Isn't that Todd Palin?

Ewwwwww.

@1 Tommy Gunn

ewwww Daaaaan! You just ruined any chance that I would get frisky today. That's not nice :-(

@5 were you ok with Rick Santorum?

Stagnetti?

i thought you could get in serious trouble for this kind of thing.

I know she's said some crazy things and all (the human brain/mouse thing literally was insane), but I would put this in the "not helping things" category. A one-off joke about masturbating to her, given her past statements... okay, fine. But photoshopping her into porn images? That seems a little unnecessary. I feel like the right could say "look at how disrespectful they are being to her!" and they might have a point.

I'm as liberal a hatefucker as they come, but this is wrong.

C'mon! Let's see a Sarah/Christine/Glenn Beck sandwich!

No no no. Not okay!

I think a lot of things that she says is just plain silly. But this is unkind. Besides, there are plenty of legitimate things that she says presently to be concerned about and to question.

And.

It just gives the "martyrs" another gold star for towards their "persecution" merit badge.

Do not give those who hate you a reason to wind themselves up and consider their "persecution" justified.

i think it's terrible. i second 5, 8, 9 and 10.

oh and i second 12 too, of course!

Ugh, isn't that what guys call a boner killer?

Are you people all new here or something?

Stop apologizing. While I fully support the adherence of proper etiquette and manners at dinner parties and on public transit, much as with love and war, in politics, all's fair.

I need I remind you that while gays (et al) suffered abuse for decades, eons, it was't until they physically stood up and fought, at Compton's in the TL, and then Stonewall, and again on White Night, that the abusive, snapped out of their "we can treat fags however we want" thinking, and took notice, at least for a minute or two.

I can assure you that these people on the right, are not sitting around worrying about hurting feelings, compromising, "dialoguing" or any other kind of hippie bullshit. They go for the throat and so should we. And once you get it you don't let go. People's live are literally at stake when political decisions are made. This bitch is a loon, a dangerous one. If its her or you, are you gonna let it be you that gets the shaft at the end of the day in the name of sportsmanship? This isn't a friendly game of grab ass people. Its about making and enforcing the laws of the land.

Fuck the right or they're gonna fuck you first. They don't suffer from guilt or a sense of fairness.

@17 Thank you!

Can I just rub one out to a proxy?

17 expressed it crudely, but I think (s)he's right. How is this kind of photoshopping more offensive than Obama with a bone in his nose, a Hitler mustache, or the recent slave-driver thing in Yakima?

This is Slog. I would be disappointed if it didn't sink to this level. Given her completely insane rantings, particularly her beyond-prudish views about sex in general, I think this is entirely appropriate.

I will gladly rub one out in her name. All for a good cause!

Boner killer...
Also, I'm already in for No-Fap September, aka No Faptember.

What the fucking fuck is going on? In the words of Jacobim Mugatu, I feel like I'm taking crazy pills.

Christine O'Donnell Masturbation Day? I'm not crazy about it, but fine. That's about her public, bullshit statements. This, however, crosses a major line, and acting like conservative bigots crossing similar lines first makes it okay is insane. Any liberal, sex-positive columnist who thinks it's cool to create fake, non-consensual, sexualized images of a woman and use them to publicly shame her is a giant fucking hypocrite.

Perhaps some of you weren't present back when your brothers and sisters were marching in the streets and fighting for their lives during the aids epidemic, when people were dying... getting sick and dropping dead... while this country was at best, indifferent and at worst, cheering on the disease. Perhaps you didn't hear the kinds of things that were said, very publicly, by prominent so called representatives at the local, state and federal levels, about our community. Maybe you weren't around in the days when that particular shit was hitting that particular fan. They haven't changed. I'm gonna tell you again, that when it comes to politics, ( and this isn't your Cousin Abigail's coming out cotillion ) when playing against this type of opponent, you fight fire with fire. They have no shame. They get up on television, look straight into the camera, and lie through their teeth everyday about every matter facing our nation today. They have no morals. They have no shame. Being nice about it is not going to sway any of them to your favor or make them think any less of you than they already do.
Sick 'em Danny!

and that photoshopped pic is far less offensive than the words that come out of her mouth and if you don't see that then you have some messed up priorities. This picture is meaningless and affects no one. This woman, and her political positions, should she acquire the power of the legislative branch, can do real damage, to real peoples' real lives and unlike this pic, that's no joke.

