New Church Ad Campaign

[thesometimesaint]

frankenstein:

Youngster. In the distant past I've been known to wear a leisure suit to church. It hasn't stopped me from serving in leadership capacities.

[Bsix]

i have worn a blue shirt, kakis, black belt, WHITE SOCKS, BROWN SHOES, to my ward for since I moved in. Last week I spoke. I wore the same outfit.

LOL...I have been an Elder's Quorum President three times, the Ward Clerk, the Ward Missionary Leader, and have been a frequent speaker and five-time Gospel Doctrine teacher. During that time, I did never wore a white shirt, a suit, and almost never a sports jacket to Church. None of that prevented me from being called to my current position on the High Council. (I do now, reluctantly own a suit and one white shirt.)

But white socks??? That is not diversity...that is just a fashion don't.

Six

[Thinking]

I am curious. If this was the "first one" you viewed. Which others did you view? Did you do any internet profiling on of any of the other video subjects? (Sort of oppositional research?) Do you have issues to raise with any of the others?

I haven't viewed any of the others. When he stated that he had been a professional skateboarder and is currently a photographer, I figured it would be pretty easy to find information. I found his website in less than one minute.

Perhaps I will check out some of the others.

To those who are sort of defending his PG-13 photos, would you approve of your daughter or wife posing for such photos?

[rockslider]

I haven't viewed any of the others. When he stated that he had been a professional skateboarder and is currently a photographer, I figured it would be pretty easy to find information. I found his website in less than one minute.

Perhaps I will check out some of the others.

To those who are sort of defending his PG-13 photos, would you approve of your daughter or wife posing for such photos?

Chad Hardy quickly comes to mind: http://www.thaindian.com/newsportal/world/hot-mormon-muffins-calendar-makes-a-debut_100267006.html

[Thinking]

I think many hear are being entirely harsh. The photos do not depict nudity - a pg movie is permitted to have "brief nudity" (see mpaa movie ratings).

Is the MPAA the authority for LDS standards?

[Daniel Peterson]

In terms of things like dress, hairstyle, speaking patterns, and predictability, the diversity of the folks at the Community of Christ certainly made the official representatives of the LDS look like robots.

Ah yes. Dress, hairstyle, and speaking patterns.

LOL.

For all its shortcomings in these regards, I'll take the intellectual diversity and cultural vitality of the Mormon community over that of the Community of Christ any day of the week.

Chad Hardy quickly comes to mind:

To the very, very limited extent to which I ever thought of his project at all, my objection to Chad Hardy's venture wasn't the poses or the clothes, but his insistence on making it explicitly about Mormons.

[rockslider]

To the very, very limited extent to which I ever thought of his project at all, my objection to Chad Hardy's venture wasn't the poses or the clothes, but his insistence on making it explicitly about Mormons.

It just seems a bit ironic that a young man's degree and I believe his membership was lost over pictures that were not as graphic as those that I just viewed by a person who's lifestyle is being highlighted by the Church in an advertising campaign.

Actually ironic is not the right word to describe this.

[Bsix]

Chad Hardy quickly comes to mind: http://www.thaindian..._100267006.html

Ah. I was wondering how quickly someone would bring up Chad Hardy. I personally see a difference between the Church promoting the testimony of a member who is a photographer that takes serious professional non-LDS related photography that sometimes is on the racier side...and Chad Hardy, the beefcake calendar impresario who exploited Mormon culture and values to make a buck. Mr. Hardy, who it seems was not living the principles of the LDS Church.

Is the MPAA the authority for LDS standards?

Actually, never. However, it is a reasonable point of reference to provide universal context to exaggerated claims of banning from this message board for even linking to Brother Maready's professional site.

Do I approve of Brother Maready's photography? Would I want my daughters posing for him? Given the concept of diversity that exists within the Church...such a question has no bearing.

I suspect that the critics of Mormonism are attempting to use a few of Brother Maready's photos as a wedge issue.

