New Plushies and Items

And hopefully more to come

Come here to voice your comments, concerns, and questions with the mayor and their aides!
User avatar
Azariah Ben Yaakov
100% Kosher
100% Kosher
Posts: 5746
Joined: January 2006
Location: Chillin. Probably sniffing your connection for passwords \:D/
Contact:

Post by Azariah Ben Yaakov »

Individuals, whether young or old, can learn to discern good from bad, right and wrong. removing minds from the gutter when they are indicated towards a particularly harmless, and safe word for all ages when accepted in concept ;).

There is nothing inherently wrong with the word "sexy", merely people's minds automatically are exposed to the negative effects, to which they should be educated otherwise.
Image
User avatar
Homeward bound
Lucid and deductive
Posts: 2336
Joined: August 2006
Location: Can't say where I am, but my head is in the clouds...

Post by Homeward bound »

violet flower wrote:
Laura Ingalls wrote:
Taq wrote:Am I the only one uncomfortable with there being an item named "The Sexy Plushie" on this message board? O:)
No, you're not. ;)
Agreed!!
I must agree as well...I think that the fact that the word does have certain connotations with it that may cause several people to stumble should be reason enough to not have that word in the title.

Romans 14:13-21 (Yes, I realize this is in the context of food, but I believe it applies here as well... ;) )
User avatar
Dr. Watson
Be positive!
Posts: 5568
Joined: April 2005
Location: 221B Baker Street

Post by Dr. Watson »

I am also offended/concerned about this choice of title. :anxious: Why not name it something that doesn't have strong negative connotations already attached to it?
User avatar
Azariah Ben Yaakov
100% Kosher
100% Kosher
Posts: 5746
Joined: January 2006
Location: Chillin. Probably sniffing your connection for passwords \:D/
Contact:

Post by Azariah Ben Yaakov »

So we are not allowed to use a word that has a fine positive effect because it has a negative effect, or that most people only see the negative? ;).

It's a fine, morally correct word.
Image
User avatar
Homeward bound
Lucid and deductive
Posts: 2336
Joined: August 2006
Location: Can't say where I am, but my head is in the clouds...

Post by Homeward bound »

I'm still not sure what the positive effect is...and if the negitives outweigh any positives for many members of this board, is it worth it?
User avatar
Dr. Watson
Be positive!
Posts: 5568
Joined: April 2005
Location: 221B Baker Street

Post by Dr. Watson »

What fine positive effect are you referring to? I think the normal, everyday use of the word has negative (for the Christian) connotations. Why not name it "The Handsome Plushie" or something else equally non-offensive?
User avatar
Azariah Ben Yaakov
100% Kosher
100% Kosher
Posts: 5746
Joined: January 2006
Location: Chillin. Probably sniffing your connection for passwords \:D/
Contact:

Post by Azariah Ben Yaakov »

Sorry, the definition was on the second page, I just assumed everyone had seen it :p.

Alternative definition to sexy (the implication here, and the desired effect that should be adhered);
2. Slang Highly appealing or interesting; attractive.
Image
User avatar
Dr. Watson
Be positive!
Posts: 5568
Joined: April 2005
Location: 221B Baker Street

Post by Dr. Watson »

Yeah, I saw it several times. :) My question still stands: For a Christian, why use such borderline words that have immoral connotations? I mean you can't just declare an alternative definition and expect the normal connotation of the word to be vaporized from people's minds.
Last edited by Dr. Watson on Mon Jul 28, 2008 5:42 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Homeward bound
Lucid and deductive
Posts: 2336
Joined: August 2006
Location: Can't say where I am, but my head is in the clouds...

Post by Homeward bound »

Azariah Ben Yaakov wrote:Alternative definition to sexy (the implication here, and the desired effect that should be adhered);
2. Slang Highly appealing or interesting; attractive.
I did see it...but I don't consider it "positive", simply an alternative definition. :p Besides, even that definition could stir up controversy...

edit: I must echo Dr. Watson's questions.
User avatar
BrokenButBeautiful
Certified Theatre Geek
Certified Theatre Geek
Posts: 3900
Joined: May 2008
Location: Not behind you......(;
Contact:

Post by BrokenButBeautiful »

SivartM wrote:*demands a SivartM plushie*

:demonstration:
*Demands a plushie for all three of The Randoms*

:demonstration:
Image
User avatar
Azariah Ben Yaakov
100% Kosher
100% Kosher
Posts: 5746
Joined: January 2006
Location: Chillin. Probably sniffing your connection for passwords \:D/
Contact:

Post by Azariah Ben Yaakov »

Oh I understand where you are both coming from ;).

