Riding crop costumes go bye bye

[€uroMeinke]

Originally Posted by Cadaverous Pallor

I'd say that I see it as fantasy world improv. Make it up as you go along but stay in character.

The "character" would be "the nicest store clerk you've ever met." The scenario is one much like that Twilight Zone episode involving the town of Willoughby (sp?) which is a romanticized version of an old man's past. Everyone is cordial and things are simple. There is no "backstory" because the idea is that things are not that complicated - everyone is a smiling and helpful, and that's all they need to be in this hyper-reality.

Cool - so in your directoral vision, would those clerks necessarily be a size 12 or less?

[Cadaverous Pallor]

Originally Posted by €uroMeinke

Cool - so in your directoral vision, would those clerks necessarily be a size 12 or less?

In my own imagined perfect world? I guess so. Same way that I'd cast leggy girls for can-can dancing at the Golden Horseshoe, strapping young men for the canoes, sweet-voiced female storytellers for Storybook, goofy looking guys for Jungle Cruise, and creepy looking people to staff the Mansion. And of course, I'd balance looks with ability. I admit that if I had two chicks in my office applying for a store clerk with similar qualifications and abilities, I'd take the prettier one. Once again, pretty doesn't have to involve weight.

It's all subjective as to where we draw the line. There are people for whom their personal imagined perfect world would require clerks to necessarily be a size 12 or more. Some guys go for heavier people. Same goes for women. Same goes for gay men/women. What do you think a gay "bear" dream for DL would include? Lash, you want to jump in here?

The problem is that we're all different, and any business is going to want to appeal to as many people as possible. Apparently most people in our society feel that under a size 12 (or whatever made-up boundary line one wishes to create) is more attractive.

Prudence, I know you think I insulted you, and I have no idea why you keep feeling that way. Should I cry because I have a friend who prefers big tits over my tiny ones? I don't know your husband personally but from what you've said he obviously loves you and is very attracted to you. Having said that, he probably wouldn't find me very attractive at all, but I see no reason to feel insulted because of that. I know not everyone wants a scrawny girl with no meat on her bones and a flat chest. I'm ok with that.

I'm still wondering if anyone is going to try and claim that they're physically attracted to everybody equally.

Eliza - I love LSPE too, and you as well.

[€uroMeinke]

Originally Posted by Cadaverous Pallor

The problem is that we're all different, and any business is going to want to appeal to as many people as possible. Apparently most people in our society feel that under a size 12 (or whatever made-up boundary line one wishes to create) is more attractive.

See, this is the probelem as I see it - Disneyland has long abandoned this "Size 12" standard - and it appears you are arguing that they shouldn't have, because "under size 12" is still considered a cultural norm for "attractiveness" - not that you personally feel this way - you are just taking Disney to task for not reinstating it, or that's how it's coming across.

I too believe beauty is subjective. I also think the current policies of Disneyland help promote that belief. Sure Disney is within it's rights to require weight standards (though actually that might not be true if my recolection of recent stewardess lawsuits are correct) but I don't know why you would bring that up unless you feel the current crop of CMs are to "unattractive" for the "show."

It's like saying I have no problem with gay lifestyles, but I wish California would reinstate and enforce it's anti-sodimy laws - not that I believe in them becasue well, some of my best friends are gay.

Perhaps I'm missing something in your posts, but that is how they have come across, and why I can see that someone might take offense.

[Cadaverous Pallor]

Originally Posted by €uroMeinke

See, this is the probelem as I see it - Disneyland has long abandoned this "Size 12" standard - and it appears you are arguing that they shouldn't have, because "under size 12" is still considered a cultural norm for "attractiveness" - not that you personally feel this way - you are just taking Disney to task for not reinstating it, or that's how it's coming across.

I used the term "size 12" because you mentioned it. I couldn't point to a line of increasingly heavy people and say "there, that's where they get too big to be attractive, so whatever size they are is beyond the limit." I could, however, look between two people, interview them, and find out which are more able to fill the role I'm casting for.

I guess my question would be, where does it stop? Do they make costumes for size 24? Size 144? Is a person just above whatever increment they decide to stop at being discriminated against? Who decides? I sure as hell wouldn't be able to.

