Happy St. Patrick's Day! Put on Some Green...

[Jason Dunn]

In honour of this fine, fine day, I've created a Today screen theme that will prevent you from getting pinched! :wink:

Download the theme (http://www.pocketpcthoughts.com/files/stpatricksday.tsk) for your Pocket PC (21 KB) and change your desktop wallpaper (http://www.pocketpcthoughts.com/files/stpatricksday.jpg) (144 KB) while you're at it. I've never seen a Leprechaun, but if they all look like this, it's time to change the Frosted Lucky Charms cereal box (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&q=frosted+lucky+charms)... :lol:

UPDATE: If a PG-13 image of a Leprechaun in a bikini offends you, please do not click either of the links above. I'm not responsible for the emotional trauma that you may feel if you do. :lol:

[PetiteFlower]

If you can make one with a beefy shirtless male leprachaun, then I'll think about it :p

[lurch]

Dude-

I seriously don't appreciate that at all... :?

Pocket PC Thoughts took a small step down in my "respect level".. I thought this was a respectable website where pictures like that would never be brought up, specifically on the home page!!

Dissappointedly yours,
lurch

[WindWalker]

From the distant murky RPG past....

Isn't that the Leprechaun-ized version of the lovely and talented Annah from the underappreciated "Planescape:Torment?"

Or am I just to geeky to live?

[bikeman]

lurch - Lighten up, dude. :wink: If you are objecting to the image, there are much more lascivious images all over the media, including the nightly news. And if you are objecting to any Celtic pagan overtones, well, Christianity has borrowed heavily from Celtic traditions.

[lurch]

lurch - Lighten up, dude. :wink: If you are objecting to the image, there are much more lascivious images all over the media, including the nightly news. And if you are objecting to any Celtic pagan overtones, well, christinaity has borrowed heavily from Celtic traditions.

I know it's not "that bad", but if I wanted to see stuff like that I'd go to the places that have stuff like that.

It's not why I come here, and I don't expect it to show up here!
Besides, I don't buy the excuse "it's everywhere else, so why not here?" that's a cop out.

[cslaughtermd]

I'm with bikeman - that theme is not very racy compared to half the things on primetime television these days! I'd see it as a relatively innocent holiday amusement for other readers. If you don't like it, don't download it. Pocketpcthoughts maintains a high level of respect in my eyes. Happy St. Patty's Day!

[Foo Fighter]

Happy St. Pat day!

By the way....what the hell is a blarney stone? Sounds like something you pass through your urinary tract. :?

[Sven Johannsen]

Sheesh Lurch, if that bothers you you better stay off the beach, and wear blinders when walking through any department store near the lingerie section.

Is that a new Axim case she has strapped to her leg?

[Kati Compton]

And where's something for the ladies?

[Jonathan1]

In honour of this fine, fine day, I've created a Today screen theme that will prevent you from getting pinched! :wink:



Preventing pinching maybe. Slappings and lawsuits are another matter altogether. ;)

[Jason Dunn]

If you can make one with a beefy shirtless male leprachaun, then I'll think about it :p

If only I could find one! :lol:

[WindWalker]

OK......despite my apparent status as the only one who actually played Torment, I am following up with this info...

Annah was a tiefling, a half demon half human hybrid in the City of Doors called Sigil. She was a critical NPC in the game, and her voice was provided by Sheena Easton. If you ever have a hankering to play a deep computer RPG, check out Torment in the bargain bins at your local Wal-mart. I think you'll be pleasantly surprised.

The original character looked like this. (http://www.planetbaldursgate.com/images/image.asp?/pst/encounters/characters/annah/model_annah.jpg) Other info on her is here. (http://www.planetbaldursgate.com/pst/encounters/characters/annah/)

THe original wallpaper that this theme came from is here. (http://www.planetbaldursgate.com/pst/media/files/wallpapers/)

There you have it!

[Jason Dunn]

Pocket PC Thoughts took a small step down in my "respect level".. I thought this was a respectable website where pictures like that would never be brought up, specifically on the home page!

It never occurred to me that a computerized cartoon character in a bikini could possibly offend a fellow Christian. :? If you can't appreciate beauty, in all forms, then you need to take another look at the world around you. :wink:

[Jason Dunn]

Isn't that the Leprechaun-ized version of the lovely and talented Annah from the underappreciated "Planescape:Torment?"

Could be! I don't remember where I found that, and there's no author name on the image...

[JohnnyFlash]

Happy St. Pat's. As an Irishman living in the US, I can tell you it's a weird feeling to be here on 17th March.

St. Pat's day here IS NOT about celebrating Irishness, it's about celebrating American-Irishness, and there's a difference. I'd never heard of the pinching business, or corned-beef and cabbage until I got here a few years ago.

Still, I'm happy to get some extra kudos for actually being Irish on this day (unlike when I was living in London for example, and got duffed up instead), so if you are over the necessary age limit, hope you enjoy a glass of Guinness (or Murphys) and thank the Lord for Ireland - the country that exports more people than almost any other ;-)

Go n'éirí leat

[PetiteFlower]

I do have to say that I do find it *somewhat* disturbing that some places and companies seem to think that because the majority of their viewers/customers are male, that it's ok to objectify women. DOA Volleyball anyone? It's going for the cheap gawk and it's rather tasteless IMO. The image itself isn't that objectionable, it's the mindset behind it that bothers me. I wasn't going to say anything about it, but I think lurch has a point so I wanted to back him up, since everyone else has jumped on him :)

[Jason Dunn]

The image itself isn't that objectionable, it's the mindset behind it that bothers me.

But how did you know what my mindset was when I posted this?

It happens to be the only St. Patrick's Day image I have on my computer, and it's somewhat of a tradition with me to use this wallpaper and that theme on March 17th (this being the second year I've had that image).

Why assume the worst? Why not simply see it for what it is: a little bit of harmless fun on a day all about green?

[jmbneaf]

Someone call the thought police! Quick!

Everyone lighten up! - What ever happened to that happy March day we all lived for in our youths! - Green shakes from McDonalds the green Chicago river - food and fun ??? w/o all this PC stuff....

All take a chill pill plezz er um please. If you don't like it don't look & be happy that you have the right to or not to read these messages! Unlike other locations in the world!

JB

[JohnnyFlash]

The image itself isn't that objectionable, it's the mindset behind it that bothers me.
But how did you know what my mindset was when I posted this?


