's saying something!

I also can't believe that the magazine let her plug her website like that. Shameless!

Also, I yawned when she said she came from a Christian conservative household and that, gee, she's now in Playboy. What a shock ! :roll: So many people have swung far into the other direction that I don't care to count them anymore.

And, yes, it's funny to poke fun at uptight people. And that includes Conservative Christians. I said it. OK?

If she had a desk job working at an insurance company no one would care.
my point - which seems to have eluded everyone - is that no one makes fun of uptight people of any identifable group - except this one - without getting branded as non-pc by some member of the pc police. i find the inconsistency worth commenting on - especially if one is supposed to be a moderator - whose response - not the repetitive references - is what i commented on.

i mean, somebody should say something since anyone who fits the "conservative christian" stereotype the people participating in this tpoic appear to subscribe to - they wouldn't be reading a thread referring to a playboy playmate anyway, right? and they have as much right to their views as anyone does, don''t they? i mean, they're not nearly as zealous as salsa dancers are about how salsa has changed their lives, or being provincial when they can't understand why others don't share their world view, etc. :roll:

or maybe they're just being gracious & ignoring all this.
 

Merrylegs

Well-Known Member
#42
tsb said:
Michelle DiMascio said:
Subjects for flippancy, sarcasm, facetiousness and head shaking abound in the article and this woman's life.

The first time I laughed all day was at Alemana's post, thanks!

I have so much to say about that article AND THE PICTURES that I don't even know where to start.

Well, actually, I do. The photo of her in the red costume is inappropriate. It shows way too much of her, um, lack of dance pants. While I would assume that someone in her line of work is more than comfortable with revealing that side of herself, it doesn't work in ballroom dancing. Competing 101: wear appropriate undergarments. This isn't the Champagne Room at the Cheeta Club. Cover it up, please!

I've actually seen her dance in person, several years ago. I felt that I was looking at a Barbie doll. It was at a competition on the East Coast and the collagen lips, silicone boobs and all the rest of it was just too much. And out of place that far from Hollywood. Even for ballroom, and you know that's saying something!

I also can't believe that the magazine let her plug her website like that. Shameless!

Also, I yawned when she said she came from a Christian conservative household and that, gee, she's now in Playboy. What a shock ! :roll: So many people have swung far into the other direction that I don't care to count them anymore.

And, yes, it's funny to poke fun at uptight people. And that includes Conservative Christians. I said it. OK?

If she had a desk job working at an insurance company no one would care.
my point - which seems to have eluded everyone - is that no one makes fun of uptight people of any identifable group - except this one - without getting branded as non-pc by some member of the pc police. i find the inconsistency worth commenting on - especially if one is supposed to be a moderator - whose response - not the repetitive references - is what i commented on.

i mean, somebody should say something since anyone who fits the "conservative christian" stereotype the people participating in this tpoic appear to subscribe to - they wouldn't be reading a thread referring to a playboy playmate anyway, right? and they have as much right to their views as anyone does, don''t they? i mean, they're not nearly as zealous as salsa dancers are about how salsa has changed their lives, or being provincial when they can't understand why others don't share their world view, etc. :roll:

or maybe they're just being gracious & ignoring all this.
You know what? If, instead of saying "conservative Christian" group I inserted a different noun, would you be having this issue with me? I was using it as an example. And, I DIDN"T SAY ANYTHING THAT I HAVEN"T WITNESSED IN MY OWN LIFE. Wanna guess what my family's beliefs are?

Please, give me a break. If you have an issue with someone how about taking a look at the the former Concservative Christian-Playmate-Internet pornstar-adulteress? Giver her a hard time about values and send her an email, why don't you? I think you've missed the mark, my friend.
 

tsb

Well-Known Member
#44
Michelle DiMascio said:
You know what? If, instead of saying "conservative Christian" group I inserted a different noun, would you be having this issue with me?
you still don't get the point - which is the only reason i responded to your post to begin with.

i think that someone who is a moderator, regardless of their personal views, has an obligation to be impartial to the best of their ability rather than encourage this - regardless of what faith or religion is being belittled.

*that* is my point - that it's apparently OK to belttle one particular religion but not others and that someone who is a moderator was apparently encouraging it.

still, in response to your question, deity forbid that i make a flippant comment about a stereotype of jews, catholics, mormons, or muslims, etc. but that someone from that group and/or a moderator wouldn't eventually respond and the ruling from on high would be: non PC. but that doesn't seem to happen for the faith in question.
 

Merrylegs

Well-Known Member
#45
tsb said:
Michelle DiMascio said:
You know what? If, instead of saying "conservative Christian" group I inserted a different noun, would you be having this issue with me?
you still don't get the point - which is the only reason i responded to your post to begin with.

i think that someone who is a moderator, regardless of their personal views, has an obligation to be impartial to the best of their ability rather than encourage this - regardless of what faith or religion is being belittled.