Sure Disney is within it's rights to require weight standards (though actually that might not be true if my recolection of recent stewardess lawsuits are correct) but I don't know why you would bring that up unless you feel the current crop of CMs are to "unattractive" for the "show."

I do feel that I would be cool with them putting a more focus on this.

It's like saying I have no problem with gay lifestyles, but I wish California would reinstate and enforce it's anti-sodimy laws - not that I believe in them becasue well, some of my best friends are gay.

I am fine with the movies casting attractive people for attractive parts. I don't mind that an unattractive person has a snowballs chance in hell of having a movie star career. Do you? Even though you may know some unattractive people? Even though I know that I personally would have that same snowball's chance in hell.

To restate - I have no problem with people that I'm not physically attracted to, but I hope showbusiness will continue to employ hotties, because I like looking at hotties. Doesn't everyone?

I know it's all hip to say that the movies are so fake and blah blah blah but come on, everybody likes eyecandy. And isn't unreality the point?

Perhaps I'm missing something in your posts, but that is how they have come across, and why I can see that someone might take offense.

My thanks to Chris for engaging me in conversation instead of condemning me without pointing to what I'm doing wrong.

[LSPoorEeyorick]

Originally Posted by Cadaverous Pallor

I know it's all hip to say that the movies are so fake and blah blah blah but come on, everybody likes eyecandy. And isn't unreality the point?

I know you like to "speak the truth" (like a comic attempting to say what we're all thinking) but I think you're off-base here. Hip? I dunno about hip, but I much prefer eye candy that looks, well, more like me. Like, for instance: the woman I am most attracted to in the whole bunch of Disney onliner geeks is BluePeople. That's right. Plump, gorgeous Gretchen. Over everybody else. I'd much rather watch her in a movie than Jennifer Aniston. That's just my taste. Please don't imply that I am, or anyone else is, wishing for less plasticism in their pallate because it's "hip."

[€uroMeinke]

Originally Posted by Cadaverous Pallor

I guess my question would be, where does it stop? Do they make costumes for size 24? Size 144? Is a person just above whatever increment they decide to stop at being discriminated against? Who decides? I sure as hell wouldn't be able to.

Why not tailor the costume to the person who can play the role the best? It appears Disney is no longer imposing a size standard, why do you think they should? It's not like they are going out to Target to buy the costumes (yet) they are making them specially for the park.

I have no problem with people that I'm not physically attracted to, but I hope showbusiness will continue to employ hotties, because I like looking at hotties. Doesn't everyone?

Um, no - at least not in the standardized homoginized airbrushed and enhanced sense - which your posts continue to suggest is what you are refering to (a cultural norm that fits within some dress size or tonage). Like I said maybe my aesthetic may be all out of whack, but I find real people sexy and Hollywood hotness kind of - boring and overdone. But I'm only speaking for myself here.

[lashbear]

Originally Posted by Cadaverous Pallor

What do you think a gay "bear" dream for DL would include? Lash, you want to jump in here? .

Thanks, don't mind if I do.

All the Male CM's would look like:

• SzczerbiakManiac
• ISM (and Zapppp from memory) when they had the facial hair
• Euromeinke
• Al Borland

All the female CM's would look like Al Borland too.


PS: Facial Hair is definitely a plus...... HINT HINT SM.

[Not Afraid]

Originally Posted by lashbear

Thanks, don't mind if I do.

All the Male CM's would look like:

• SzczerbiakManiac
• ISM (and Zapppp from memory) when they had the facial hair
• Euromeinke
• Al Borland

All the female CM's would look like Al Borland too.


PS: Facial Hair is definitely a plus...... HINT HINT SM.

There's my husband being the Stone Cold Fox again. (PS: Boss Radio decided to call him that and it's great to see him turn red!)

It's about time others discovered what I already knew.

[SzczerbiakManiac]

Originally Posted by lashbear

PS: Facial Hair is definitely a plus...... HINT HINT SM.

Too late

[lashbear]

Originally Posted by SzczerbiakManiac

Too late

OK, Now I have to have pictures. PM them if you must.


Oh, and I also forgot to mention that amongst the Bear CM's must be Kevy Baby & GD (Providing he's still got that goattee)

and STC, but only if he grows a mo and wears that lycra body suit again.