Christine O'Donnell isn't that attractive. Not ugly, mind you, but not attractive either. She's sorta plain.

Oh, come off it. I'm so sure that no one but you really understands what it FEELS like to be oppressed, and if any of us really understood, we'd totally get why it's okay to "fight fire with fire," or, more accurately in this case, hate with hate, stupidity with stupidity, and oppression with oppression.

I don't give two shits about being nice. I've said it before and I'll say it again, she should be nailed to the fucking wall for the disgusting things that she says. But if people can't do that without photoshopping her into porn of all sex-shaming, sexist, childish things, then they have no business pretending to be about equality, responsible sex-positivity, or progressive politics.

no business pretending to be about equality, responsible sex-positivity, or progressive politics

I never claimed to be about any of those things. Nor did I say anything about being the only one who understands oppression. And there isn't anything shaming, or sexist about porn or that pic (which isn't porn by the way, or even nudity for that matter)

Picture #3 in the link made me LOL.

Also LOL at people thinking that poorly made photoshops of a woman having sex, and comparing the President to HITLER (with no comic intent), are the in the same realm of indecency.

joe miller in alaska is a much more realistic problem, and we're all looking at crazy fuck sally field jr.

I'm talking about Dan, fab40, and if you don't care about equality and aren't implying that people who don't agree with you don't really understand oppression, or you think that these images are meant to be celebrations of O'Donnell, then your self-righteous little rant is even more pointless. And if you don't think that we're talking about porn, then you didn't click the link to the project (and that full image) or read the blurb and have no idea what you're talking about. As seems perfectly clear.

So, tell me again what this accomplishes, besides alienating a whole bunch of your supporters?

As to this -- "And there isn't anything shaming, or sexist about porn or that pic" -- you're being disingenuous, fab40. If those pics on Fleshbot weren't shaming, there would be no joke. And yes, shaming a woman sexually is sexist. This is no sex-positive celebration of female sexuality, and you know it. Major fail.

Jeez, Dan, just when I'm feeling all warm about you, you go and cheer on something like this. What the fuck were you thinking?

My issue is that by photo-shopping her head onto pornographic images one creates an image that is not sex-positive nor consensual. In fact it is sex-negative, misogynistic and bullying. And, it is hypocritical.

I am not a fan of either this woman or her politics. But, I don't agree that this is the way to go about nailing her to the wall. Now, it is just my $0.02 and everyone is free to ignore it. I'd be lying if I didn't admit that this saddens me to see such non-consensual, sex-negative and misogynistic shaming being promoted as a tool for achieving equality and justice. It is both hypocritical and disappointing in my opinion. And, yes, this gives them another reason to think of themselves as a "persecuted" majority.

I'll shut up now.

I'm not the self righteous one sweetheart. I'm pointing out that there is nothing wrong with the picture and that when it comes to politics, Americans are going to follow the people who've got the balls, so you can't be afraid to get dirty.

It wasn't intended to be a rant. You just took it as such because you didn't like the way I said it. It set you off a little. I just cited some examples of the community standing up for itself and I believe that is correct course of action.

We all know there has or was, for a long time, a debate about the best way to win favor/demand rights in the past.

But really where do get off calling porn sexist and shaming? And everyone in that pic appears to be smiling by the way. Its a funny pic, a somewhat tired old school trick perhaps but certainly harmless and the hoi polloi have been sticking it to the rulers that way since voting booths had stone ballots.

porn porn porn porn porn! boo!

With a friend like fab40, Dan sure doesn't need enemies.

@36: after seeing these oh-so convincing pics, one would hope Christine O'Donnell had at least a couple of enimas...

wha, wha, whut??

Have... have you people never visited the internet before?

inb4 a shitstorm...

TOO LATE.

Yeah, I have to repeat @33's question: what is this supposed to accomplish? Is it going to convince moderate voters not to vote for her? Get her to leave the race? The Santorum thing had a specific purpose: to associate a bigot and his bigotry with a particularly unpleasant image. To this day, when people Google his name, they get links to that association and hopefully learn why he's associated with it.