It is a sexist image, objectifying women and supporting stereotypes - that cannot be denied. Two stereotypes in fact: that view of the female form, but also all that Irish stuff! So I might get offended too! :-)

Seriously though, that kind of image doesn't help anyone. But I find it bizarre that a female form and hints of sex are so offensive, and guns, violence the forthcoming media frenzy of a war in Iraq isn't.

The coverage of the Iraqii war - now THAT will be pornography.

[Jason Dunn]

It is a sexist image, objectifying women and supporting stereotypes - that cannot be denied. Two stereotypes in fact: that view of the female form, but also all that Irish stuff! So I might get offended too! :-)

I can certainly deny it.

So let me get this straight: an image of a woman, any woman, is sexist. And an image of Irish iconography is also offensive because, well, you're Irish and you don't agree with the way someone else (the artist of this work) portrayed an aspect of your culture?

Politically correct garbage like this makes me sick - people who try to suck the life and fun out of things need to get over their own insecurities and care about things that matter! Feeding the poor - that matters! Giving shelter to the homeless - that matters! Curing cancer - that matters! Supporting local charities and organizations doing good in the world - that matters!

A cartoon of a female leprechaun posted on a Pocket PC site on St. Patrick's day is a blip on the radar of life, no matter how "offensive" it is, and DOES NOT MATTER.

IT'S NOT EVEN A HUMAN WOMAN! SHE HAS A TAIL!?! 8O

I'd be more inclinced to take you people who are complaining seriously if one of you were a Leprechaun and felt this degraded your species. So, come on, Leprechauns please speak up - I'm listening. The rest of you, well, go try to stamp prayer out of schools or whatever else the politically correct army is up to this week... :evil:

[JohnnyFlash]

By the way, I'm delighted that this thread has degenerated into a discussion of sex, politics and religion. As anyone who has actually been in an Irish pub will testify, this is EXACTLY what bring Irish is all about!

I feel so much closer to home now! :-)

HAPPY ST. PATRICK'S DAY!!!!

[JohnnyFlash]

I can certainly deny it.

So let me get this straight: an image of a woman, any woman, is sexist.

No. But that image is. Sorry you can't see that..

[lurch]

Seriously though, that kind of image doesn't help anyone. But I find it bizarre that a female form and hints of sex are so offensive, and guns, violence the forthcoming media frenzy of a war in Iraq isn't.

The coverage of the Iraqii war - now THAT will be pornography.

<tongue in cheek>Sorry, next time I make a comment like that I'll be sure to include everything that is offensive in the world... ;)</tongue in cheek>

(whoa I can't believe how geeky I've become! I'm using html-type tags to indicate my attitude when typing... wow.)

[Jason Dunn]

This is going to get moved into the Hall of Flame & Shame pretty soon, but I might as well finish what I started...


I can certainly deny it.

So let me get this straight: an image of a woman, any woman, is sexist.

No. But that image is. Sorry you can't see that..

No, you feel that image is sexist. You're projecting your feelings about the image into this conversation as an ABSOLUTE, which is what's ridiculous. You can say "I feel that image is sexist", but other people have every right to say "I feel that image is not sexist". Neither one is an absolute - both are correct for that person. I'm normally not a big believer in the "personal truth" line of thinking, but when it comes to one human interpreting a visual image created by another human, there is no absolute. A sunrise might be beautiful to one person, but a collection of far-off gas and refractory light to another - both interpretations are "correct".

What if I put a picture of my wife up in a bikini? Is that also sexist? When does an image become sexist? Is "sexy" automatically "sexist"? That seems to be the line of thinking I'm seeing here, which is even more laughable... :lol:

[egads]

I do have to say that I do find it *somewhat* disturbing that some places and companies seem to think that because the majority of their viewers/customers are male, that it's ok to objectify women. DOA Volleyball anyone? It's going for the cheap gawk and it's rather tasteless IMO. The image itself isn't that objectionable, it's the mindset behind it that bothers me. I wasn't going to say anything about it, but I think lurch has a point so I wanted to back him up, since everyone else has jumped on him :)

I think there are a number of people out there that may find Lurch's Avatar just as offensive as Jason's picture. Would I have posted a picture like that, no, but I also would not have an Avatar that announces I'm a Christian (which I am) every time I post either.

We should not be jumping on Jason for posting that picture, we should be jumping on Jason for liking HTML in email's :D

I'm from the Chicago area and have been to a many St. Patty's day parades and if someone was dressed like that they would have died of exposure :D

[luebster]

Hmm...what's that smell? Oh yes, HOFS! Not too much longer now...

[Ashley Dunn]

Hello everyone, it's Ashley here - Jason's wife. First off, I kinda think this photo is cute. :-) Like Jason said, she has a tail. I'm into the sci fi thing and have even read a few fantasy novels, and this photo is simply that - fantasy.

However, I can promise you you will never see a photo of me in a bikini up on the site. :lol:

[Jason Dunn]

I think there are a number of people out there that may find Lurch's Avatar just as offensive as Jason's picture. Would I have posted a picture like that, no, but I also would not have an Avatar that announces I'm a Christian (which I am) every time I post either.

Exactly! So are Avatars next on the hit list? There are some people who have images of females in their avatars - quick, better take 'em down before the "Thought Police" (not the Thoughts Police - they're different :lol:) come after you! After that....crosses? Animals? Circles? What if the Square Loving Society (SLS) finds circles offensive? :lol:

In any given community of people, a certain amount of freedom of expression should be protected. This is a private Web site, so true "freedom of speech" doesn't apply here, but we try to maintain a healthy level of free speech, even if people don't always agree with each other. Keeping this silly thread going is a good example of that, for better or worse. :roll:

[JornadaJ]

It's a cartoon. Animation. I'm sorry, but offensive? A cartoon female...something with a tail...dressed in green. Oops, DRAWN in green.

I've seen the same on the cover art work of some of the fantasy novels. I mean, we have people dying in Asia and now N. America of some mystery superbug, we're on the verge of a war and the economy is sputtering at best.

If that's all it takes to offend people, wow, we all need thicker skins. Relax!

[Jason Dunn]

However, I can promise you you will never see a photo of me in a bikini up on the site. :lol:

Oh come on honey, please? I'm sure it would be popular, you hottie you! :mrgreen:

[Don Tolson]

Just to shift the focus a bit and answer a couple of questions I saw on page one....

a) The Blarney Stone -- is located in Blarney Castle -- and here's the 'official' word from their site:

Kissing the Blarney stone

The world famous Blarney Stone is situated high up in the battlements of the castle. Follow one of the several long, stone spiral staircases up to the top and enjoy the spectacular views of the lush green Irish countryside, Blarney House and The Village of Blarney.

