Page 1 of 1

What danielh has been up to...

Posted: Wed Jan 30, 2008 10:54 am
by christie1111

Posted: Wed Jan 30, 2008 11:07 am
by peacock2121
Poor catholics.

No sense of humor.

Posted: Wed Jan 30, 2008 11:12 am
by danielh41
Nice ad, although I've never modeled for nuns. Not that I wouldn't though...

Posted: Wed Jan 30, 2008 11:19 am
by BackInTex
peacock2121 wrote:Poor catholics.

No sense of humor.
Perhaps if it were an ad for a fresh produce company and depicted a bunch of young black kids looking at a large display of watermelons with their mouths watering you would say "Poor blacks, no sense of humor"?

Posted: Wed Jan 30, 2008 11:39 am
by gsabc
BackInTex wrote:
peacock2121 wrote:Poor catholics.

No sense of humor.
Perhaps if it were an ad for a fresh produce company and depicted a bunch of young black kids looking at a large display of watermelons with their mouths watering you would say "Poor blacks, no sense of humor"?
I was more wondering if they require nuns and other women not to look up when going through the Sistine Chapel. Or to avert their eyes when passing by the "David" statue.

Gabe Kaplan: Stereotypes have some basis in reality. Some Jews are good with money. Some blacks like watermelon. Some Chinese all look alike.

Ricky Nelson: You can't please everyone.

Tom Lehrer: When correctly viewed/Everything is lewd.

Posted: Wed Jan 30, 2008 11:54 am
by peacock2121
BackInTex wrote:
peacock2121 wrote:Poor catholics.

No sense of humor.
Perhaps if it were an ad for a fresh produce company and depicted a bunch of young black kids looking at a large display of watermelons with their mouths watering you would say "Poor blacks, no sense of humor"?
Really not a good analogy. Stereotypes have black people like/jones for watermelons. Stereotypes have nuns not like/jones for naked men.

Come up with a good analogy and I will be happy to answer your question.

Posted: Wed Jan 30, 2008 12:36 pm
by danielh41
peacock2121 wrote:
BackInTex wrote:
peacock2121 wrote:Poor catholics.

No sense of humor.
Perhaps if it were an ad for a fresh produce company and depicted a bunch of young black kids looking at a large display of watermelons with their mouths watering you would say "Poor blacks, no sense of humor"?
Really not a good analogy. Stereotypes have black people like/jones for watermelons. Stereotypes have nuns not like/jones for naked men.

Come up with a good analogy and I will be happy to answer your question.
Yeah, I didn't get this analogy either. I'm glad I'm not the only one...

And when I said that I've never modeled for nuns, I should probably amend that to "I've never knowingly modeled for nuns."

Posted: Wed Jan 30, 2008 12:56 pm
by gsabc
danielh41 wrote:And when I said that I've never modeled for nuns, I should probably amend that to "I've never knowingly modeled for nuns."
Reminds me of back at one of my first jobs. Short, cute lady worked in my group. Got asked out by one of the unattached guys, and they went on a date or two. He was mortified when she left about six months later to become a nun. "I dated a NUN???"

Posted: Wed Jan 30, 2008 12:59 pm
by tlynn78
Nuns or no nuns, that model has a nice





uh, muscle tone. Yup, gooood muscle tone.


t.

Posted: Wed Jan 30, 2008 1:07 pm
by mrkelley23
gsabc wrote:
danielh41 wrote:And when I said that I've never modeled for nuns, I should probably amend that to "I've never knowingly modeled for nuns."
Reminds me of back at one of my first jobs. Short, cute lady worked in my group. Got asked out by one of the unattached guys, and they went on a date or two. He was mortified when she left about six months later to become a nun. "I dated a NUN???"
Ever-so-tactful me would've responded, "No, you turned her into one."

:twisted:

Posted: Thu Jan 31, 2008 9:14 am
by BackInTex
peacock2121 wrote:
BackInTex wrote:
peacock2121 wrote:Poor catholics.