I'd jerk off to Rush Limbaugh if I thought it would help advance the agenda of gay rights, separation of church and state, access to health care, regulation of financial markets, etc. But for the life of me I don't see how this helps anything.

I'm not calling porn sexist and shaming, fab40, and the whole point is going right over your head. For someone who wants to give other people long-winded "I guess you weren't there" history lessons, you don't seem to know the jackshit basics of the history or present of sexism and how sexualizing women without their consent to demean them has been and is a huge part of it. This shit doesn't just hurt the nutjob female politician in question. It hurts women, and you don't have my permission to use me as your collateral damage.

@35: Good try, but no one here has said porn is inherently sexist and shaming. We're objecting because it's deliberately being used as a tool of humiliation. There's nothing pro-sex or pro-porn about that.

Anyway, I'm not going to waste any more time arguing with you. Kim already said it best. I'll leave it at that.

just another form of:

Quisquis amat. veniat. Veneri volo frangere costas
fustibus et lumbos debilitare deae.
Si potest illa mihi tenerum pertundere pectus
quit ego non possim caput illae frangere fuste

I'm torn between the part of me that admits those against this have a point, and the part that says we should lighten up and enjoy a laugh.

For those of you who think this is awful, I have a question. Do you find it equally awful when fake nude pics are made of mainstream celebrities, when the intent is to create sexy images (a visualization of what we are imagining)? Or is that different because an erotic intent is not as bad as an intent to create fake nude pics just to laugh at someone?

[For the record, a hatefuck wank doesn't turn me on or motivate me to wank. So I'm not feeling this on an erotic level.]

What kim and Irena said.

There's a reason the saying "Two wrongs don't make a right" is an axiom.

(however, three rights make a left)

And two Wrights make an airplane...

C'mon here. This is America, where you're allowed to say disparaging things against Jews so long as you don't suggest the Final Solution.

Someone needs to post pictures of their jizz on a picture of Christine O'Donell's face to the Internet. 'Cause, you know, pics or it didn't happen. :)

@48: Yeah! I mean, we control the banks and the media; we can take a few off-color jokes.

Kim, you put things so well. thanks.

i can't stand this woman - being against this is not supporting her. i'm against it because it's wrong.

ask yourselves this: if dan got a letter to savage love in which a woman we know nothing else about was freaking out because her ex boyfriend (or whoever, someone who hated her), had manipulated pornographic images and photoshopped her face onto them and spread them all over the internet, what do you think dan's response would have been? what would the comment thread look like? i would certainly bet/hope that the majority of us, especially dan, would come down on the side of the woman whose sexuality/privacy etc. had been violated.

wrong is wrong, regardless what we know about her politics. i know she's batshit crazy. i know she needs to be stopped. but this ain't the way to do it - it just gives her and her people more ammo.

All I know is that one person (who wrote very eloquently on this subject last night) got so upset by this that she told me she'll be "taking a break" from Slog for a while. And that pisses me off.

I believe this article is in response to her 'campaign'...
please read this or watch this or this

...context is key?

Maybe I am headed straight to the circle of hell reserved for misogynists, but I have never thought liberals/progressives were "above" crudely sexual images. Come on, people.

I'm a demcrat. Not a progressive. I find progressives to be annoying and I grew up in the middle of progressiveland.

Free speech trumps any perceived right to be protected from hearing or seeing things you don't like. I would never, ever, be in favor of banning opponents from being able to say/portray whatever they want. I don't need that protection.
From cross burning to flag burning, to hate speech to badly photoshopped porn, free means free and you go from there. Start muzzling people and suddenly its a lot harder to identify what you're up against.

I support the right to post these pics. If there's a legal issue, she's welcome to sue.

Oh Jesus, fab40. No one is talking about criminalizing these pictures or legislating against them. Free speech doesn't mean free from criticism. Re-read the first amendment and get a clue.

You fucked up, Dan.

kim in portland and all the others in the same vein--I'm totally with you. Couldn't have said it better myself. Come on, Dan. More "It Get's Better" project, and less sex-negative, misogynistic and frighteningly non-consensual calls to arm, please.