The stone is believed to be half of the Stone of Scone which originally belonged to Scotland. Scottish Kings were crowned over the stone, because it was believed to have special powers.

The stone was given to Cormac McCarthy by Robert the Bruce in 1314 in return for his support in the Battle of Bannockburn.

Queen Elizabeth I wanted Irish chiefs to agree to occupy their own lands under title from her. Cormac Teige McCarthy, the Lord of Blarney, handled every Royal request with subtle diplomacy, promising loyalty to the Queen without "giving in". Elizabeth proclaimed that McCarthy was giving her "a lot of Blarney", thus giving rise to the legend.

You too can acquire the gift of eloquence by kissing the stone!


b) I was reading some material in the Social Studies column from the Globe and Mail (www.globeandmail.com) this morning about St. Patrick's Day, and apparently, in Ireland, it is a day for quiet reflection when Irish go to visit graves of their relatives. As was mentioned earlier, all the 'merrymaking' is apparently a North American invention. According to the article, St. Patrick wasn't even Irish!!

[Don Tolson]

OK, I gotta say it -- why are Jason and Ashley communicating via email??? (Don't you guys sit, like across the room from each other???)

[lurch]

I think there are a number of people out there that may find Lurch's Avatar just as offensive as Jason's picture. Would I have posted a picture like that, no, but I also would not have an Avatar that announces I'm a Christian (which I am) every time I post either.

Exactly! So are Avatars next on the hit list? There are some people who have images of females in their avatars - quick, better take 'em down before the "Thought Police" (not the Thoughts Police - they're different :lol:) come after you! After that....crosses? Animals? Circles? What if the Square Loving Society (SLS) finds circles offensive? :lol:

In any given community of people, a certain amount of freedom of expression should be protected. This is a private Web site, so true "freedom of speech" doesn't apply here, but we try to maintain a healthy level of free speech, even if people don't always agree with each other. Keeping this silly thread going is a good example of that, for better or worse. :roll:

Wow, looks like I underestimated the ability of the general public to take something and run with it.. :)

My first and only point was that i didn't expect to see something like this show up on PocketPCThoughts' HOME PAGE... If I get offended by a forum post, or an AVATAR, I don't make a deal about it or even post about it. The picture that we're talking about wasn't even that offensive to me, I just felt it was slightly innappropriate for this website.
Oh well!
At least we made it to the hall 'o flame and shame! :)

P.S. If the fact that i have a cross as my avatar pegs me as a Christian, then I am saddened. I would hope that the life I lead, and the language out of my mouth would reveal my heart... the cross is the logo from my website. But I suppose on a website you can't see how I live my life or anything (maybe that's a good thing though)

[GoldKey]

I do have to say that I do find it *somewhat* disturbing that some places and companies seem to think that because the majority of their viewers/customers are male, that it's ok to objectify women. DOA Volleyball anyone? It's going for the cheap gawk and it's rather tasteless IMO. The image itself isn't that objectionable, it's the mindset behind it that bothers me. I wasn't going to say anything about it, but I think lurch has a point so I wanted to back him up, since everyone else has jumped on him :)

Remember, it cuts both ways, you posted this earlier in the thread.

If you can make one with a beefy shirtless male leprachaun, then I'll think about it :p

[JonnoB]

Maybe what this forum needs is an IGNORE list much like that used in IRC and IM software.

[lurch]

No, you feel that image is sexist. You're projecting your feelings about the image into this conversation as an ABSOLUTE, which is what's ridiculous. You can say "I feel that image is sexist", but other people have every right to say "I feel that image is not sexist". Neither one is an absolute - both are correct for that person. I'm normally not a big believer in the "personal truth" line of thinking, but when it comes to one human interpreting a visual image created by another human, there is no absolute. A sunrise might be beautiful to one person, but a collection of far-off gas and refractory light to another - both interpretations are "correct".

You really need to read C.S. Lewis's "The Abolition of Man"... He might have a thing or two to say about your argument here.. :)

[Jason Dunn]

OK, I gotta say it -- why are Jason and Ashley communicating via email??? (Don't you guys sit, like across the room from each other???)

No, I'm at work in my basement and she's at work in an office far away. Come on, we're not THAT geeky... :wink: :lol: Although we do IM when we're in different rooms... :D

[entropy1980]

I am starting a www.pocketpcthoughtspolice.com to make everyone happy....here's what it will look
www.pocketpcthoughpolice.com
Start page










End Page
:roll: :wink:

[klinux]

Uh, the leprechan sort of looks freaky and scary. I am going to have heck of a nightmare tonight. Thanks a lot Jason. :)

[JohnnyFlash]

This is going to get moved into the Hall of Flame & Shame pretty soon, but I might as well finish what I started...


I can certainly deny it.

So let me get this straight: an image of a woman, any woman, is sexist.

No. But that image is. Sorry you can't see that..

No, you feel that image is sexist.

Yes I do. And rather sad, in fact, to have a computer-generated female figure designed to be "sexy" displayed on a pocket computer. I guess we differ in our opinions. I'm sure St Patrick would have loved to have a picture just like that, of course.

[Jason Dunn]

I do have to say that I do find it *somewhat* disturbing that some places and companies seem to think that because the majority of their viewers/customers are male, that it's ok to objectify women. DOA Volleyball anyone? It's going for the cheap gawk and it's rather tasteless IMO. The image itself isn't that objectionable, it's the mindset behind it that bothers me. I wasn't going to say anything about it, but I think lurch has a point so I wanted to back him up, since everyone else has jumped on him :)

Remember, it cuts both ways, you posted this earlier in the thread.

If you can make one with a beefy shirtless male leprachaun, then I'll think about it :p

A good point...I think PetiteFlower's initial post was in line with the spirit of my original post - fun, light-hearted. Heck, if I had a beefy male Leprechaun image, I just might have made a theme. :wink:

I find it odd that THIS post was the one to cause the ruckus - go back a few days and read the comments in the thread where Ed posted the image-edited photo of the nurse. If anything, I thought THOSE comments would have been a little offensive to some. But I've just accepted with a 95% male readership, "boys will be boys". If any of the comments crossed the line, we certainly would have stepped in, but they were all innocent enough.

This whole issue got blown our of proportion by everyone (including myself) so how about I just buy you all some green beer and we forget about it? :D

[Kati Compton]

Remember, it cuts both ways, you posted this earlier in the thread.