*that* is my point - that it's apparently OK to belttle one particular religion but not others and that someone who is a moderator was apparently encouraging it.

still, in response to your question, deity forbid that i make a flippant comment about a stereotype of jews, catholics, mormons, or muslims, etc. but that someone from that group and/or a moderator wouldn't eventually respond and the ruling from on high would be: non PC. but that doesn't seem to happen for the faith in question.
Sir, I am confused. I am not a moderator on this forum, or anywhere for that matter.

I admit to being confused, I think you might be as well. Are you taking aim at me or someone else? Am I being paranoid or is there an issue with me?

Please write clearly and succinctly so that I may understand what the problem is. Thanks.
 

Merrylegs

Well-Known Member
#47
I've just re-read every post on this thread, and I can confirm that *I* did not make any derrogatory comments about a specific group. I just said it was funny to poke fun at uptight people. Sure, I made comments about the costume and probably some other stuff, too. I made a reference to Barbara Moore's article and that it was no surprise that she swung all the way to the other end of the spectrum based on the household she grew up in. (That was paraphrasing.)

And, the deity in question is acknowledged by many groups, which I won't name for fear of being called un-pc again. When did it become un-pc to just NAME groups?

If you only knew me, you'd know that I am inclusive of people from every aspect of life, with exception of closed minded people. I've recently dumped a friend for constantly telling racist jokes when I asked him not to, because it goes against my beliefs and the way I live my life. I embrace everybody, o.k.?

Why do I feel like I'm getting into trouble here? I'm going to wait until I hear back from you before I respond again. Am I nuts?
 

fascination

Site Moderator
Staff member
#49
tsb said:
Michelle DiMascio said:
You know what? If, instead of saying "conservative Christian" group I inserted a different noun, would you be having this issue with me?
you still don't get the point - which is the only reason i responded to your post to begin with.

i think that someone who is a moderator, regardless of their personal views, has an obligation to be impartial to the best of their ability rather than encourage this - regardless of what faith or religion is being belittled.

*that* is my point - that it's apparently OK to belttle one particular religion but not others and that someone who is a moderator was apparently encouraging it.

still, in response to your question, deity forbid that i make a flippant comment about a stereotype of jews, catholics, mormons, or muslims, etc. but that someone from that group and/or a moderator wouldn't eventually respond and the ruling from on high would be: non PC. but that doesn't seem to happen for the faith in question.
sir, since we are setting the PC setting on high, Catholics ARE christians, at least that is how THEY view themselves and would be quite offended by another christian putting them outside of the category christian...just as would methodists and episcoplaians etc...SO, becareful with your indignation as you have just inadvertantly made a similar error...hug
 

fascination

Site Moderator
Staff member
#50
DancePoet said:
Anyone know if she still competes?

(DP, what were you searching for that brought this to the surface again?)

Oh ... nothing.

(DP, quit your whistling, we might think you are up to something.)
you know DP the only reason I clicked onto this site was to see what YOU had to say about it :lol: :lol:
 

Sagitta

Well-Known Member
#51
This thread was right at the bottom of the page and I couldn't resist. It was brought to my attention by concerned people and I see why. :(

A general comment. Actually a couple...maybe. I welcome pms, but don't want a public discussion of moderating.

1. Comments on moderation by non-members.
Please read the guidelines. Sometimes moderators comment publicly, but in general we like to keep all moderating comments out of the public eye as it changes the atmosphere on df.

2. df atmosphere
Big time sniping going on over here. How many posts arguing about if you/I am a moderator with half the responses with agitated tone and also confused about what we even are talking about? If you think that someone is talking about moderating issues and shouldn't do you continue adding fuel to the fire or pm a moderator? I would advise the latter. There is a reason we have a pm function. Also attacking people's religion/religious views/comments? :shock: This is why we encourage people not to include religious comments. It takes a lot to talk civilly about an issue that is so personal and I have seen very few discussions on df which have touched this issue and succeeded in not disintegrating. Again, we have a pm function.

If I read this thread today as a new member I would hesitate to come back. Think about what most you value about this place and comments that I have seen elsewhere today, included below:
------------------------------------
1:Welcome!

Im pretty new too. So far everyone seems nice. Laughing


2:
Thanks for all the welcomes Very Happy

I haven’t figured out yet how to reply to parts of other posts so I will do it all in one go….
---------------------------------------

Perhaps when we feel like retorting back online we consider the impression that we are making? What sort of community that we are trying to create? Open, welcoming discussion, respectfully disagreeing...
 
#53
I wanted to see what all the ruckus is about, so I went and looked up Barbara Moore photos on google images. I must say, compared to the airbrushed perfection of her Playboy portfolio, her boob job looks absolutely terrible on most of the photos. Big turnoff. Ladies, don't do it.
 

Dance Ads