That has to be one of the best flyers Creative Fresno has produced.

there's edgy and then there's dead hooker.

Dead fake legs hooker or no dead fake legs hooker, I like the flyer.

I don't really envision "woman left for dead" in the flyer, but more "hipster girl drank too much at Tokyo after ArtHop and got lost in the alley on her way to the lofts."

come find out for sure tomorrow at milano where Dead Hooker Society (along with Thrawtle and Diesel Finger) is playing. they know about all that stuff.
k-

If you go to the bartender challenge, make sure you ask Chris for a 'Runny Blumpkin', its his specialty (although I've heard that Josh delivers a mean 'hungry unicorn'). Should be a hoot.

a) it's a flyer b) it's PUNK RAWK YO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

...poor taste, and stupid.
whomever thought of this is a fool.

-if it were to 'go national' (and be some sort of 'example' of goes on here (music/marketing/etc.) of the town?
People'd be all: '...what were they thinking? this is how we promote something?'

(but then again, Burger King has lost it's sense of reason in order to gain attention in it's advertising...)

message I got?

-Young woman,
-drank too much at the bartender challange,
passed out half in bushes,
(since she has no pants on?)
-probably was sexually assaulted, (maybe wasn't, but most normal people at this event in an urban setting would be wearing clothing from the waist down.)
-and this happened 'downtown,'
-(definitely not 'uptown' or in 'non-urban' area.)

(why I thought this?)

When you find a young woman half in the bushes with no pants,socks,shoes on at night?
They've usually been sexually assaulted and are in need of medical assistance (or) are dead.
(at least the one's I've seen.)

Okay, that may sound harsh...
Lets just say
'everywhere but Fresno at this particular Fundraiser Event'
would that be true.

and

'everywhere but fresno would this be seen as degrading, suggestive of violence towards women, (and) supportive of irresponsible alch. consumption, jeopardizing of one's health, and promoting poor judgement (and possibly) a crime.'

no?
(Show of hands)
-How many women want to find themselves in this condition?,
-anyone who cares about women want to find their friend, daughters, wives, girlfriends, sisters, (etc.) in this condition?

I would like to consider myself one of those with the 'rock 'n roll attitude' but I agree with Heather and Towel, the flyer is just wrong.

There's a very frightening underlaying theme when one sees what is perceived as a naked woman in the bushes. It frightens me that this is what is considered "hot" or sexy. I am a woman, I am the parent of a future woman... I don't want the men in our world to be told that this is what a good time looks like.

Want a sexy flyer that hints at too much to drink? ( another issue, but I won't go there,yet) what's wrong with a fully dressed woman climbing into a cab? Nice leg in heal outside the cab, long arm reaching for the door, car keys dangling from long fingers. Still lots of skin, lots of sexy, and not a hint of violation.

Did I really write "underlaying"?? kind of ruins the rest of the post, doesn't it?

...nah.

In light of these geniuses using this sort of stuff as 'creative?'

misuse of a word (underlaying vs underlying) is nothing compared to the definitely implied misuse of a person.

For the record, I don't find the legs in the bushes hot or sexy, but I DO find the flyer intriguing, well done, and with a great rock 'n' roll/indie attitude.

While of course Towel is correct, I still give this flyer a flyer - it's art, nothing else.

While I appreciate art and will acknowledge that there is much in art that is dark and disturbing ( and I tend to appreciate that the most), it is not used to 'sell' something.
Using such images to push a product, to saturate a market, to plant a seed of "this could totally happen" in the minds of a largely passive audience is not art.
The most dangerous thing to do is to make something harmful look glamorous to an unthinking society. To me, it's even more dangerous when this propaganda is sold towards one group in society to the detriment of another group in society.

Well said, Claire, but I want to continue my point by saying that flyers like these almost have to be artistic, since they're not so much 'selling something' as they are representing an artistic mindset.

The flyers are being used to intrigue and lure, but also to represent the musical artists (and graphic artists) being touted.

I can't speak for them, but I highly doubt they were trying to suggest any literal or harmful translation of the piece. The flyer art is 'rock and roll' by definition, which represents and garners much more leeway while shirking societal norms.

We can all agree the term 'rock and roll' often represents a societal deviation (casual sex, casual drug use, violence on-stage, ironic use of lyrics and artistic make-up and set pieces - think Marilyn Manson, KISS, etc). Acting a fool in hotel rooms, throwing televisions from balconies...all anti-societal statements.

This could qualify as one of them.

HOWEVER, Towel and Claire, where you inherently win your argument is here: this flyer isn't necessarily representing the artistic choices of the Supressors or Rademacher or It'll Grow Back. It's ultimately selling Creative Fresno and the Bartender Challenge. In that context, Towel's right - the resulting naked legs in bushes would be one potential result of a long night of drinking and heavily tipping bartenders.

Still, all in all? The flyer still gets a flyer from me.

strange, somehow i missed this "controversy" during the week.

i saw the flyer and didn't think rape victim, sexual assault, too much to drink, etc. "i thought, hmm, that's an interesting flyer. it's a lot different than the normal, logo driven ones creative fresno uses." maybe that's just me.

I wonder how many people would call it art if it was a naked pair of thick, hairy, masculine legs poking out of the bushes.

heather,
i wonder if all the people that feel the flyer suggests/implies sexual assault would have said that if it were hairy, men's legs sticking out of the bushes?

I guess the way that this arguement continues as some sort of 'artistic license' or 'this is punk-rock/rock music' thing is to completely disconnect with society and reality.

Say for example, you are walking down the street, it's after dark, there is like, nobody on the street, and there are the still legs of anything lying half out of the bushes, (male or female.)

Nobody thinks that could be amiss?

-oh but this is 'art' this is 'a flyer' this isn't 'real.'

Since a photograph represents real life in this situation (it's not a fantasy, not a collage, this is a REALIST piece,)

--if (in real life) you're walking down Blackstone in the area of Zapps and you find this,
NOBODY is going to think: '...hmmm, this may be something wrong...?'
(I'm curious what the mindset of anybody (any adult who lives in a city setting) would think anything but.)
Re: Location?
-I think anybody would be a bit concerned if finding this in a Suburban or gated community, and would think something was up if this was out in a vineyard somewhere or even in clovis, back behind the airport...

(In truth)
People are found all the time around here in desolate areas uncovered,
usually dead,
and it's in the papers usually starting with '...a partially clothed body was found in the vicinity of: '
-and it goes on to describe some area that folks (hope) is not theirs.
(dead hooker? dead farm worker? dead 'banger? (pick an ethnicity) --that's NORMAL, right? so I guess that imagery is okay...)

This looks pretty obviously to be a mannequin's legs, (so yeah, nobody that anybody cares about was left partially unclad (nor) photographed that way.
--And I'm sure some twit is going to try and say
'...but it's just a mannequin, it's not real, it's just imagery, it's meant to get attention, it's not real, it's successful because it's created controversy..'

But like Claire was saying, and like Heather is alluding to.

These are representational of a woman's shaved legs, and by their positioning and in the setting, they are clearly representing something that (again)
---if anyone we cared about was found in?
We'd be concerned.
(Very concerned.)

Anybody who thinks this is cool?
Got any sort of woman or young woman in your life? (in any way,)?

--you find Them looking like this (alone on a dark street anywhere,)
--are you going to try to assist or correct the situation?
-maybe help them up
-maybe put some clothes on them
-maybe ask 'are you okay, what happened, are you okay?'

--and anybody with half a brain knows that a scene like this (with real people) usually (anywhere, even here) is not good for the person in this position.
Don't give me this lame garbage that
'it's just art.'

This is a realistic photograph, not some 'fantasy/design/artsy-fartsy' thing to be debated.

And the laughable aspect?
-it's not even a new style,
-it's simply implied crime scene photography (without the chalk lines and reference numbers.)
-If you want to see this done in all it's glory? (like, 40-60 years ago?
Look up the 'Stack o Wheats' murders (or) anything on 'the Black Dahlia,' if you want the real deal, (only when she was found, they thought initially she was a mannequin.)

It's exploitive,
-and it's either a clear case of
'...because it's nobody I care about, and just an image, it's fine,' or
'...even if it is somebody I care about, to me it's entertainment and 'art' so yeah, this is fine with me.'