If you can make one with a beefy shirtless male leprachaun, then I'll think about it :p

I took this comment as a signal that it's a bit tiring to only see hot women. I could be wrong here.

No the picture doesn't offend me. I could see a parent perhaps getting upset if their young child (10 yrs?) was browsing a site and that pic was on the front page. I personally wouldn't be (though I have to admit that I'm not yet a parent), but some would be.

I do think images like this make a site seem less professional. Such as a recent argument about Pocketgear vs. Handango, I believe. But since this is a user site, I don't think that's necessarily an issue. I will say that I don't think the image should have been front page, but I also don't put in all the effort to run the site, so to that extent, what I think isn't important. But as one of the few women on the board, I felt I should at least give an opinion.

It's not the pictures of sexy women that bother me. Instead, I get very frustrated by the lack of equal time (which is well stated by somewhat snide but very appropriate comment by PetiteFlower). Goldkey - I think you missed the point that it *doesn't* cut both ways, and that in itself can be upsetting. I haven't seen *any* sexy guy pictures here.

I don't think there's anything wrong in finding the female form sexy - I just don't really. And it does get tiring when the media (I'm not talking about this site here) seems to only make a woman's image important, regardless of the rest of her traits. Anyone try to search for porn of non-gay men lately?

A number of times this site has had "sexy girl" pictures. This one, the one with the cell phone necklace, the nurse with boobs of steel, etc. Am I upset? No. Do I sigh and shake my head before moving on? Sometimes. But that's just part of what I signed up for when I wanted to hang out in a male-dominated board. Most guys don't want to look at pictures of sexy guys.

Did I get offended by that picture? No. Do I think it's cute? Yes, actually. Am I disappointed that there isn't a sexy guy version? Yes I am. Am I going to stop visiting this site because of it? No.

YMMV

[Kati Compton]

A good point...I think PetiteFlower's initial post was in line with the spirit of my original post - fun, light-hearted. Heck, if I had a beefy male Leprechaun image, I just might have made a theme. :wink:

Sometimes pretending to play along is the best way for a woman to deal with the issue of how women are frequently portrayed. Underneath, those sentiments may not be true. Why do we react this way? Because if we complain, we get told to relax and not be so uptight. Doesn't make us feel too good to be told it's our fault for objecting or being hurt or whatever. Especially by people who don't have the "opportunity" to see it from the female side.

Not that this picture had that effect on me, but I've done this in some situations before.

Just FYI.

Edit #1: fixed spelling
Edit #2: Responing to PDA Gerbil without adding *another* post:

I think the issue is that on a beach you're expecing to see people (both genders) in swimsuits. On the front page of a tech community, perhaps not. But I think the main argument is no longer over the offensiveness or lack thereof of this particular picture, but is more on the principle of the issue. Several people on both sides of the argument have already stated that this particular image in and of itself is not all that offensive if at all.

[Jonathon Watkins]

It's a cartoon. It's less than what you would see at a beach. This agrument is blown out of all proportion. (Just like her :wink:)

Seriously - what's the problem?

[Ed Hansberry]

I am starting a www.pocketpcthoughtspolice.com to make everyone happy....here's what it will look
www.pocketpcthoughpolice.com
Start page










End Page
:roll: :wink:
Bingo. :(

[Skoobouy]

Hello! I'm loaded with opinions right now, so just like those nuclear war drills: "When you see the flash, duck and cover!"

Lurch: I'm pretty much with you at this point. As Christians, we obviously believe that the human body is a beautiful thing. But that is not what is at stake. We value something positive: the dignity of women, and the decorum of mass media. I agree that this picture represents a little (little) hit to both of those. I'm also happy that you and others are able to say those sorts of things, and I think that Jason is very generous to allow it.

Jason: You have a pretty huge readership, you know. You're bound to get a couple of Puritanical types like me in the forums! :) Just hope you're not surprised. Incidentally, I am not interested in making a big deal about this. I don't doubt that your intentions are good. I for one appreciate your Christian consciousness. I still remember PPCThoughts' update abstinence for last year's Easter and after 9-11. But there are a few things I think should be understood:

It's not the fact that the image is female, or Irish, or has a tail, or even that she's half nude. A better artist could put all those things together into a perfectly tasteful piece of art. It's only that she was "built" into an image that is unambiguously eroticized. Now, I'm not a child, and believe me; this sort of thing is not new or shocking to me. But it does strike me as a small contribution to a larger cultural pollution--a pollution which I think most Christians are legitimately concerned has won too many battles for the soul of the Western world. That's why folks like Lurch and I might be legitimately called "counter-cultural." This is evinced well enough by the general lack of support Lurch finds for his views.
I think Stellarmetrics makes an important point, but I am tempted to turn it on its head. Incidentally, outrage at senseless violence is more universal than is concern over mis-representations of the human body. Just think of the recent post concerning the deaths of three men trying to retrieve a cell phone. Truly sad--and its response was proportionate. This matter is rightly judged trivial in comparison--but that does not warrant its passive acceptance. Respect for the human body as such is reaching all time lows. We all know human cloning is inevitable; it's only a matter of time. After all, how different is it from producing a CG image to our exact likings for our pleasure?
I think political correctness needs balance. For example, I hate it when people try to sterilize the English language (or worse, English translations of the Bible) by stripping it of gender content. I mean hey, this is the same language that produced some of the most beautiful literature the world has ever seen. Gender-neutered Shakespeare is like week-old steak and cold gravy. On the other hand, some 'artists' conscript beautiful images of genders and cultures and coerce them into empty capitalist, erotic, or propegandist pop-culture flatulence. Such things are echoes and shadows of deeper evils: international prostitution rings, neo-fascist racist groups (like Vlaams-blok here in Belgium), and the deep seated reality of human depravity despite our relative isolation and comfort. It's kind of like how an innocent Cuban cigar in American has become an emblem of international tension and political rancor; how the innocuous Nike swoosh conceals exploitative globalization; or how hundreds of thousands of pro-life PPC fans unknowingly contributed to Hewlett-Packard's multi-million dollar pro-legalized abortion funding spree by buying an iPaq or Jornada (like me). But wanton images of the eroticized female body run broader and deeper than all of these; in many ways encompassing them. What I'm establishing here is the unfortunate reality that our play-things often carry with them a direct link to human depravity; especially when the image of a woman is made a play-thing. Free speech is fine; that doesn't mean it needs to be liked.
This post is not a response to the leprechaun image itself, but only to what I perceive to be the exagerrated trivialization of sensuo-erotic images in this thread. The conservative (decency) objection and the liberal (sensitivity) objection should be considered at length and not dismissed as mere Puritanism or Feminism.