I think a lot of people commenting here haven't actually read the post on Fleshbot, with all the photos (of a variety of sex acts) and their captions (each of them a more-or-less pertinent O'Donnell quote). It's tasteless but biting satire. I laughed.

I should hasten to add that I'm talking especially about those claiming that this is an act of misogyny. Her head is on a black guy's body in one pic for fuck's sake!

Thanks, Kim. You've got a gift for written expression that I really envy. Thanks for speaking up.

I'm with everybody else who says THIS IS NOT OKAY.

I guess this what can happen when you only care about one kind of oppression.

@62: Agreed. I objected to the idea of this before I actually saw the pictures. I am firmly against forcing someone to appear in porn against their will, and that includes realistically photoshopping their face onto someone else's body. This is not that: this is pure satire, with obviously faked images and hilariously apt captions. It may cross the bounds of taste and decency for many, but it is in no way immoral.

@62- Precisely.

I also think part of the problem with the left in this country is that they're so self-censoring! Perhaps its by taking the supposed moral high ground, their believe their voices will be heard above all the irrational and hateful rancor from the right? I agree with fab40, its naive to treat your opposition fairly when they believe your mere existence is beneath contempt. And what Fleshbot's doing is kidstuff compared to the shit they consistently throw the way of minorities in this country, including the aforementioned examples in previous posts.

O'Donnell wouldn't have this done with her pictures (because nothing was done to HER) if she wasnt running for the fucking federal office on an extremely sex-negative platform. And Im a bit disturbed by the folks who cant see the satire beyond their own self-righteous liberal causes. Both sides ran Palin through pure misogynist muck when she was running for vice prez, and continue to do so - where is the indignation for her?

Folks need to get off their high horses if they think their cause is so above a (hilarious!) tongue-in-cheek tactic like this.

Is the sex-negativity part of her political platform? My impression was that her main political aims were the usual Tea Party "Government is BAD!" ideas, and the anti-masturbation stuff was said in other contexts and then blown up again by the media once she got famous. Is actually planning on legislating against masturbation? Crazy chick can be "chaste" all she wants, but that doesn`t mean she`s going to try to make wanking illegal.

These pics are offensive. And they`re not much of a "political tactic" - they`re just an in-joke for like-minded people to giggle at. It`s the same as photoshopping a bone in Obama`s nose or showing Michelle Obama as a chimp - it`s not going to change how anyone votes. It just makes the people who already agree laugh, makes the people who disagree angry, and makes those who created the images look mean.

I've been masturbating constantly to thoughts of dosing Christine O'Donnell with a carefully constructed cocktail of low doses of stims, tranqs, barbs, and low-grade hallucinogens designed to paralyze her inhibitions, enhance tactile sensations, induce a moderate degree of euphoria, and increase her naturally Catholic tendency towards docility and compliance.

I'd hold her at gunpoint and make her watch hardcore BDSM porn while the drugs take effect. Then I'd order her to strip and masturbate while describing the most memorable parts of the video.

At the first sign of resistance, I'd hit her with 100,000 mcg of pharmaceutical grade LSD and enough curare to paralyze her major skeletal muscles and send her crazy little Christian brain straight to the steamy stormy second layer of Dante's Hell where the lustful damned drift on the winds amid the mists.

While she drifts amidst the mists, I shave her completely bald and decorate her all over with henna, from head to toe, eyelids to lips to labia to gums to tongue to soles to armpits.

By that time the curare should be wearing off and her acid trip should be nearing the peak intensity it'll stay at for seventeen days. That's when I start to fuck her.

I fuck her up down back forward left right and sideways. I fuck her ass, fuck her pussy, and fuck her mouth. I bring in specialists to fuck her in ways I, with my slightly above average dick can not. I keep her in a constant state of fuck for seventeen days until the acid begins to fade and so does the henna.

Then I plaster $200 to strategic locations of her supple and thoroughly degraded body and let her go, coherent, exhausted, and still tripping balls.

I really should pay the whore for all the wonderful orgasms she's engendered by the depths of her crazy.

@71: Please tell me you didn't get any jizz in your keyboard just then...