No sense of humor.
Perhaps if it were an ad for a fresh produce company and depicted a bunch of young black kids looking at a large display of watermelons with their mouths watering you would say "Poor blacks, no sense of humor"?
Really not a good analogy. Stereotypes have black people like/jones for watermelons. Stereotypes have nuns not like/jones for naked men.

Come up with a good analogy and I will be happy to answer your question.
It is a good analogy. Humor was based on a stereotype. The difference being that blacks/watermelon is not necessarily a negative stereotype as there is nothing negative, immoral, perverted, or prudish about liking watermelon. The stereotype with Catholic Nuns, in this instance is slightly negative (not that is matters for my analogy) from the sponsors perspective because the sponsor likely feels the prudish (stereotypical) nature of nuns as foolish.

Yet unless the analogy it +/+ or -/- it can't work for you? My point, and one that I had hoped would be clear, is that people can be offended by stereotypes whether that stereotype is their behavior, looks, likes or dislikes.

Many blacks would certainly be offended by a watermelon analogy just as these Catholics are offended by the nude men analogy.

However, I do agree with your first point, no sense of humor. Just wonder if you'd say the same about other stereotypes.

Posted: Thu Jan 31, 2008 9:42 am
by peacock2121
BackInTex wrote:
peacock2121 wrote:
BackInTex wrote: Perhaps if it were an ad for a fresh produce company and depicted a bunch of young black kids looking at a large display of watermelons with their mouths watering you would say "Poor blacks, no sense of humor"?
Really not a good analogy. Stereotypes have black people like/jones for watermelons. Stereotypes have nuns not like/jones for naked men.

Come up with a good analogy and I will be happy to answer your question.
It is a good analogy. Humor was based on a stereotype. The difference being that blacks/watermelon is not necessarily a negative stereotype as there is nothing negative, immoral, perverted, or prudish about liking watermelon. The stereotype with Catholic Nuns, in this instance is slightly negative (not that is matters for my analogy) from the sponsors perspective because the sponsor likely feels the prudish (stereotypical) nature of nuns as foolish.

Yet unless the analogy it +/+ or -/- it can't work for you? My point, and one that I had hoped would be clear, is that people can be offended by stereotypes whether that stereotype is their behavior, looks, likes or dislikes.

Many blacks would certainly be offended by a watermelon analogy just as these Catholics are offended by the nude men analogy.

However, I do agree with your first point, no sense of humor. Just wonder if you'd say the same about other stereotypes.
Not sure about the black thing.

Am sure if it were a bunch of rabbis salivating over pork, and the people in charge of Judaism made a big fuss, I would say "poor Jews, they have no sense of humor.

The watermelon thing has me for some reason - I am thinking it is because I see a covert stoopidness attached to it - that it's not just about watermelon.

Posted: Thu Jan 31, 2008 11:10 am
by VAdame
mrkelley23 wrote:
gsabc wrote:
danielh41 wrote:And when I said that I've never modeled for nuns, I should probably amend that to "I've never knowingly modeled for nuns."
Reminds me of back at one of my first jobs. Short, cute lady worked in my group. Got asked out by one of the unattached guys, and they went on a date or two. He was mortified when she left about six months later to become a nun. "I dated a NUN???"
Ever-so-tactful me would've responded, "No, you turned her into one."

:twisted:
LOL -- My cousin Patty dated a priest (before he was a priest.) He later married her!

By that I mean, of course, that he witnessed the Sacrament of Matrimony between Patty & her husband :)

Posted: Thu Jan 31, 2008 11:14 am
by danielh41
tlynn78 wrote:Nuns or no nuns, that model has a nice





uh, muscle tone. Yup, gooood muscle tone.


t.
In that case then... Yeah, that's me modeling...

Posted: Thu Jan 31, 2008 11:28 am
by tlynn78
In that case then... Yeah, that's me modeling...

lol - well, yeah, we knew that from your avatar, anyway. :lol:


t.