Six

[Bsix]

It just seems a bit ironic that a young man's degree and I believe his membership was lost over pictures that were not as graphic as those that I just viewed by a person who's lifestyle is being highlighted by the Church in an advertising campaign.

With all due respect, unless you have access to LDS Church records or are Mr. Hardy, you cannot make that statement with any level of credibility. You don't know why Mr. Hardy was excommunicated from the LDS Church.

Six

[Daniel Peterson]

It just seems a bit ironic that a young man's degree and I believe his membership was lost over pictures that were not as graphic as those that I just viewed by a person who's lifestyle is being highlighted by the Church in an advertising campaign.

Actually ironic is not the right word to describe this.

Not having been in his stake presidency or on the high council in his stake, I'm really not up to speed on the specific, detailed reasons for the excommunication of the faithful and devout Chad Hardy, so I'll defer to you on the matter.

[rockslider]

With all due respect, unless you have access to LDS Church records or are Mr. Hardy, you cannot make that statement with any level of credibility. You don't know why Mr. Hardy was excommunicated from the LDS Church.

Six

Seems Mr. Hardy was pretty vocal on various message boards at the time this was all going down. If I recall, he publicly documented his side of the story pretty well at the time.

What is fun to watch are those of you who will now scramble to justify what appears to be the Church's foobar. And if it was not a foobar -- i.e. they knew and intended to show just how main stream we Mormons really are

[jskains]

Seems Mr. Hardy was pretty vocal on various message boards at the time this was all going down. If I recall, he publicly documented his side of the story pretty well at the time.

What is fun to watch are those of you who will now scramble to justify what appears to be the Church's foobar. And if it was not a foobar -- i.e. they knew and intended to show just how main stream we Mormons really are

[rockslider]

Is it impossible to believe that he is intentionally leaving out pieces of the story that might make him look bad? That is an extremely common trait of people who have left the Church and seek attention on their story.

I knew a fellow that told everyone he knew that he was being excommunicated for a critical story he wrote online that he Bishop saw. His wife finally got tired of his moaning and forgot to mention that the inquiry started over his obsession with porn.

So while it might be "well documented", we should be critical of what exactly he chose to document over what he might have left out.

JMS

I assume you did not follow Brother Hardy's plight.

But hey, I did not want to derail this thread to being about Hardy, the only point was to show where the Church has taken a very strong stand against an individual's career interests, dealing with photography, in the past.

And if it is yet to be argued that the Hardy deal had nothing to do with inappropriate photography, then drop that and lets come back to the issue of this man's photography. I'm suggesting that all standards of the Church, dealing with the nature of this would be strongly opposed to it.

[Daniel Peterson]

Seems Mr. Hardy was pretty vocal on various message boards at the time this was all going down.

Always a reliable sign of devotion and piety going into a disciplinary council.

If I recall, he publicly documented his side of the story pretty well at the time.

Well then, that settles it. His account is true. And exhaustive. Nothing remains to be said.

What is fun to watch are those of you who will now scramble to justify what appears to be the Church's foobar. And if it was not a foobar -- i.e. they knew and intended to show just how main stream we Mormons really are

[DanGB]

I think we need to step back here for a

[rockslider]

Once again, I really did not want to drive this to a discussion of Hardy.

I do find it interesting that Dan has no problems with the pictures in question. Now what is ironic, is that Dan happened to pick that particular profile.

Trying to get back on topic:

I'm a sucker for the old sugar sweet commercials; you know the ones that always raised your emotions to the surface, bringing a tear to the eye. In the past, the Church's producers of these types of emotional response geared work were very good at it.

It seems there is a whole new focus group here, and every day, normal, main streamed people seems to be the message.

There was a time Mormon's took pride in being "unique". Of course in today's world, that uniqueness is not a very marketable thing.

