Riding crop costumes go bye bye

[Cadaverous Pallor]

Originally Posted by €uroMeinke

But yeah it's not a protected status in some states, just like homosexulaity.

Whoo boy, that there is one can o' worms, and I haven't even begun contemplating what I'd feel regarding it, never mind actually open the can...

Originally Posted by LSPE

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."

There have been plenty of posts here affirming what you're affirming - that the "standard" isn't anywhere near your own standards, and that the idea that there even is a standard is silly. I can see your points but I must also point out that in the end, there is going to be some sort of bell curve, some sort of gradiation. In the end you can go out and poll people, or see which body types get the best movie roles, or which kinds of porn are the most popular. And the businesses are going to do their best to find a common denominator.

Anyway. I think I've said everything many, many times. If there's anything I missed please let me know. I'm exhausted!

[€uroMeinke]

Originally Posted by Cadaverous Pallor

There have been plenty of posts here affirming what you're affirming - that the "standard" isn't anywhere near your own standards, and that the idea that there even is a standard is silly. I can see your points but I must also point out that in the end, there is going to be some sort of bell curve, some sort of gradiation. In the end you can go out and poll people, or see which body types get the best movie roles, or which kinds of porn are the most popular. And the businesses are going to do their best to find a common denominator.

Anyway. I think I've said everything many, many times. If there's anything I missed please let me know. I'm exhausted!

Well, what would a message board be without some tilting at windmills

I guess what I wonder from you, is if there is this "standard," do you believe it needs to be upheld? As your posts seem to indicate that as inaccurate as the standard might be to the individual we should acceept it and furthermore promote it - through hiring and casting. You haven't really sadi that, but it seems to be the implication of your posts.

As for the standard itself, I've no doubt that we could construct a number of surveys to deteermin the prefered weight, height, physique, earlobe shape, hair length, etc. and you could average it all up and come up twith the universally "Popular" conception of attractiveness - which I guess you could use to some purpose, like eugenics or something, but that woud miss the boat entirely as for what you or I find beautiful - which I think is one of the most delightful dialogues you can have - what is beauty.

As for businesses looking for a common denominator - maybe that was the modus operandi 20 years ago, but I know I work in a diverse work place and the people there aren't there for PC tokening reason, it's because it promotes creativity, it produces better products, in part becasue customers and clients respond better to people like them - though there those xenophobes who get bent out of shape when signage appears in a foriegn tongue.

As for porn, I prefer the amatuer stuff - and I'd offer that celbrity porn is more about seeing someone humiliated than marveling at their beauty,

[Cadaverous Pallor]

Thanks again to Mr. Meinke for actually making me think about my posts.

Originally Posted by €uroMeinke

I guess what I wonder from you, is if there is this "standard," do you believe it needs to be upheld? As your posts seem to indicate that as inaccurate as the standard might be to the individual we should acceept it and furthermore promote it - through hiring and casting. You haven't really sadi that, but it seems to be the implication of your posts.

Ok. Now I see the problem. The feeling among those that have been mad at me involves the idea that because I dig places using attractiveness as one of the many qualities they can look for in a CM, it means that I do not support beauty of other types, and wish for everyone to promote the same beauty standard. This is not true. Like I've said before, my standards of beauty are not in lock-step with society's standards.

Making me think about this has prompted me to reexamine the original reason for the thread. Like I said, I can't personally decide that a certain costume size = beauty, since for me that's definitely not the case. In fact, I lean more on the heavy side when it comes to guys. Skinny guys aren't my thing at all. Doesn't mean I'd get naked for a 400 lb guy, but still, it's a valid point.

As I've urged others to consider, I know that my own standards are simply that, and very subjective. I would never expect a company's standard for beauty to fit my own either. I wouldn't expect someone hiring CMs to pick exactly the same people I'd pick, no matter what criteria we're talking about. I could say "pick the smartest person" or "the kindest person". There wouldn't be complete consensus on which fits the bill.

I think what I'm trying to say is that I'm ok with that. I'm ok with the company making it's own decisions as to who fits their casting better than others. And once again, I never advocated that beauty should be the only factor.

This brings me back to the size issue. It's becoming a sticking point in my head. Especially since it's the reason for this whole discussion! After all this crap it's becoming clear to me that in regards to selecting a specific costume size make or break, I couldn't make a distinction. I'd have to interview people and see which fit the many factors best. And if all I get are bimbos that look nice but can't do the job, then I'd definitely hire those that I find less attractive but can do the job.

As for businesses looking for a common denominator - maybe that was the modus operandi 20 years ago, but I know I work in a diverse work place and the people there aren't there for PC tokening reason, it's because it promotes creativity, it produces better products, in part becasue customers and clients respond better to people like them - though there those xenophobes who get bent out of shape when signage appears in a foriegn tongue.

I love working with a diverse group of people and having a diverse group of friends. That's the best part of the 'net community - we've got all kinds.

Your post infers that people are thinking that what I want is a generic world. I am sad that that's the implication people are getting from my posts. I'll always be a Jewish kid in a white world, a Libertarian in the face of Reps and Dems. There's no way I'd support true conformity of any kind.

Eliza mentioned the Twilight Zone where when you reach a certain age you choose a standard body. I was always so frightened by that episode. The mention of it now, in this context, frightens me too. As a person who never would consider cosmetic surgery (short of some disfiguring accident) I'm rather bummed that people would think that that my statements here are condoning that lifestyle. I think that what we're talking here is a difference between extremes and shades of gray.

To be perfectly honest, I've become very dismayed by this thread and what it may have done to my reputation. I will not retract my statements (except the messed up joke at the beginning) and I do feel this way regarding show practices. But the idea that my friends will see me and may feel that they are being judged for their appearance just tears me up. It's so untrue, so wrong, and I hope that my friends understand that.

Honesty really does bite me in the ass, all the time. I do wish I hadn't joined this thread. If I could keep my opinions to myself things would be much easier. I blame zapppop

Anyway, we'll be at the park on Sunday, for the first time in months. I'd love to see everyone and give out hugs...I really never meant to insult anybody.

Much love
Jennie