Anyway, sorry for the long post. Would you believe I did that all on one little cup of coffee? I wonder if I've lit the fuse to the powder keg? In which case I apologize in advance for the bandwidth loss this thread may cause.

[GoldKey]

Remember, it cuts both ways, you posted this earlier in the thread.

If you can make one with a beefy shirtless male leprachaun, then I'll think about it :p

I took this comment as a signal that it's a bit tiring to only see hot women. I could be wrong here.


I agree that is how I took the first comment, but PetiteFlowers later comment that she felt the message of the image was that it's ok to objectify women when she earlier was objectifing males withe the "beefy shirtless male leprachaun" comment.

[Skoobouy]

I think there are a number of people out there that may find Lurch's Avatar just as offensive as Jason's picture. Would I have posted a picture like that, no, but I also would not have an Avatar that announces I'm a Christian (which I am) every time I post either.

A little bit of Karl Barth theology: If the cross is not offensive, then something is really wrong. It's supposed to offend--it is a torture device after all. Christians might as well have a noose or a rack for their sign of faith, but those would be too mild. The Catholics are even worse--they've got the whole bloody corpse up there too! And by golly, it should offend us to see this little Jewish man hanging dead on a piece of wood; it's the troubling ambiguity of God's YES and God's NO to mankind. Barth is a scary sort of theologian, though; that's why I like him. He makes C.S. Lewis look like a care bear.

[jeff]

a) The Blarney Stone -- is located in Blarney Castle -- and here's the 'official' word from their site:

Kissing the Blarney stone


What they don't usually tell you is the Blarney Stone is way down on the castle wall and you have to stick your head in a hole to reach it. I just kind of figured it was rock sitting somewhere, but it's a piece of the structure.

The Travel Channel is awesome for that sort of information. Usually between the four hour Vegas blocks.

[ploeg]

De gustibus non est disputandum.

I personally found the Today screen easy to ignore, but it's futile to argue with anybody who didn't.

As for the propriety of such a thing on this board, on the one hand it's Jason's board and we're all riders on it. On the other hand it's the community that's the thing. If you do something that irks somebody else, that's not sufficient reason in itself to quit doing it (or to keep doing it, just to show 'em), but it's something to consider.

[yodacai]

I too am a born-again Christian, but I take little offense to the image itself, rather, as a shrink-in-training, I find this thread to be stimulating and thought provoking regarding human cognition, interaction, and behavior. Thanks for giving me a timeout from studying for a stats/research methods final.

Post On!

:D

[Kati Compton]

Uh-oh. Now we're *really* under the microscope. :)

[lurch]

Hello! I'm loaded with opinions right now, so just like those nuclear war drills: "When you see the flash, duck and cover!"

...

Anyway, sorry for the long post. Would you believe I did that all on one little cup of coffee? I wonder if I've lit the fuse to the powder keg? In which case I apologize in advance for the bandwidth loss this thread may cause.

Ahhh, a man after my own heart, or actually a better statement: a man after Christ's own heart! :) (that was not a statement about my own heart)

And Jason -- I really didn't mean to hijack your thread like this, although when I sit and think about that, what exactly would the posts in this thread be about anyway? :? Oh well..

[cmchavez]

IT'S NOT EVEN A HUMAN WOMAN! SHE HAS A TAIL!?! 8O


Does she ever! Thank you for my new St. Paddy's day wallpaper Jason! :twisted:

[Jason Dunn]

You want to know what really gets me about this whole thread? I rolled out of bed at 7:20 AM, away from the embrace of my wife, put on my housecoat, and stumbled downstairs in a sleepy stupor JUST TO POST THIS...I honestly thought I was giving a gift to everyone, something fun and different. It never occurred to me that my efforts would backfire so badly.

So if I seem a little defensive, that's why.

This is what's known as a "de-motivator" in the life of a Web site.

[GoldKey]

You want to know what really gets me about this whole thread? I rolled out of bed at 7:20 AM, away from the embrace of my wife, put on my housecoat, and stumbled downstairs in a sleepy stupor JUST TO POST THIS...I honestly thought I was giving a gift to everyone, something fun and different. It never occurred to me that my efforts would backfire so badly.

So if I seem a little defensive, that's why.

This is what's known as a "de-motivator" in the life of a Web site.

I put the wallpaper on my PC. Your work was greatly appreciate, it kept a smile on my face every time I looked. I may even leave it up tomorrow!

[JohnnyFlash]

What they don't usually tell you is the Blarney Stone is way down on the castle wall and you have to stick your head in a hole to reach it.

Funnily enough, the one time I visited Blarney Castle (on a motorcycle tour of the south - Cork and Galway are lovely places) and hoped to see the stone, about a dozen coachloads of American tourists had just arrived, and the queue was too long. So I didn't get the change to exchange oral bacteria with about a bazillion other people.. shame ;-)

[PetiteFlower]

A good point...I think PetiteFlower's initial post was in line with the spirit of my original post - fun, light-hearted. Heck, if I had a beefy male Leprechaun image, I just might have made a theme. :wink:

Sometimes pretending to play along is the best way for a woman to deal with the issue of how women are frequently portrayed. Underneath, those sentiments may not be true. Why do we react this way? Because if we complain, we get told to relax and not be so uptight. Doesn't make us feel too good to be told it's our fault for objecting or being hurt or whatever. Especially by people who don't have the "opportunity" to see it from the female side.

Thank you Kati, for pointing out where I was coming from, since I was away from my computer for a few hours and couldn't keep up!

And Jason--it's the whole "boys will be boys" attitude that I object to. It's NOT ok to objectify women just because they only make up 5% of your audience. And obviously your mindset behind the post was that you thought it was harmless fun. I'm sorry, it's not. Posting a sexy picture of a woman in a bikini, even a cartoon woman, is like I said going for the cheap gawk. And it is a deliberate nod to the male portion of your readership while ignoring the female portion--which was actually the reason I posted my first comment in the first place. We may be few but we still exist! The very idea that you thought your post was a "gift" to your readers just makes my point for me.

Further then that, it endorses the idea that women exist to give men something to look at. And the fact that if this bothers me, I should just smile and ignore it, otherwise I'll get flamed for being oversensitive, that's a problem as well. The reason I posted what I did first is because I KNEW if I said how I really felt, I'd get the same "relax, you're too uptight, PC is bad" bs that women who speak their mind in public often get--and you know, when I did post my real thoughts that's exactly what I got! No, I really don't think it's any better to objectify men. But men don't have their worth to society measured by their bodies anywhere near to the extent that women do for one thing. And for another, at least if there was a male and female version of the theme then I wouldn't feel quite so overlooked. The post was meant really as a reminder that women are here too, please don't ignore us.