-Both stances which tell me that said individual has their head clearly up their own backside (which,
would have been a more fitting picture, shown some actual physical talent, --and portrayed this understanding of 'art' more honestly.)
...Now, THAT would raise some money.

I seriously wonder, knowing how the human mind works and that there really is such a thin membrane between what we want in reality (and what's just 'fantasy') at what sort of person would enjoy such imagery and find it entertaining?
(let alone something that would attract them to an event?)

I have no respect for an artist that would do this, because it is degrading and exploitive of people in general, women in particular, and using an (already rampant crime scenario) to 'attract attention' to your event.

What's really unfortunate is:
This was a high level/ high image group within Fresno (Creative Fresno) and not just a bunch of kids trying to be 'cute' with a stock image for a goth tribute band at club Fred around Halloween or Valentines day.

This is Creative Fresno, I know some of these people (personally) and I'm wondering what they were thinking when they did this,
(it's not just disrespectful and stupid, --but it's insensitive and careless,
---in the name of what is supposed to be an intelligent, creative, and 'up-building with Fresno' sort of org. (Creative Fresno.)

-THIS is what you guys think promotes Fresno in a good way?

The last thing that irritates me (only as long as I care to let it,)

This is also just is another typical '...hey man, don't dis it because it's 'art', ---and deliberate myopia claiming 'it represents the form,' -like that's a credible arguement (and just reaks of faux-intellectualism.)

As an artist? to me? that defence just screams 'poser.'

Then, when nobody stands behind it saying
'...this is what we were after,
this is why we did it,
this is the meaning that we were trying to convey, and what we were trying to make you feel...'
(which is what a real artist will do, by the way,
---like they had some actual intent with the design and execution of this piece?)

-it screams
'...as Creative Fresno, we're gonna bang on your door, do something semi provocative, offensive, edgy, and then run.'
-THAT screams 'juvenile,'
-not even art for art's sake.

---Finally? It tells me that thinking that folks who use this type of 'shock' marketing? really are not worth my time nor money,
(...and yeah, Creative Fresno?, if you keep up with this line of 'promotion' I'm not going to support your effort
(and)
I'm going to publically wonder what in the hell of this town you're looking to represent, (both to itself, and the outside world.)
-In hopes that somebody reaches your marketing group, and they are able to extract their heads from their backsides (before) they suffocate (or) further 'image' issues of Fresno spread farther and wider,(once again, for 'real reason' -not- because it's just 'easy to pick on Fresno.')
--Keep putting out stuff like this?
It's not easy, it's a sign that intelligent life exists elsewhere, and that there's something right in the world.

(seriously,

I've not checked Facebook, to see if they're associated:
but have you guys even heard of the Marjoree Mason Center?
--Is Creative Fresno one of their supporters?

--YA think THEY want to be associated with garbage like this???
(surely somebody there is a seriously studied artist who 'gets it.'
---right?
They're probably hurtin' financially,
--how 'bout this as a fundraiser T-Shirt Image, Right?
(what, you folks can't take 'edgy and dark humor???')

----besides, 'it's only an interesting design.'

Just don't do this stuff anymore.

You want to sit and argue and diddle with your own philosophy of what's art and what isn't? If you have that kind of time, knock yourself out.

But
-This is a universal image (half naked woman lying on ground, half out of the bushes on a city street at night,) that means something very wrong has happened.

Maybe that's just ineteresting, edgy, and provocative in 'Fresno.'

(...that is, until a photo of this (in reality) gets printed in the Bee, and it's in a section of town where 'stuff like that isn't supposed to happen.')

I'm kinda curious
--would McGlatchy even print a picture this graphic and suggestive in the Bee, -if it was real?

I already know Creative Fresno's answer.

Ed:
-as one person who feels strongly against this sick joke of a promo?

Yes, I would have thought that any body lying in the bushes (male or female) shown unclothed from the waist down had been a victim of something, (and,
by virtue of lack of clothing/shoes in an obviously public place late at night)
-probable victim of some sort of attack/crime,
-most likely sexual because of the radical lack of clothing.)

And yes, it would have still been exploitive and a tremendously poor choice to promote anything positive, 'creative,' or befitting anything positive associated with an activity in this town or any other.

The image was chosen primarily because it stood out from other stock photo images and for its unusual content. How often do you see MANNEQUIN legs laying on the sidewalk? The secondary reason was because it (in the context of the flyer) seemed to mock the overwhelming majority of flyers containing semi-dressed women in various provocative poses advertising events on the Beehive and elsewhere (and surprisingly don't seem to get the same vehement responses from Wet Towel).

To answer some of the criticisms, I (as the designer of the flyer) don't consider this art but a flyer. I never saw the legs has having a gender because they are one half of a mannequin that was (according to the photographer's comments on the image) left on the sidewalk.

The image was never intended to represent any type of sexual, violent or drunken situation. It was intended to be different and out of the ordinary (which apparently it succeeded at being) and to get you to come to an event.

For the record I still think the flyer is a good design and do not believe I have my head up my "backside". I consider myself to be a strong supporter of women and would never use an image I thought or felt in any way was truly demeaning.

Donavan

Donavan, with all due respect, you seriously didn't think the legs were feminine? Truly now? I find that hard to believe. My husband is a reletively thin man and his legs do not look like those, even if he were to shave them. If you really didn't see the legs as feminine, I really think you should consult others about future photo decissions.

Though, it's likely that Towel has a different view of the other flyers than I... but as a woman, I'm willing to address their (usually) bad taste. The other pictures are provocative projections of women, yes. They are very sexual in nature, yes. However, those that I've seen are posed or of a woman standing, sitting, leaning. They include a projection of a woman who has NOT been victimized. Do I like them? Not always. Some I do, and in the face of this discussion I'm sure many would be surprised by which ones I DO like.

The truth is, one does not have to purposefully demean women to do so. I've found that so much of our society has been exposed to the acceptance of violence against women that they are incapable of distinguishing it in all it's forms. If the legs had bruises on them you probably wouldn't have used the photo. Had they had panties around the ankles, you probably wouldn't have used it. That's far to in your face to be sexy. Yet, you ( and dare I add a completely feminist remark such as "because you're a man") simply don't see the finer nuances in this shot. Heather had the same kneejerk reaction as I ( and she's at least a decade younger). I dare say that there are other women who did or would as well. In some ways, your ignorence in such matters may actually cost you. Unless Zapps Park has changed in the last 10 years ( can't believe it's been that long since I've been there), this truly isn't the image to use in order to get a nice mixed crowd into that little corner. This is coming from a woman who is headed to the Manson/Bullet For My Valentine concert come July ( I'm not an easy listening middle aged mama, here).

Towel has lived in areas of the country where this sort of picture has been a reality. I live with the knowledge that not having my keys ready, not drinking with friends, or just going out alone is a dangerous reality that has the threat of ending up in such a situation. Doesn't matter what neighborhood I'm in, this is my reality.

There are lots of stock photos out there that are 'different' and far more appropriately represenative of the Rock 'n Roll lifestyle. There are alot of pictures that don't relay the message "Get her drunk, get her naked, get outta there." And honestly, that message is not unusual, it's all too familiar.

Donavan:

You're a nice guy.
And I do wish you well on so many endeavours.
And, though I respect your owning up to creating this? (I mean, you had it as your tag-line on facebook for a while there...)

This seriously needed to be rethought before it was released.

I'm going to chalk it up to being 'caught and too close' to the moment and not really stepping back and saying '...what does this really look like?'

Obviously these legs weren't set up to portray 'mannequin' legs,
---but the bare legs of a woman sticking out of a hedge. (that's why the picture 'works' and 'makes you look.'
--do we have to go over what works in design, now?

Do I comment (actually) on other flyers (which are designed messages) that are stupid and portray women in a poor light?
Actually, sometimes I do, --but more often than not, others have already stood and taken the usual pot shots of
-'how ghetto(e)'
-'how many 'hosts' can Thaiphoon have?'
-'stay classy Fresno,'
and we all see these situations as the sad urban blight that gets passed off as 'celebrating' here in Fresno, (you know, before the cops show up.)
-and hope that the rest of the planet will not associate the town with when the name comes to mind.

Considering what Creative Fresno is?,
considering who Creative Fresno is?,
--and considering what the mission statement (documented or not) as wanting to promote and raise the creative level of this place?