[Daniel Peterson]

Incidentally, I don't much appreciate the apparent attempt to hijack this thread and turn it into a conversation on Mormon hypocrisy or even about what constitutes art (though I have strong opinions on the subject), let alone into yet another yawn-inducing discussion about the supremely insignificant work of Chad Hardy. Moreover, as thread-instigator I think I may have some say about this. And, if I need to, I'll contact the moderators about the matter.

The thread is about the Church's new ad campaign.

Added: Though I only partially agree with his remarks -- but even that is rather astonishing! -- DanGB is actually on topic.

[Daniel Peterson]

Once again, I really did not want to drive this to a discussion of Hardy.

Then don't.

I do find it interesting that Dan has no problems with the pictures in question.

I also like Klimt, and Bernini -- I was just recently looking at a lot of those two -- and a whole host of other artists whose work I would not hang on the walls of a chapel.

Now what is ironic, is that Dan happened to pick that particular profile.

"Happened to pick" is precisely right. The computer chose; I didn't. But I have precisely zero problem with it.

No irony.

There was a time Mormon's took pride in being "unique". Of course in today's world, that uniqueness is not a very marketable thing.

It's not about "uniqueness." It's about false and inaccurate stereotypes.

[rockslider]

Dan, please review post 38 and post 41.

I also much agreed with DanGB's post, and likely right on topic with my previous post's question of if this was not a foobar. It is possible that the Church indeed knew of the "artistic" nature of this photographer and intended to show that we are Mormon, we are hip and we are not prudes.

What say yea: foobar or not?

[jskains]

Dan, please review post 38 and post 41.

I also much agreed with DanGB's post, and likely right on topic with my previous post's question of if this was not a foobar. It is possible that the Church indeed knew of the "artistic" nature of this photographer and intended to show that we are Mormon, we are hip and we are not prudes.

What say yea: foobar or not?

Why do you seek a problem with the ads? Why not just accept them? He is LDS and skates and obviously enjoys being a member. Lets leave it at that and leave the photography between him and his bishop.

JMS

[Thinking]

I am going to simplify this as much as I can.

I don't believe that LDS Church leaders would approve of any LDS female posing like the semi-nude models which are pictured on Josh Maready's website.

So there are three possibilities:

1. Those who produced Maready's video did not know that he had semi-nude pictures on his website.

2. Those who produced Maready's video knew that he had semi-nude pictures on his website.

3. The semi-nude pictures were added after the video was produced.

If case 1 is true, the producers were lazy. I found his website in less than one minute.

If case 2 is true, I doubt the producers informed LDS leaders about the pictures.

If case 3 is true, then Josh Maready is misrepresenting the LDS Church.

In any case I think one of two things will happen: Josh Maready's ad will be discontinued OR the semi-nude photos will be deleted from his website.

[rockslider]

If case 2 is true, I doubt the producers informed LDS leaders about the pictures.

This would seem to be common sense, but I wonder --- in my poll, you seem to be voting for foobar.

Done with full knowledge/intent is still a possibility.

[rockslider]

Why do you seek a problem with the ads? Why not just accept them? He is LDS and skates and obviously enjoys being a member. Lets leave it at that and leave the photography between him and his bishop.

JMS

These commercials are telling the world what it is to be a Mormon, thus its public domain.

Take "Thinking's" possibility 3. If this is the case, Josh (the commercial's photographer) might find out a bit more about what it's like to be hip Mormon (i.e. Hardy).

[mercyngrace]

After reading this whole thread, the only comment I'd like to echo is.... White socks, Frankenstein???? Dude....

Oh yeah, and I thought Maready's video and photos were just fine and LOVED that he said we aren't robots! Some of us have been singing "

" ever since Michael McLean penned that song.

[Bsix]

If I recall, he [Chad Hardy] publicly documented his side of the story pretty well at the time.

With all due respect, Mr. Hardy did nothing of the kind. He spun his side of the story. He produced no recording, susbstantiating witnesses, no transcripts, etc. We have no real idea if Mr. Hardy is telling the truth.

The Church has not commented on the proceedings nor provided any public basis for his excommunication.

Regards,

Six