I'm not a christian, just a feminist. In fact I think it's kind of funny that I'm on their side in this case! I actually like the non-gendered interpretation of the bible, since IMO god doesn't really have a gender, though I'm definitely not in favor of stripping all references to gender in language or anything as extreme as that. And I'm not a fan of being PC. But I AM a fan of people thinking about what effects their actions or words will have on the people reading/listening. Putting stuff like that on the front page is alienating to your female readers; do you want to put forth the impression that your site is a "boys club"? Because that's what I felt like I was being reminded of when I saw it. Sorry if it's a "de-motivator" to you to hear that some of your readers were bothered by what you posted but I hope you're hearing and understanding us in spite of that.

[Jason Dunn]

Thanks the for expressing your thoughts PeiteFlower. I have a dozen counter-points bouncing around in my head (like "If a sunrise exists just to look at, does that make it any less beautiful?"), but I think it's time to pull back and let this thread fade away.

I'm reminded once again that, despite my intense desire to do so, I can't please everyone. I suppose I should just get over it and not care about upsetting a few people, but I can't quite seem to do that...

[Weyoun6]

Jason, you must admit that viewing this on a public computer or cubical at work/school would be a little embarassing, not to mention bad for you if your teacher or boss happend to walk by.

I am not debating whether it is sexist or appropriate for this site, just that it can cause problems.

Sorry I am late about this post, but I could not afford to view ppcthoughts all day because I was at school.

[Skoobouy]

Hm. Let me switch gears a little bit. I didn't want to contribute to a rotten vegetable-throwing spree, but at the same time I think I lobbed the fattest tomato. I'm sorry. Hero complex... you know how it goes. Now I feel guilty and I want to tell everyone to lay off Jason. Am I an anachronism or what?

It's an interesting discussion, though, isn't it? I mean, you have three different sorts of Christians two different sorts of feminists (I'm guessing [?]) along with some others all falling on either side of an opinion but for a variety of different reasons. Hey, Jason, you brought conservative Christians and feminists together; if that's not something that would look good on your resume, I don't know what is. :)

Personally, I get some joy in seeing a post I've originated explode into a 60+ post discussion. Isn't that some consolation? Not only do you have a radically diverse international community thriving in your forums like hot vegetable soup, but you manage to get some good controversy happening every now and then. I'm always suspicious of the post-modernist "argument for argument's sake" mentality, but still I think I would interpret the response here as more a sign of life than a demotivator.

Hey yodacai--what can you tell us about the leprachaun in terms of Frued's partial repression, disavowal, and splitting the ego in the process of defense? I'm sure we'd all love to hear. 8O [/b]

[markcrump]

Jason, you must admit that viewing this on a public computer or cubical at work/school would be a little embarassing, not to mention bad for you if your teacher or boss happend to walk by.

Which is the greater offense, seeing the picture, or surfing while you should be doing other things?

There was a thread a while back on a game-related message board about graphic sig files: "Please don't have such graphic files. My HR departement would have a cow if they saw that image on my screen". Don't ask a site admin to censor their site so you don't get in trouble.

In the schema of the world, Jason posting this pic doesn't cause any harm. In fact, with the days events, Jason posting this pic may be what the board needed. It sure beat thinking about the imminent war.

If you see something about the site that offends you, post a quick "jason, just to let you know, I find that offensive", or use the contact list. This IS Jason's site, but as someone said, it's the community that defines the site. Jason has done things I don't 100% agree with, but I have yet to find a site where I DO agree 100% with the content. He has done a phenominal job at providing excellent content. If you're offended, let him take a mulligan on it, and think back to last time he did something you considered to be morally reprehensible.



[/quote]

[yodacai]

Skoobouy,
Hhhhmmm, Freud, not exactly a big fan of his or psychodynamic/psychoanalytic theories. But, most likely he may spout off some sort of nonsense about the women getting upset at the men because they were envious of our penises, and that somewhere along the way Jason's Id led him to post the image to release some sort of pent up energy (sexual or not, take your pick) through cathartic means. :wink: All-in-all, it would probably take about 3 years of psychodynamic therapy to come to this conclusion. Where can I send the bill? :D


I don't know, I could be way off base here. :D I just enjoy the discussions/communications and the interactions that takes place between people. Even saying nothing can convey a message. Just remember that even though we may be different people with different beliefs/values, we can all come together under a common passion...

"What's your passion?"... wait wrong site. :wink:

[Kati Compton]

Which is the greater offense, seeing the picture, or surfing while you should be doing other things?


Normally, I'd say that surfing periodically between work sessions helps me work more productively. Otherwise my I get a brain-cramp and I end up staring at the screen not doing anything anyway.

[markcrump]

Oh, believe me, I wasn't taking the higher road on "thou shall not surf at work" :)

I was just trying to place the thought in context. Was he more afraid of his boss "condoning" the image, or his boss "condoning" the surfing habit?

Now I'll admit, the image wasn't one you'd expect on a technolgy site, but it's easilly scrolled around if you spy someone heading your way,

[Kati Compton]

different sorts of Christians two different sorts of feminists (I'm guessing [?])

Not to start a new flame war, but I don't consider myself a feminist....

<runs>

[st63z]

Just like a Canadian to generate his own St. Patrick's day controversy now :roll: I know you guys don't care, we've gotten your answer already (re: troop commitment).

Don't need this stress, I'm hunkering down come Wednesday.

;) :(

[lurch]

Just remember that even though we may be different people with different beliefs/values, we can all come together under a common passion...
What passion would that be?
The only thing truely in common between anybody who posted saying they didn't appreciate the picture was that they didn't appreciate the picture. I saw about 10-15 (exaggerating) different reasons as to why they didn't appreciate it, but the only commonality was the non-appreciation (if you will).

My main reason differs from everybody elses greatly. (and I'm not going to mention it because I know that only about 1 other person on this site would agree with me, that's the odds, and I don't want to start a flame war. :) although maybe it would be cool to see if we can get the number of posts for this thread above 200 ;) )

While it's true that people with different beliefs/values can come together under a common passion, it's always temporal. It doesn't last, it fades, and before long we're all back to the differences. This is a killer example (because it delves into politics), but Congress is a great example. After 9/11... totally unified... and slowly it eroded until now they're split on almost everything again. It's temporary!