This flyer was a really bad idea.
Way too close to reality here in the area,
-and not anything (imagery wise) that most sane people would want to be a part of or find themselves in.

I had higher expectations of Creative Fresno, (considering the calibre, character, and talent level of the people who are a part of it.)

I'm hoping this was just a momentary lapse of reason, (I'd like to maintain my opinion of Creative Fresno being a solid front of talent, class, and communication standards...
(perhaps not of excellence, all the time) but at least of standards.)

And, though I really don't need others to think for me, or throw down a path to ride on (as far as views and opinions?)

There are others on the string who threw down flags as well, and way before me,
--none of them shrinking violets who are going to faint at the first sight of something 'edgy.'

Women (and men, Ed, since you're wondering) do get attacked, raped, and left half naked (sometimes dead) in this town, and all others.
'fake mannequin legs' that suggest this?
Is nothing to promote an even with.

(Whether you're the height of Fresno Creativity, (or) some ghoulish 15 year old who lives in the cellar and does nothing but watch 'saw' for weeks on end.

Somebody, (you, anybody) do a lot of creative (good) stuff BEFORE the next half-naked whomever is found in the county limits, reminding us of how real this scenario is, unkay?

I dunno. I think this whole flyer situation has been taken WAY outta context.

It's a flyer. It's subject to interpretation.
I for one see a picture of a female MANNEQUIN partially sticking out of the bushes. I dont view it as misogynistic or demoralizing.

As a woman I am pretty open to alot of things. I typically tend to see the picture as a whole. Meaning, who is promoting what type of event and how does said organization represent themselves in general.

If this had been a flyer for a nightclub event for someone's birthday or promoting a "Ladies Night" then okay maybe I could see the mixed feelings about the picture.

But it's a Creative Fresno flyer. For a bartender challenge. It's from a respectable, highly reputable organization who's main focus is to promote Fresno. With that said, we need to continue to see things in context.
If you were to go to an arthop show and see this and other similar pictures, would you proceed to disect the artist or organization responsible? Or would you stand back and applaud the artist for being edgy?

Seriously ladies, step back and take stock of the bigger picture.

I have yet to see Claire or Katrina or even Heather comment on the Worst Flyer of the Week with such vehemence and the women depicted on those flyers are half-naked willingly. There should be more disappointment/anger in the fact that those women are stripping down for the sole purpose of gratuitous sexual innuendo.

Kudos to you, Donovan for now cow-towing to the few who can't quite see past their soap box.

Keep doing what you do, because you do it well.
The flyer is pretty damn compelling.

Okay, H. Point taken. I am not one of the six who've been assualted.
But this whole flyer issue seems so completely over-exaggerated.
Again, having the fortune of not being assaulted, I cannot speak for those who have and who view this as inappropriate.
But again, I just can't see what you are seeing.
I guess to each their own perspective.
I'll get off MY soap box now.

My lack of commenting on the worst flyer of the week tends to fall under the "it is the worst flyer of the week. They are outright trash and there is no mistaking that."
Sometimes that screaming in your face sexual content does it's own job in pointing out how wrong it is.

I'd also like to add that I, in no way, am against advertising, art, music, etc. of a sexual nature. I am against the glamorization of the "violence is sexy" innuendo.

As for the art hop, it all depends on how this was shown. Shown straight up within the midst of other thought provoking pieces? I'm not sure if I would applaud it on it's origionality, but it would not cause me to dislike it.

It's the context in which it's being used, in this case. In this setting it's being used to sell what is supposed to be a good time had by all. "Come on down, have some drinks, listen to some bands, spend your money" and the picture is the side note of "maybe you'll find some naked/drunk girl in the bushes, or put her there." Was the side note on purpose? No, I don't believe so. The picture was simply chosen by a man who didn't truly examine what came across.

Soap boxes are wonderful things and everyone should have one or two. Having a soapbox opens up conversations that should be opened up. Such conversations are only a waste of time to those who refuse to think broader than their small wants. Such conversations might make people open their eyes. Such conversations might make them cover their ears and sing "La La La", either way, they are much needed conversations.

If Donovan wants to continue being effective in advertising he should be aware of what people, all people ( especially those with soapboxes, because they tend to tell their friends) feel about certain images. He should be able to look past the "it's cool" issue and be aware of what, if any, kneejerk reactions will result. It will give him a bit of a leg up on things. He can decide to offend some people based on an overall look or he can decide that he doesn't want to alienate a certain group. He can decide if he wants to stretch his talent to advertise while being socially responsible or if he just wants to sell.

And Donovan, you say you didn't think of it as truly demeaning ( that you didn't see it), I believe you, because I like to believe in people like that. I do think it's further proof of needing to really examine what might be inferred by others. If you want to be aware of what is portrayed in media, through you, then reading something by Dr. Scott Lukas is a good place to start. Work by Andrea Dworkin is a good place too... though I suggest looking up facts about her life, first. Dworkin is not easy reading and there are things I don't agree with. I'm still examining the idea that I don't agree because I don't, or because I've been programmed by society to think that certain things are "Ok".

I don't believe in everything needing to be PC to a fault. I do believe that there needs to be a certain amount of social responsibility.

When I look at how this is playing out, honestly? I'm seeing why I really have such little interest in the whole 'how do we make Fresno better' and 'they're picking on us again, and calling us backwards' concern when it comes to here.

This is not promoting and bettering Fresno, this is stupid.

Why?

when I look this situation: Creative Fresno (a group that is comprised of seriously trained artists, pols, social organizers (etc.) who are supposed to be all about promoting the arts in Fresno and affirm it as a 'credible' arts society?
I'm seeing stuff like this.
(with 'stock photography, no less.)

Maybe what really has me worked up is,
unlike the other flyers and posters (which are so ignorant and promoting of, mmmm, I dunno,
STD's, alch. additiction, and mysogeny, before the bullets fly,
--and bling (can't leave out the bling,)
In my mind?
I look at it and think:
'this is really sad, but in a lot of ways, these people don't know any better, and if they did?
If they thought that there was more to life than getting drunk, getting laid by some poor girl who's only being seen for her bust-size, --and a bangin' set of rims for the donk?
--They'd reach for it, do better,
-and maybe live past 32.

In truth, I don't really go after those posters so heavy, because it's like making fun of somebody who's got a handicap and can't help the way that do something as ungracefully as those who don't.

The arguments are baffling.

(Joey) -you wrote in not long ago, about being sexually assaulted by an officer (while being intoxicated) on your birthday, -and how wrong it was.

What you're not gettting?

Where does that mindset
(that it's okay to treat women like this, (depiction in the flyer) and (real life, in your retelling,)?
Come from?
Huh?

You can call it a soapbox if you want, fine.

People (usually women) get mistreated, and when there are bodies left in orchards of in
'the parts of Fresno you don't go to.'
-The reaction (locally) I'm finding is this:
'...Well yeah, she shouldn't be (on the west side, Downtown, out in an orchard, working in a field, by her self, dressed that way, with that guy, with that girl, with that crowd (etc.)'

And somebody will get all pissed off and write about a crime against a woman, and how unfair it is, and how vicious and wrong it is, and how (due to poverty, race, location, etc.) there is greater vulnerability (and) less caring than if it was some well-to-do cul-de-sac brat from a gated community.
(..it may even be me writing, in the past?
I think even you have written on it,(past your personal experiences about being groped by an officer.)

But you know why it's all worthless?

And (partly) why people who commit crimes against women, children, minorities, the vulnerable, and such do?
--Because they know that they can.
--Because they know that some people actually think it's 'cool.'
--Because they know that, for the most part? People aren't going to care, and when some individual gets violated?
Pretty much the response is going to be:
'...anybody I know? No?
oh well, they learned their lesson.'

Call it a soapbox. I'm fine with that.

If we took a poll of how many readers of Beehive alone have been sexually attacked, taken advantage of, forced, or physically attacked (using alch. as part of the method?)
-I have the suspicion
(if Fresno is just like the rest of the country,) that the numbers would be pretty high.
I also think, due to the pervading attitudes that I hear and see about women here in town? Those numbers may be higher.

What's so screwed up about this place?
If those statistics were published (like now.)
you'd hear:
'...well, hell, we're not as bad as (so and so) over there.'
'...well, looks like we're no worse than anyone else..'
'...well, they made their choices to be there, and that's what they get..'
'...well, it doesn't happen in this section.'