However I suggest that innocence is greater than misapplication for what the word is used for in the sense.

Since it has been defined, one cannot let the negative connotation of the word take effect, when it has no precedence in the case.

A different word could have been used obviously, but I don't see it necessary when there is no negative impulse. However I suppose if a crowd of angry revolting individuals came at me with pitch forks, my mind could be swayed :-k.
Image
User avatar
Homeward bound
Lucid and deductive
Posts: 2336
Joined: August 2006
Location: Can't say where I am, but my head is in the clouds...

Post by Homeward bound »

Honestly, Ryan, I still don't see your arguement holding much water. You continue to say that we should simply adhere to your definition of it, and as long as we do that, it should be ok. However, you aren't going to be there to tell everyone who reads it that's the definition you want...people will read it and use whatever definition they associate with it, whether you meant it that way or not.

You have given many reasons why it should be allowed to be used but no benefits as to why it should be used over a less offensive term. Although normally it shouldn't be necessary to go this extra step, I think in this case in order to convince people to stop complaining, you will need to do so. Several members have already given good reasons that the term could be harmful. You need to give a reason that despite the potiental harm, the word is worth leaving in the name. You need to give a good reason this term is better than a less offensive term.

Unless you can come up with a benefit (not just a reason it's ok or the definition you associate with it), I maintain my request that you change the name.
User avatar
Azariah Ben Yaakov
100% Kosher
100% Kosher
Posts: 5746
Joined: January 2006
Location: Chillin. Probably sniffing your connection for passwords \:D/
Contact:

Post by Azariah Ben Yaakov »

At the time of the design of the particular plushie, I was wanting more of a comical term, at least something we hadn't have. Unfortunately Handsome, attractive, and other seemingly useful names, but they didn't strike as "funny" I suppose you could put it, to me.

It really isn't that big of a deal, I don't mind changing it if it is absolutely necessary :P.
Image
User avatar
Catspaw
Care Bear Admin
Care Bear Admin
Posts: 30466
Joined: April 2005
Location: Canada
Gender:

Post by Catspaw »

How about the Splendiferous Plushie or the Even Awesomer Than EK Plushie or something like that? :-k
Image
User avatar
Azariah Ben Yaakov
100% Kosher
100% Kosher
Posts: 5746
Joined: January 2006
Location: Chillin. Probably sniffing your connection for passwords \:D/
Contact:

Post by Azariah Ben Yaakov »

I'm thinking the awesomer than ek doll sounds like a good revision. An ironic one for him at that, as he was predominantly the first to buy one :-k.
Image
User avatar
Kairi
Set blasters to rapid-fire
Posts: 5045
Joined: August 2006
Location: Siberia

Post by Kairi »

How about the Controversial plushie? ;)
Image
*CAWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW*
User avatar
Catspaw
Care Bear Admin
Care Bear Admin
Posts: 30466
Joined: April 2005
Location: Canada
Gender:

Post by Catspaw »

:lol: I love that idea, Constance!
Image
User avatar
EK
The Original EK
The Original EK
Posts: 18945
Joined: April 2005
Location: Not Canada.

Post by EK »

Catspaw wrote:How about the Splendiferous Plushie or the Even Awesomer Than EK Plushie or something like that? :-k
Well if you chose the latter then it would be a false statement...in other words a lie. And I'm not comfortable with lies on this message board, are you? :noway:
User avatar
The Top Crusader
Hammer Bro
Hammer Bro
Posts: 22646
Joined: April 2005
Location: A drawbridge over a lava pit with an axe conveniently off to the side

Post by The Top Crusader »

I find that the administrators of this board are propogating lies to be highly offensive and ungodly. :noway:
User avatar
EK
The Original EK
The Original EK
Posts: 18945
Joined: April 2005
Location: Not Canada.

Post by EK »

FALSE PROPHETS! :x
Locked