What happens when my beliefs counter the beliefs of others that I'm supposedly "unified" with, and the only way to maintain the unity would be for either me or them to compromise on what we believe? There will always be that point of a fork in the road. And it will always lead to strife.

[JohnnyFlash]

(like "If a sunrise exists just to look at, does that make it any less beautiful?").

Er.. Jason, can you see a difference between a picture of a beautiful woman, and an eroticised image, promoting stereotypical body types and sad male attitudes, with a hint of some rather weird roll-play fantasy elements thrown in for good measure?

Just checking... maybe I saw the wrong image.

Now, back the Guinness ;-)

[yodacai]

lurch wrote:

What passion would that be?

I have to assume that since there did not appear to be an emoticon about the emotion your were trying to portray that you are serious. In that case, the passion we all have (evidenced by the fact that we frequent and post in this forum) are for Pocket PCs.

This is a killer example (because it delves into politics), but Congress is a great example. After 9/11... totally unified... and slowly it eroded until now they're split on almost everything again. It's temporary!


I can't help but notice you are comparing bipartisan behavior of Congress to that of a hobby (i.e. our passions for PPCs). Even if the passion for our PPCs were only temporary, one could just leave the forums and no longer frequent the PPC community. The point is that although coming together to celebrate our passions may be temporary, there does not seem to be a problem if one wishes to leave the forums if their passion has faded away. They U.S. Government may be in some deep kimchee if Senators and Congressmen/women began resigning because they were no longer unified.

[Weyoun6]

Oh, believe me, I wasn't taking the higher road on "thou shall not surf at work" :)

I was just trying to place the thought in context. Was he more afraid of his boss "condoning" the image, or his boss "condoning" the surfing habit?

Now I'll admit, the image wasn't one you'd expect on a technolgy site, but it's easilly scrolled around if you spy someone heading your way,

I was more concerned that this image, which would be unexpected on a tech site like this, might cause problems on a public computer. It had nothing to do with surfing, my statement was assuming that surfing was ok. This site, last time I heard, is most often visited during the work hours. If Saint Patty's day was on a Saturday, fine. (Although I find the picture inappropriate, that's not the point I am trying to make.)
Although I like Jason's work, and don't want to keep hammering the point, I don't think it's an appropriate picture to post on the front page, when it is visible during the work week.

[PetiteFlower]

Jason--Just to make it clear, I hope you don't think that I think any less of you or your (awesome) work here. I was just trying to express what went through my head when I saw the picture, in the interests of communication etc etc etc. Nobody's perfect, me included :)

[Steven Cedrone]

Since the picture is no longer on the front page, and St. Patricks Day is over, why don't we let this thread fade away???

Steven Cedrone
Community Moderator

[Janak Parekh]

Since the picture is no longer on the front page, and St. Patricks Day is over, why don't we let this thread fade away???
The problem is that we're on the East Coast. :D

I'm glad posters have toned it down, but yeah, we've probably said everything that needs to be said by this point.

--janak

[Jason Dunn]

Since the picture is no longer on the front page, and St. Patricks Day is over, why don't we let this thread fade away???

I'd rather have everyone "get it all out" now in this thread, then give me a bit of grace the next time I offend them. :wink:

[Jason Dunn]

I was more concerned that this image, which would be unexpected on a tech site like this, might cause problems on a public computer.

I don't grasp this at all. The image is not pornographic - I don't even consider it overly erotic - it's certainly sexual, but not exceedingly so. I consider myself a fairly conservative person, but can't imagine the world you much live in if a cartoon bikini causes so much strife...are you in Afghanistan where women wear robes down to their feet? :lol:

8O You know, I had assumed that everyone objecting was from North America, but I suppose it could be that some of you DO come from much more restricture cultures where something as seeminly innocent as this COULD be considered a huge problem. If that's the case, I offer you my apology. I guess we'd better start filtering based on IP and offer up different "ratings" of the site... :scatter:

[Janak Parekh]

You know, I had assumed that everyone objecting was from North America, but I suppose it could be that some of you DO come from much more restricture cultures where something as seeminly innocent as this COULD be considered a huge problem.
Hmm. There's even parts of North America that have "restrictive cultures". Not where I live for sure... but travel a bit further south.

--janak

[Jason Dunn]

(like "If a sunrise exists just to look at, does that make it any less beautiful?").

Er.. Jason, can you see a difference between a picture of a beautiful woman, and an eroticised image, promoting stereotypical body types and sad male attitudes, with a hint of some rather weird roll-play fantasy elements thrown in for good measure?

Sure! One is cool, and the other is super-cool! :lol: I'm a fantasy/sci-fi geek and love artwork like this. The more "exotic" (not necessarily erotic though - there's a difference!) and "non-earthly" the better. I love it all! If that makes me some kind of sexist brute in your eyes, so be it - I truly don't give a damn John! :grinning devil:

[lurch]

I have to assume that since there did not appear to be an emoticon about the emotion your were trying to portray that you are serious. In that case, the passion we all have (evidenced by the fact that we frequent and post in this forum) are for Pocket PCs.

Sorry, I guess I took you a little more seriously than you meant it.. :| nevermind!

[lurch]

... could possibly offend a fellow Christian. ...
(emphasis mine) I'm becoming more and more confused by the apparent disconnectedness between this statement and your other posts in this thread...
here's just one example,

If that makes me some kind of sexist brute in your eyes, so be it - I truly don't give a damn John!

[Jason Dunn]

... could possibly offend a fellow Christian. ...
(emphasis mine) I'm becoming more and more confused by the apparent disconnectedness between this statement and your other posts in this thread...
here's just one example,

If that makes me some kind of sexist brute in your eyes, so be it - I truly don't give a damn John!

I don't think I'm a sexist brute, but John seems to think I am. Even Christians can get fed up and not care what others think about them - or do you never get frustrated? :wink:

[lurch]

or do you never get frustrated? :wink:

No never, absolutely not! :wink:

[Jimmy Dodd]

It's not the pictures of sexy women that bother me. Instead, I get very frustrated by the lack of equal time (which is well stated by somewhat snide but very appropriate comment by PetiteFlower). Goldkey - I think you missed the point that it *doesn't* cut both ways, and that in itself can be upsetting. I haven't seen *any* sexy guy pictures here.


I'm hardly a judge of "sexy guy pictures" but does Paragon's avatar count? It's not even a cartoon as far as I can tell. :lol:

[Kati Compton]

I'm hardly a judge of "sexy guy pictures" but does Paragon's avatar count? It's not even a cartoon as far as I can tell. :lol:

Heh. It's as close as I've seen.