And then the most puzzling factor of all:
Women who have been attacked,
or are close to those who have been attacked (yet) think this is just how society is,
(or) that imagery depicting such a thing is cool, (or) defend it as being 'artistic and edgy.'

Blows my mind.
(I mean, seriously, you want people to care about violence towards women, you want people to treat women with respect, (which is a no-brainer,)
--yet, stuff like this is seen as 'progressive promotions of creativity in the valley.'
-right.

The reason why people laugh at here?
Because the behavior is laughable, (in a bewildered and mocking sense.)

This is a town where the very org. that is meant to promote the place, and will bend over backwards to print up T-Shirts and such (even changing the name 'Fres-Yes' --so that it's 'not so negative,'

---where (at the same time)
-Find bodies in orchards, have women get mistreated as meat, be depicted in club flyers (the ghetto ones, the ones we vote on and make fun of) as 'ho's and 'hoochies'
-(But then)
have the educated and upper crust creative aspect promote a night of drinking (with) simulated crime scene photography.

Heres the deal:

Nobody around here IS going to take a concern (such as abuse and missuse of women, crimes against people, etc.) seriously.

Why?
-it's being used as a joke and as a promotional item for a prominant promotional (pro-town) group.

What's going to happen?
What already does happen.

'...there was a body found in a lot down off of Inyo...'

'...huh, damn shame, creepy, was she naked?, lets go have drinks for a good cause...'

'...oh look, there's a body in the hedges on the poster for the drinks for good cause event...'

'...yep, we're here, -hope there's still room, and I hope the damn cops don't have a DUI check on the way home.'

Fresno wants to be taken seriously?
If Fresno wants to not be seen as backwards and needlessly argumentative (without even thinking first?)
It's gotta stop doing stuff like this.
This is part of the reason why people laugh at here.

I'm telling you straight up,
People (not from here) look at the phenom of a town this small, with dead people showing up in lots, orchards (etc.)
--where that's seen as 'normal,' (just another dead farmworker or 'banger, that's where you're SUPPOSED to find them)

--and then look at a prominant promotional group like Creative Fresno using imagery such as the bare ladies legs coming out of the hedges?
(and that 'normal' adults think this is 'cool?')

They don't 'think'
-they KNOW that there's something definitely wrong with this place,
and that,
on a very elemental level:
human life, (let alone gender) is far from equally respected across the board, (and) violent crime towards women is a suitable promotional tool.

Done.
There is no more to take from that.

-a woman gets attacked or mistreated (and we know her) and it's this 'horrible thing,' (which it truly is.)

A picture comes out depicting the aftermath of such a situation (promoting a drinking event)
-and folks are like '...cool, neat, edgy, provocative, we've finally arrived as a creative scene...'

Fools.

I'm starting to honestly feel that this town doesn't really want to change,
I don't think it really wants to improve it's image,
and I have serious doubts that the people who are so 'pro-woman' and 'anti-crimes against women' really are in fact, this way.

-I just think I'm seeing a bunch of folks who will do almost anything to get attention (good or bad,) and who'll lob off their own arm, just to have something to wave higher, (and then complain about being forced to do so, just to 'rate.')

If this was not so pathetic, I'd be laughing with everybody else.

Okay Wet towel, you are right. I did recount a story where I was groped inappropriately by a Fresno Sherrif.
But I dont consider myself a victim.
Maybe that is where the difference lies here.
I cannot compare my being "groped" to a women being raped or abused. But I can say that anyone, male or female has the decision to make on whether they are going to be victims or be victimized. I chose not to be a victim. It happend. It sucked. I worked it out. It's over. I chose to share my story because the topic of police brutality and assault is real and prevelant and the story along with video depicted "true" assault.
This flyer is subjective. Its all how you see it.
As someone who was taken advantage of, I chose not to allow myself to be vicitmized therefore did not in any way see that flyer in that context.

I think everyone has a right to their opinion and in offering it, be prepared for someone with a differing opinion to voice their own.

i'll be damned if this isn't a big deal.

(Joey,)
I know, and it thoroughly pisses me off that anyone would do such a thing to you, (and) just walk,
--and--
I think you're handling the situation really well, and my heart goes out (and my applause goes up) to you ---as always.

I understand that others are going to have different opinions. --that's great.

I also, due to the severity of the issue, due to (clinically) having worked with so many women who have been violated, having gone to school with, having been in churches with, having friends and family, (etc. etc.)

What people don't realize is:
even where the mindset isn't 'get'r, get'r drunk, get in, get gone.' (like Claire was saying,)

--the figures (even today) of sexual assault on women (which, groping, by the way is,)
-Are insanely high.
(And that's with women's empowerment, women's rights and awareness, womyn this and womyn that all over the place...)

I'm sorry, but this region is not an area where women are seen as equals, nor really respected, and when you start mixing the cultures? The levels just drop like a rock.
-People feel that they can take advantage of those who are 'one of those,' (or) 'from that area,' that nobody's gonna care
--and the sick fact is: to a great extent, they're right.

I did a 'sexual offender residence' check on Fresno once (as a favor for somebody who was considering moving to a particular neighborhood,)
--and it was staggering.
Them little red dots were everywhere.

As an artist? (figure painter / sculptor)
It irritates me when folks go crying 'art-culture' for stuff that is just degradation.

As a human being? (As a brother, son, uncle, cousin) --and somebody who actually just plain 'likes' women?
--having worked (clinically) with sex offenders and such, (knowing how such a zero tolerance has to be maintained.)

I don't back off.

It's not a crusade.
It's bringing a lot of reality (about something that's abnormal and wrong) to light,
-where often it's seen as
'no big deal' (or) 'normal.'

I do appreciate your perspectives (and sharing) always, ---you know that.
--and again, I have nothing against Donavan, either.

But if there ever was a subject I want killed, gutted, hung up to dry, and left for dead out in the wind?
It's the abuse and degradation of women, (every woman)
-and that (strangely enough?, by design?) are what mannequins are meant to be: 'everywoman.'

e GADS people. Such drama. I'm here as I was linked to this page and haven't even read half of the posts; however, amazing heartfelt opinions in here over a POSTER. And my opinion is this: a g-o to the designer and alternatively, I guess we're living up to the stereotype of Fresnans being narrow-minded. This isn't a dish on women's rights or is it up for nominations for poster-board of Fresno. Also, maybe they're nicely shaved and moisturized men's legs, speaking of equality.

It's "Flier" not "Flyer"...

I have said it before and I will say it again: Creativity is about risk...growth comes out of failures (not calling this flier or my dear friend, Donavan a failure, btw). I had a drill seargent in boot camp give me some words of wisdom. He said, "Sheridan, just remember, it only takes 1'aw, sh!t' to erase 100 "atta boys'."

News flash: Creative Fresno embraces creativity and takes risks. Do we (CF) wake up in the morning thinking about ways to make a mistake or upset people? Probably not. I ask this questions: "Was this done with a heart of malice?" The answer is "no."

I remember the MET Happy Hour CF hosted...git some bad reviews. Not the best event we put on. As an organization and a board of directors we discussed it and learned from it. This flier and this conversation will be discussed at our board meeting this Saturday (y'all are welcome to attend as they are open to the public). Come see how we handle situations like this. Donavan did not fail. Donavan is not mean. Creative Fresno does not hate women. We had an event. There was a flier produced. People had an emotional reaction to the flier.

I ask that you take everything into consideration. Avoid the Fundamental Attribution Error and look at the bigger picture.

Well put Heather.

Seriously folks, it's really not that serious. Most of us know the CF team and know that in fact there was no malice involved here. And there was no real harm done. Just alot of healthy dialogue. And that's a good thing, no?

And for the record. Flyer is also an acceptable spelling. I know this for a fact cause I looked it up in the dictionary in my head.
Plus my spelling of "flyer" reminds me of an airplane. And airplanes remind me of vacation. And vacation means I get to actually step away from the computer.

Wow, a handslap ( the whole flyer vs. flier quip shows an amazing lack of maturity) and projection ( you really need to read your link with a bit more depth).

I'll hand it to Donovan, he handled the entire conversation with a lot of grace.

Oh, Lord.

Just cuz, I went and looked online at some Rock album covers. Jane's Addiction, Yes, KISS, Meatloaf, etc etc.

G'head, do it.

You'll see that the Creative Fresno fli/yer is tame, EXTREMELY tame at best.

Wet, while I appreciated your black and white only discussion of the horrors of thisnthat and oh, my, don't we all know a female and such, this is a rock fly/ier. Rock and Roll.

It gets a pass, period. It doesn't suggest, hint, covertly intimate, imply, or show any violence, aftermath of violence, tame doings, or horrific anything. It shows what are clearly mannequin legs. It's clearly not photo-realism, it's clearly art. The long shot down the wet street. The interesting focus.

I think it and the bands rock. I think Greer would likely just have easily posed for such a picture were it suggested to her. However, the mannequin didn't seem to mind.

Rock and Roll. Hoochie Koo.

Art.

Not a wisp of discussion about the tatted dude who gets whomped twice by a female in MikeOz's other post about Sk8ters. Why? Cuz that's Sk8tin,' man!

Fli/yer gets a fly/ier from me still.

It's really hard to justify a lot of discussion (after a while) when you realize that, for the most part? People are going to basically hold the attitude of Mintz '..it's just rock-n-roll, that's all it is.'

Cobain blowing his head off? was rock and roll too. (and gee, that was just posted last week.)
Not supposin' that aspect of the genre (rock artist suicides) is gonna come up next, huh?

What halfway bugs me? (because my dialogue 'caring' factor is really starting to diminish,)

Is stuff like What Claire is pointing out, (and she makes excellent points '..when you go after spelling,' (it is being petty, it is not really having much better things to say, and just taking jabs.)

What's sick about it?
-When (otherwise) intelligent folks (who have had some background in such things as debate, conflict resolution, and 'peacemaking,'
--or simple social graces, do this crap,
--and the person trying to make a point reeeeallly is is trying to be respectful, yet clear, and you gotta play along, you know? because you're really trying to be genuine and not be petty...

Personally? It gets old.

If you want to go after real 'conflict resolution,' you need to be willing to see both sides, you need to be willing to entertain that the other person is right...
-you don't hold onto your stance, (when such a stance is being called insensitive (and) portraying someone in a degrading manner, and start fronting creative intellectualism with such tired chestnuts as '...it's a good design,' 'it's edgy,' (or) 'it's rock-n-roll' and 'eye catching.'

I really have no desire to back off of my assertions of why this sort of image does not belong in an event associated with a 'more intelligent and culturally aware creative' group such as Creative Fresno.
(Particularly when Fresno itself is no stranger to finding dead people in desolate areas, (and) is no stranger to violence towards women.

The stupid part of it?
The pot-shot and frontin' argument.
-is it 'flier or flyer...'
-or the real rave:
'..it's not realism, it's surrealism'
-yeah...
like I don't know the catalogue of such greats as Salvador Dali (a surrealist,) nor dada, nor absurdist art, (vs) photojournalistic 'realism' imagery (or staged crime-scene/forensic photography.
---And the funny thing is?
This is still not a surrealist photo, it is realist. (I mean, that correction really was useless in the main point, but still...)

But that's what we get to defend and debate in this...?
(That, and what a nice guy Donavan is, and how he loves women and would never do anything degrading...)

I got a great suggestion for you there, Slappy, how about this:
Don't put stuff that's possibly degrading and can be seen as mysogenistic out there? (and) people won't raise an eyebrowy (and) you won't find yourself being associated with this drech... huh? (make sense?)

Somewhere on the thread,
somebody said that 1 in 6 women in most crowds have been taken advantage of sexually, or victim of sexual attack.
-Personally?
I think that number is actually too low.
I recall it being 1 in 4, and have seen it as 1 in (to) actually 50 percent or higher.

(But there are factors there...
(for example) Joey, in retelling her being 'felt up' or 'groped' by a sheriff? did not call that a sexual attack (because she did not see herself as a victim.) (..okay, her right, I respect Joey.)

--Strange thing of it is: the law (federal, state, etc.) would probably determine 'any unwaranted advances, conversation, attention, --to be sexual harrassment,
-and any physical contact to be definite sexual harrassment (possible assault)
-and any touching or grabbing that is uninvited to be assault,
--any touching of an erogenous zone or sexually defining point of the body that is uninvited? Sexual Assault. (headed into the varying levels of 'rape.')

-But it is her body, her experience, and I respect her decisions of how she wishes to handle the issue. (By the laws, however, that situation qualified as sexual assault.)

Another concern.
(And yeah, Steph, this is black and white,
and you can go look at your favourite Scorpions album and talk about how 'tame' the poster is after this, okay?)

MOST women who are sexually attacked or victims of a sex crime (or sexual misconduct,)
Do NOT report it.
-This is MOST women. (across the board.)
The percentage of women who are sexually attacked and violated? we'll never really know.

Even higher amounts do not report it in rural, urban poor areas, and areas where they are people of color (latina, asian, nat. american etc.)
BECAUSE
(and notice this:

-They feel that they will not be believed (nor) that anyone will actually care.

-They fear that something 'worse' will happen if they say anything. (Which gives rise to the point that most women taken advantage of (the polite euphamism) KNEW their attacker, and they're still local (or feared to be.)

-Feel inside that they did something to 'provoke' the attack, (sometimes even 'drinking with somebody gets seen as that.)

-They (and this is the saddest part) feel that this behavior is just 'normal,''and how life/guys are.'
In other words? '...It's only Rock and Roll, it's only guys being guys...' (etc.)

Then you have the scenarios where there will be two people kidding around,
0then one goes WAY over the line,(the aggressor)
--and everybody involved knows that a 'wrong' has happened,
-but the one who was violated?
Feels... 'well, I was kidding, and therefore was partly at fault, and somebody could say that I opened myself up to this (by) not shutting it down sooner (or) saying something sooner.'
(A lot of predators work that angle, it's alarming.)

(But it's only an Image, it's only a rock poster.)

Sorry, anyone with half a brain knows that we choose our imagery and design carefully, and want to gain attention with them.
--And this is where Claire has really made a lot of sense.
-It's eyecatching, (but it's eyecatching because it's startling and you don't know what's going on.
It's certainly not normal, it's certainly not something you'd expect to see, --and what makes it 'edgy' is that (surprise, hold your yawns,) it may have been an assault.)
(gasp, NO... (reallllly.)

But back to that 1 in 6 ratio of women who've been sexually assaulted...
(and this may hit home, and believe me, it's not something I like to think about, (nor) is it grandstanding.)

How many women have posted on this thread?
(I didn't count, really.)
Got Claire, Heather, Joey, Teresa back there... whom else...
--so that's, what... 4?
So....
we go one more, and then the sixth one who chimes in...
gives us the magic number...

Now, work with me here
(and if I'm talking to Creative Fresno, or Kiel and Travis with their red correction pens, or just Donavan... so be it.)

Of the four actual women on the string?
And two hypothetical?
Chances are one of them has been sexually attacked.

....

I hate saying that.

Did you notice how the tone and temp of the words typed now have just run cold?
-And here's the comment nobody wants to read (ready)

Who?
Which one?
We know these people, I'm genuinely fond of them (as well as I know them,) And I don't want to think that.

But...
-it's a statistic.
-It's actually a fact, (gentlemen.)
--and I'm telling you that it's more than 1 in 6, because (again) most of the time it goes unreported

One has discussed a very wrong situation that happened.

What, are we supposed to be like '..okay, we're good..'
until the next 5 go past?

Screw the statistics, these are real people.

Another female pointed out (initially) that the image did look like there had been foul play, (and another after that just commented that it looked like somebody had wound up in the bushes having had too much to drink.)

And that, boys and girls, is the reality that I'm speaking of..
-not some lame assed 'definition of realism or surrealsim.'

You see, even if it is 'only rock and roll,'
I know of hundreds of cases, maybe thousands (I've lost track, honestly) several even here in the valley,
-Where a woman has been violated, taken advantage of, humiliated, -you name it.

And they just had to walk it off,
and the guys who did it?
really didn't think much of it, or thought of it as sport or cute.
(That's already been mentioned way back in the thread.)

I know.
I'm saying nothing new...

And can't wait for the next brilliant salvo from the red-pen crowd, and defenders of the avante-garde in advertising.

But the real fact is: in this town there is a real problem with sex-crimes and a real problem with women being abused?