[js415]

Good Grief!!!!!

I just read this whole thread today, AFTER reading and looking at all the new "emoticons" that people were posting and playing with.

Lots of folks upset over a cartoon drawing, and what it means, represents, does not mean, does not represent, etc., etc. But not a single word about little cartoon faces shooting guns, drinking liquor/beer, puking thier guts out, calling others stupid, cussing, etc., etc. Which, by the way, did not bother me!!

I find all the PC stuff really amazing.

Nothing seems to ba taken at face value anymore. Somebody always believes there must be some "ugly, dark, underlying reason" about any topic.

As Jason said.....it was just a cartoon!!!!

Good Grief!!!!

[Jason Dunn]

Thanks for your support - nice to see I'm not totally alone. :D

Nothing seems to ba taken at face value anymore. Somebody always believes there must be some "ugly, dark, underlying reason" about any topic.

And what's more amazing to me is that many of the people criticising me have been around the site for a while, so I would have thought that they knew me fairly well. It was pretty surprising to see how quickly any form of "respect in the bank" got thrown out the window in very short order. Almost no one was willing to give me the benefit of the doubt, which is a little sad considering how hard my whole team fights to keep this site PG-13 rated. We turn away a lot of news & software posts if we feel they aren't appropriate.

Maybe it's time for a new slogan:

Pocket PC Thoughts
Where a leprechaun in a bikini is just a leprechaun in a bikini, nothing more :roll:

[lurch]

It was pretty surprising to see how quickly any form of "respect in the bank" got thrown out the window in very short order.

Isn't it funny how fast respect/trust can be lost? And don't even try to tell me that you would never lose some respect that fast.. :roll: I wouldn't buy that from anybody. People lose respect for someone else over one or two words spoken in a matter of seconds all the time! I.e. the instant a pastor giving a prayer in front of a diverse group of people invokes the name of Jesus, respect for that pastor is diminished by many people.

Lots of folks upset over a cartoon drawing, and what it means, represents, does not mean, does not represent, etc., etc. But not a single word about little cartoon faces shooting guns, drinking liquor/beer, puking thier guts out, calling others stupid, cussing, etc., etc.

As I said in my original post I only had issue with the image being on the front page... I actually enjoyed the alf-dance.. :lol:

:alfdance:

[js415]

I agree with you 100% Trust and respect is absolutely lost and gained in just seconds in and out every day!!

Without taking sides on any issue, I always find it amazing how one persons folly can be another persons passion, and how those two things do not mix when the parties involved start talking about it.

In my business, I have over 200 employees and 25,000 to 30,000 customers that I see on a weekly basis. I see and hear more opinions on more subjects than you could ever imagine. Each and everyone of them out to prove they are right and how wrong the other person or party is.

Regardless of how we feel on a subject, with all thats going on in our lives these days, I have taken the stance that a lot of fights/arguments/battles are just not worth it anymore. I tend to just smile, nod my head, and keep on going!!

Anyways, maybe I could be accused of sticking my head in the sand and ignoring issues, but I consider it leading a happier and less stressed filled life!!

By the way....This is the only site I visit on a daily basis....and the knowledge is unbelievable!!

I really enjoyed the emoticons also. If I can just figure out exactly how to use them!!

Jerry :oops:

[Janak Parekh]

It was pretty surprising to see how quickly any form of "respect in the bank" got thrown out the window in very short order. Almost no one was willing to give me the benefit of the doubt
Actually, I don't think so. Respect does take more than one "incident" to break down. I think it's just that in a larger community, everyone has different buttons, and they're pressed differently.

Regardless of how we feel on a subject, with all thats going on in our lives these days, I have taken the stance that a lot of fights/arguments/battles are just not worth it anymore. I tend to just smile, nod my head, and keep on going!!
Well put. We've probably said everything on this topic already, and as Steve said, let's please put the poor thread to rest. We don't want to end up in the HOFS again. ;)

--janak

[Stik]

I can't wait to see the PPC Thoughts April Easter Issue!
http://www.sternchensuppe.de/grafiken/Bugs%20Bunny/Bugs_run.gif

There, now I can offend everyone by depicting a nude male rabbit on another religious holiday. :rock on dude!:

[PetiteFlower]

I.e. the instant a pastor giving a prayer in front of a diverse group of people invokes the name of Jesus, respect for that pastor is diminished by many people.

Oh boy, here come the :onfire:

Perhaps it is not that the pastor has lost respect, but simply that he has excluded/alienated the portion of his audience who do not belive in Jesus. I'm jewish--if I hear someone lead a prayer simply in the name of God, a non-specific diety, I feel as though they are including me. The second someone mentions Jesus though, immediately they are no longer talking to me but only to the people who believe in Jesus as a diety. It's not a loss of respect for the speaker; it's just that the speaker specifically pointed out who he was speaking to and I wasn't among them; so it's a loss of a reason/desire to listen to him.

And that is actually topical because it was the same feeling of exclusion that was invoked by the picture. Oh, that's not for me, this site is not for me, I'm just a visitor not a true member of the "in crowd" if that makes any sense.

As far as taking things at face value, well to paraphrase Freud(I also hold a degree in Psych), sometimes a cigar is just a cigar, but a cigar with big tits is never just a cigar! I apologize for the crudeness but posting a sexually charged image is making a statement, whether you realized or intended it or not. If you weren't expecting the controversy I'd honestly have to chalk that up to lack of foresight.

[Steven Cedrone]

Well, now the thread will just fade away... :roll:

Steven Cedrone
Community Moderator

[Jason Dunn]

Perhaps it is not that the pastor has lost respect, but simply that he has excluded/alienated the portion of his audience who do not belive in Jesus. I'm jewish--if I hear someone lead a prayer simply in the name of God, a non-specific diety, I feel as though they are including me.

Well then, you might have to get used to being offended by this site - four of the six admins on this site are Christians, and I routinely post "holiday" messages at Christmas and Easter, and we don't post on those days out of reverence for those times. If the mention of those holidays will trigger anything similar to what happened in this thread...well, we have a problem and should probably talk privately, because I will not back down on issues of my faith one iota. I don't expect support from non-Christians, but if someone denounces our efforts, it might get...unhappy. :|

And for what it's worth, I posted this image last year (or maybe it was the year before?), and no one complained, so that's why I was so shocked by this. But I guess sites grow up, get bigger, and people have different expectations for them.

Anyway, topic closed.