When did an image (using mannequins legs...
'It's a mannequin' --a mannequin of what? (a woman) --and it's made to look 'real.')

WHEN did this imagery become 'cool,' --especially in this area, (where it's all too real.)

--And when did this type of cool become Creative Fresno?

And how is this imagery, --60 women show up at your shin-dig, 10 of them having been through something like this,) HOW is this going to be appealing or positive?

I mean, okay, you're gonna discuss this at the big pow-wow? Cool.
'Change of direction, something a bit more edgy, need to take risks to have success...' (cute.)

If this is the new thing that Creative Fresno is going to do (need to be rock-n-roll, can't be stodgy...)
Okay.

I don't agree with it, and I think it does reduce the appeal down to the same stuff that gets made fun of on the 'worst fly/fliers of the week.'
--Only it's just a little more 'highbrow,' and some twit is going to call it 'art,' instead of 'sleaze.'

Okay...
People have been doing dumb stuff in the name of creativity for ages... and arguing about it too.

But, what I'm taking 'PERSONALLY' (plug this in Travis, okay, ---run this in your formula, I'll be really clear.)

In an area where sexual crime is SO high, where there are cultures that mistreat women like it's 'expected' sometimes,
Why on earth use such an image?

(like nobody who picked this thing's heard of 'date-rape?'
Nobody made the association:
'...drunk girls get taken advantage of...?'
--and it's an event (promoting) a lot of drinking for fundraising (in) an area (Zapps) that's not even as well groomed as the one depicted in the photo.

THIS is promoting a positive Fresno that is Creative...? (naked woman's legs sticking out of the hedges??)

Frankly?
I look at the 'skater' vid, and I don't comment (despite the 'hope we don't have THIS' (but go look, here's the link')
-because I'm considering the source.
-People who don't mind breaking the law to skate in abandoned pools, physically assault each other, and gash their heads open --to ride a skateboard.
--Sorry, even as a (former) skateboarder?
That's just dumb delinquent maladaptive behavior that (surprise) not all skaters are into, and I don't really feel like legitimizing with a comment.
These people are doing foolish and illegal and self-destructive things, --hopefully they'll grow up and grow out of it.

I kinda was thinking (up to this flyer) that Creative Fresno (somehow) was different and knew better.
-Sort of thought it was about a different kind of mission and crowd.

If I'm wrong on that?
I'm really sorry,
I'm not looking to put anyone on a pedestal, (and)

--Even if this is a case of one person (Donavan) or several (whomever else was in this from Creative Fresno)
being basically great people doing (one) dumb thing?
That's not the end of the world.
(And truthfully?
That's how I'm seeing it, I hope somebody really thinks about what kind of imagery they're putting out...)
Learn from it and move on.

Do they need to save face, pile on the strawmen arguments and defend it as 'art and edgy'
-never agreeing that there MAY be a concern with this image?
Obviously,
--cause that's what's been going on, whole time. (now, that's kind of annoying, (expected, but still annoying.)

This is not an attack on Donavan, nor on Creative Fresno...

Is it an attack on an image used to promote an drinking event?
Hell
YES,
Absolutely.
-And I hope somebody somewhere realizes that...
I mean, if we're adults discussing art and social issues?
(Once we get past the 7th grade angle of '...don't pick on my friend, don't pick on my group...')

Finally.

I do hope (seriously) one thing comes out of this.

--and it's not 'gee, poor Creative Fresno, poor Donavan.'
They'll be fine.

I really hope,
that whomever reads this?

Realizes.
The women around them,
the women in their lives,
the women that are their relatives,
their friends,
their partners,
wives, girlfriends, daughters,
nieces, aunts, neighbors, moms,
grandmothers... (all ages.)

Get to spend (on average) -what...
80 years? in life.
How many days is that?
How many hours?

And it takes surprisingly little time
(I think Teresa's film of the 'burning tortilla' (which has been discussed on this website) is, what.. twenty or so minutes?
(...It's a camera trained on a tortilla left to burn for the amount of time that it took for her grandmother to be violated, (she was cooking at the time,) --and she was blamed for the burning of the food (and then) completely disbelieved regarding the violation...)

Twenty minutes.

Maybe Fifteen.

Maybe
an hour or two with friends or somebody who you thought was nice, who you trusted.

And next thing you know?
Something filthy is happening, and despite all you do, it happens, and you just want it to be over, and you try to pretend that it never happened, and it's a damage that just sort of smoulders for a long long time.

-And you know the funny thing?
It happens to guys too.
(but it happens to girls more.)

Maybe,
Just maybe...

Once the pompous who go over the finery of diction, definition, spelling, philosophy and 'what is art,' have had their fill?

Some girl,
some woman,
some guy,
anybody who has been living with this?,
--may be able to say...
'yeah, well you know? _______ happened to me.'
--and it sucks,
and it bothers me,
and I know what that goddamn picture feels like, and I don't like it,
and the whole thing is WRONG, (not funny,) WRONG...'

--and maybe, (maybe) they may finally talk and get some help with it.
(cause stuff like that? can really run your life, and you not even know.)

I just hope whomever they open up to,
understands that it's 'not just some image.'
It's not 'just rock and roll.'
It's not 'okay, and funny,'
It's never 'right.'
and
It happens all the time.

-And so long as it's used to promote events? (whether it's booty-shakin' time at Thaiphoon?
or somebody's secret coctail at wherever to raise money.)
--and then argued about and defended as 'art.'

It's NOT going to be taken seriously,
It's going to be seen as (somewhat) ACCEPTABLE,
-maybe even earned and expected.

And it's not going to stop,(because it's 'just no big deal.)

Anybody bother to read this far and get that?

In reality?
What Donavan or Creative Fresno does?
Really doesn't mean a whole lot to me, (honestly.
sorry, I just have other things going on.)

-But how people are seen and treated?
How women are depicted?
Knowing, being related to, working with, and caring for them, in this town?
THAT's something I really happen to care about.

(surprise)

Which is why I took the time, (which I really don't have)
to write this down,
be this thorough, and (who knows) put some folks off.
(oh well,
-you kill brain cells with alchohol for a good cause?,
I kill a social plesantry and 'associate standing' for a good cause,
...we make our choices.)

Fresno:
You gotta stop pretending that the world around you (that most definitely is 'just like everywhere else' (or) 'is worse') isn't here.
You really shouldn't treat stuff like this like it's a joke, ---when right now, probably not real far from the bar in question?
This may be actually happening.
(or even up in the nice parts of town where the 'nice' people live.)

...what was it, round Christmas Time?
A little Mexican Girl with dev. disability was taken from a Christmas Party? Found half naked sticking out of the ground, after some pervert swiped her? (Not far from here in an orchard?)
(At least she's still alive.)
...what,
4 months ago?
Should be shocking,
Should be an outcry...
-only it's seen as 'what happens out there to them,' and basically 'normal.'

But that half naked set of legs wasn't some mannequin (lookin' kinda real,) promoting a boozefest, was it... so no corrolation.
None whatsoever, I can see...

Maybe this 'only a poster,' of a depicted naked woman's legs sticking out from the hedge?

Is a good thing after all.
(maybe)
-but not the way it was intended, that's for damn sure.

If not?
It's only rock-n-roll.

(Try to see what I'm talking about.)

...what.

...the.

...hell.

a) totally agree with floyd.

b) wet towel-- too lengthy not reading it.

...anytime Claire.

You have a good night, and best to the Mr.

-be good.

Eric

Here's the last paragraph in case you don't wanna read the whole thing (though, doggone it, I wish ya would)

[Does the world hinge on this flyer? on that toothpaste? on that toilet lid?
No, I'm not making light of it---and I THINK I found my point:
In riding one's white horse of moral salvation, do we sometimes cause more actual *destruction* than progress.]

Ok, this post is old by Beehive standards..but I was on vacation for a bit, then was wracked up preparing a Spring Concert with my school kids.

{I do not wish anyone to misconstrue this little comment of mine to mean that I think violence towards women or anyone/thing is not a serious subject. I DO wish people to understand that why I don't get whipped up into thinking that *every* online discussion is of great moral hoo ha importance---not saying that none of them are...Ok, here we go if you wanna...

----Is violence so prevalent in pop images that we are desensitized to it?
---Is that bad?
---Is violence to women so prevalent in pop images that we are desensitized to it?
----Do violent things sometimes pass as 'art' and 'cool' just cuz it depicts violence and not bunny rabbits and lollipops?

If people here discussed, considered, looked at others' points of view, learned something,decided to crusade to better the world, or whatever...well, then it was that adult discussion that some people mentioned and applauded.
-----*Sometimes* one can look at most ANYthing and, with laserpowered vision and a certain starting perspective, distill it to an argument that threatens a core moral idea that one feels one must 'draw a line in the sand' over.

Silly example in silly quotes:
"I think that Creative Fresno doing a poor job at their breakfast event is no laughing matter.
Don't they know that in this region the diabetes stats are off the chart? Don't they know that breakfast is the most important meal of the day?
Don't you think they should have made every effort (considering that the health of so many people depend on it, not just the attendees, but the entire Valley with these people being 'creatives' and 'leaders of the area' and all." [end silly scenario]

Ever heard of room mates/ relationship problems based off of forgetting to put the lid down on the toilet or the cap back on the toothpaste....once again, that laserbeam perspective can turn it (rightly? it feels like it if you're in that position I guess) into a major moral issue where the 'other' is terribly morally deficient.

Does the world hinge on this flyer? on that toothpaste? on that toilet lid?
No, I'm not making light of it---and I THINK I found my point:
In riding one's white horse of moral salvation, do we sometimes cause more actual *destruction* than progress.

Blake, I'll put it like this. MY world hinges on this flyer. My daughter's world hinges on this flier. Our worlds hinge on all such flyers and depictions of women. I choose to battle the ones that are frighteningly considered 'acceptable' by otherwise thinking people.

Any moment that I can insert a smidgen of doubt into someone's mind about using such images in media I am one step closer to helping her life become safer. Love is wanting the best for someone else. My best, for her, includes a world that does not find violence against women sexy/edgy/art/cool.

Though it sounds rather meladramatic, it is my belief. I believe change begins in small moments. To pass by something and think "Well, it's not a large enough forum to really make a difference" is defeatest. Something I am not.
Take it as over the top, take it as nothing. I live my truth.

As for silly scenarios... they come off rather patronizing, don't they?

Yeah, Hi Blake, lovely comment, then retraction.
(Kind of a way of making a point, then backing off and saying 'oopsie' or 'silly' and maintaining some affect of fairness.
-Some riffs just never get old, do they?

I guess the white horse of salvation aspect would be me or my writing? (ditto 'the laser?')

And yeah, you know? you're right, writing on things endlessly can belabor a point (or further explain it, depending upon what's being said in the further writing... sometimes it just explains the point being made.

By now? Anyone reading this is actually 'looking for it,' --because it's been below the stream for BeeHive for days... If you're reading this? You want to. If you're going to complain about the length? I can't help you with your massochistic desires.

Everybody?

Just for yuks?
Do a 'sex offender' search in your zip code. (Even Kingsburg,)
okay? (I'll wait.)

(there's sites for it where a pretty accurate map comes up... sometimes it's a few years old, (so it's probably higher in count,) but you can find them.
Doing it by zip code means your immed. area, --you're not looking at 'Fresno et al.'

I live next to Fashion Faire.
My map
(which, 'just to see' punched up last night?)
I'm getting somewhere in the high seventies (close to Eighty) registered sex offenders,
and this is in my immed. zip code.

My immed. zip code has (jeesh, I dunno, I wasn't raised here, (you were) help me out,,, 'kay?
A HighSchool, At least
(2) Jr. Highschools, and I think at least
(3) to (4) elementary schools.
(But I don't know all the schools, and they get tucked into neighborhoods I'm not normally in.)
So... what's that.. at least Nine? places of education where thousands of kids are, where they walk home from,
--and I guess, as it's not the age of the BradyBunch anymore, --a bunch of kids coming home to a television or a neighbor who's 'keeping an eye on things... sorta.'

In that mix? --again, an outdated map that says somewhere around 80 registered sex offenders (names, addresses, whole nine.)

Here's another 'fer instance.

A friend of mine who's moved out of the area, was married to someone who was in a local program (they were going for certs in forensic psych.) who worked with area sex offenders (whole county I believe)
--as well as those individuals who had not just committed repeat crimes, but had killed their significant others (this was male vs. female crime, with the women now dead.)
Two things really stuck in my mind when we were talking shop one evening.

'...of all the women who were killed by these guys, ALL of them had even gone so far as to take out restraining orders agains them.' -And though we did not get into specific numbers? The numbers were really high.

(further)

'Though they went into the program of working with these folks, looking to find ways working with the guys who had committed these crimes? (like with success rates and stuff,) what they're finding is that it's becoming one big advertisement for how the system is not working, and how inneffective it is, the recitivism rate is unreal, and basically it's becomeing a study to just show that the jail terms need to be longer and the monitoring of these people more intense, -but even then, it's becoming clear that they're habitual repeaters...'
-Now, this was coming from somebody who is clinical, a Dr. and looking to 'help' this population to get better.

(I've worked with this population as well, for decades, back on the East Coast in the NY, NJ, Phila area, but we're talking about 'here...' (sorry for the 'lazer' and pinpoint, ---but I'm trying to be accurate and explain the relevancy...
(oh wait, that might take length... darn.)

Another scenario (not silly.)
I'm aware of a situation, where an individual was canned from their position for sexual harrassment and repeat violations of the workplace by which nearly all females working with them felt extremely uncomfortalbe.
There were not just looks, but comments, and actions taken (and documented.)
This individual was significanly over the females (and males) in seniority.
Because of 'legal concerns?' they were not 'terminated,' and this was not cited as the official reason (sexual misconduct/harrassment) they were encouraged to resign.
(This, by the way, is an extremely common method in todays society of handling this.)

(The behavior was not heresay, this was not somebody 'spurned' this was a situation so 'regular' in this environment that it was well known, and considered to be 'just the way it goes.'
The individual now?
to my understanding?
-teaches school, (adolescents.)

Now.
These three scenarios (not as hilarious as the use of, what was it, toothpaste? toilet seats? Pancakes???)
Are real.
The one is straight up fact, (by virtue of geography.. I'm working with facts that can be verified, --though I'm sorry, they'll not be accurate, as the charts and maps (available at this time) are not updated.

The other two? Something that will have to be seen as '..well, it's insider info, it's anecdotal, and it could be grandstanding or fluffing to make a point.'
--If I've given the impression that I'm into sloshing around and exaggerating points, I'm sorry. You'll have to draw your own conclusions.

Looking at that?

I'm really straining to understand how being adamant and specific on the issue of violence towards women (or vulnerable people) could be seen as a
'white horse of salvation' (a remarkabley theologically flavored statement...
-which, okay,,, Blake and I both claim to be Christians, the Bible tells us to treat women with 'all due respect,(some translations: purity.)'

Okay..
I didn't say it, but, sure...
am I somebody's 'white knight?'
I dunno.
I'm not looking to be.
-I think someone who sees me as a 'knight,' can do way better,
(personally I think I just may be a guy who knows what he's talking about writing about something he feels is serious. (Not exactly 'hero' and 'crusade' material,
--I think it better qualifies as 'somebody with a spine.')

-Blake, you find this obviously ridiculous, huh?
-Thanks for not calling me DonQuixote, exactly, but if you took the time to actually find this aging thread, and make the jab?
I must be doing something right.

I like the illustration of 'laser.'

I'm going into nursing, (well, if I can get to class today,) and lasers are kind of funny.
It's light focussed on one area.
It's used for delicate surgery, measurments, and is noted for focus at the very least.
Yep, sometimes they burn, and you're not supposed to look into one (unless it's that sort of proceedure,) but most folks working with them don't misuse them,
--if this has been one? Great.

What am I focussing on (I'll try to be specific)

'Imagery used in recent event promoting consumption of alch. in a rough neighborhood, (by)
a 'well known' 'educated' 'socially aware' 'Creative' 'City Promoting' group
(should not)
be that which portrays (and has been recognized by some) as a woman who has been violated,
(or) has passed out drunk,
(or) fallen over (and is now vulnerable to attack/further attack) -this being the bare legs sticking out of hedges.'
---This accentuated by the (national) condition of abuse towards women being high,
glamorized in certain artforms seen as deviant and degrading
(as well as) the disproportinately high amount of women, children (and men) who turn up in THIS condition (often dead) in the immed. area within the past (what) 4 months?

I think it's a bad move. (personal opinion)

I think it's making light of something that is horrendous and is happening way too much.
I think it's beneath the good stature and (positive) emphasis of Creative Fresno. (personal opinion)

(okay, that's pretty specific and easy to understand, right?
I mean, by spelling it out, did I go too long?)

Where it goes longer:
(and this needs to be seen)

It was not an attack on the 'individual' who used the imagery.

When the first comments were written?
Nobody (including myself) knew who did the design (well, they wrote about it on their facebook, but even then it was after initial flags were thrown.)

-What it became?
(and this is the part that I think really tells how this problem (and soooo many others,) are going to be handled here in town.
(definitely NOT laser focus here, folks)

-'Don't attack Donavan'
-'Don't attack Creative Fresno'
-'Don't attack 'good design' and 'risk'
-'Don't misspell
-'It's only a poster'
-'It's only rock-n-roll'
-'Don't rant, rave, laser, soapbox, white horse, and write (for too long.)
----all THAT is what's wrong here.

There were some things in the conversation that I thought that were also kind of telling.
-Sometime
(skip mine, if you'd like)
---but look at some of the other responses:

-How many of them are trying to say:

'DO NOT minimize this,
this is a serious issue! (violence towards women, rape, sexual assault.)'

It's really kind of darkly humorous in that there are even responses that say
'...I'm not saying it's no big deal,
(but)
it's no big deal.'

(?)

And then what dictates what is right and wrong in this situation? (the issue of using this image? (nope) 'how somebody looks.'

Whether it's nationwide (or simply here)
there is a phenomenal current of 'lets get along' even in the face of addressing a significant (and potentially) lethal societal concern.

('...Nobody get too worked up on this, we all have to get together and be friends, we all have to support our efforts, here, we're not saying anything BAD about each other here...')

I'm sorry, but I really have had my fill of this.

If something is wrong and bad, going after that wrong and bad thing? (should in some ways) create friendships... (gee, you mutually care about an issue and want to rectify it.) -after all you're going after a common enemy.

Instead:
'Yeah, it's a wrong and bad thing,
but, you know,
so and so's 'a friend' is associated with it,
or it's an otherwise 'nice' group,
--don't be too hard on them,
--afterall they're nice.'

It's amazing.

I am saying this is a big deal,
(violence towards women, girls, the vulnerable)
--and as this imagery suggests (at the very least) high vulnerability of a female, with likely assault having taken place? I'm saying that it's a stupid choice for a promotional flyer, PARTICULARLY in light of the high rate of crime against women in this area.

Is that focus tight enough?
How many times does it have to be said?
(How many times is it going to be minimized and passed off as something else and acceptable in (any) fashion?)

Why restate it?

Simple.

(Though Blake is not the first) there has been a long string of responses that are basically meant to do one thing:
say
'...this is only a (this) this is only a (that) this is not a big deal, I'm not advocating for violence towards women (but) WHEN YOU GO ON AND ON ABOUT IT, it does more damage than good.)

Really...
Talking about it, bringing facts, connecting the dots on how it is furthered.
-That's a BAD thing.

What's really funny?
I'm dealing (and presenting) facts and real scenarios dealing with violence towards women.

I'm presenting things that, though they may be known (and sometimes thrown out as a 'cred point' in a newscast?) Often aren't experienced and understood in their full gravity by the general public.

There are probably three groups who fully 'get' the severity of the problem and understand WHY I'm not sitting back and saying:
'...gee folks, you're right, it's really no big deal, I don't know why I'm so worked up...'

A. -There are people (like myself) who who have worked with this element of society (for years)
B. -There are people (like myself) who know and are close to one or more female (usually female) who has been mistreated and attacked.
C. -Then there are the people who have been attacked.
(I think they get it too...
though
not always,
for far too many?
there is a level of 'acceptability' to this that is held to even among those who have been assaulted. The truth of the matter is, the aftereffects of assault and rape really can mess up a person, and they can do things just to cope that can really warp a sense of right and wrong, --again as a method of coping and dealing with the attack.)

You'll notice very few real (actual) responses to what I'm actually saying, (or) the points I've brought up.
-It's usually a response to how I'm saying it, the length, and that I've 'attacked' an individual or group
(when I'm actually saying?
'dumb choice by smart people.')

The issue of sexual assault and mistreatment of women is pretty complex. It goes across the boards in terms of social demographic, but there are overwhelming stats that need to be considered.
-Most of the time it's women
-Most of the time it's not believed
-Most of the time it goes unreported
-Most of the time it's not followed up upon.
-Most of the time it's repeat offence

(My opinion)
It's a start: but the only way this problem is really going to be effectively dealt with?

Not minimizing it.
Ever.

Again,

I'm floored that anybody who is female, --who realizes the risks and liklihoods of they or somene close to them being attacked, --sees this as 'funny' or 'no big deal,' (especially around here.)

-And I'm dumbfounded by any guy who has a woman (again, lets go through the list: Wife, Girlfriend, Sister, Aunt, Mother, Daughter, Friend, (etc. etc.) ---who understands the high level of risk
AND the damages (post) attack
-who'd see this sort of imagery (to promote an event) as being acceptable.

I'll ask them (again, show of hands, men, ladies?)

-of the girls in your life:
(now, they have to be people that you actually care about, okay? not some 'faceless nameless image (or somebody from a part of town 'where that happens.')

(1 for each 6,
2 for each 12,)
WHICH do you want to see in this condition (the legs depicted)
in the bushes down by Zapps Park?
Kearny Park?
Roeding?
(oh okay, lets go highbrow)
Woodward Park??

In a very honest sense, that's what I don't understand.
As a brother, uncle, son, (foster) parent, friend?

I'd be mortified, heartsick, and enraged at find anyone I knew in this condition.
If they were attacked? and I knew who did this, (and was able to get to the person who did this?)
I'd probably tear them apart, and wind up in jail myself for manslaughter.
And, yeah, in case you're wondering, people very very close to me have been victimized this way. (I've honestly lost count of how many.)
And there are people who I know, who have taken advantage of women (who) I really have to restrain myself from physically attacking, and just trust that the laws will suffice.
(I see no reason to lie about this.)

(But yeah, you know, us white-knights ranting at that which doesn't need to be talked about, tilting with our run-on sentences...
-we're a bit annoying like that.)

Truth be told:
I'm close to a lot of people, (even here.)

And, for some reason I'm the sort of person that folks open up to, (even those who don't like me.)

For as many women who have talked to me about their lives (of all ages)
I have the rather unenviable task (that needs to be done) of telling you that the amont of women who've been taken advantage of (by whomever?) has been so high (by their account) that it's 'more often than not.'

In fact?, it's kind of a rarity that I'm told 'nothing like that has ever happened to me.'

I'm not saying 1 in 6.
I'm telling you that it's 'the usual.'
Pretty much 'almost always.'
(And I know a lot of women, and they've told me this first hand.)

As a guy?
As a human being?

That's not acceptable.

It's not a joke.
It's not just a stupid poster,

(My opinion)
The answer only begins when we talk about it for the mess that it is.

The answer only is possible to be found (if) it's seen for what it really is, and for how bad it really is.

I don't know why people minimize things of this nature, and minimize so much around here.

Minimizing and taking the legs out from under somebody with a legitimate concern (and actual facts) only contributes to the apathy, increases ignorance, and makes talking about it harder.
What reasons they would do such a thing?
I don't know.

Personally?
I don't care.
Let them say what they want, and reveal their maturity levels, big deal.

The facts and points I've made are not 'inherently my own,' -nor are they 'about me.'
Anyone else can pick up these facts and points (even their own personal experiences)
-And convey them.

The sad thing is, whether I talk about this situation, focus on it, and bring it to light
(or not) women all over the area are going to be treated this way.

This is not 'history' (these facts.)
This is where we are now.
This is what is building now.
This will happen this afternoon, tonight, next week, next year.
This is not 'slowing.'
(Do you get that?)

'Minimizing the problem, throwing the point, downplaying the issue, and dilluting the comments with pettiness?

Only furthers the problem and the environment in which it thrives.

(Well done, guys, seriously...
If it's 1 in 6?
Take 6 women you know,
find the one who was attacked, hold up that flyer and say
'...GREAT DESIGN, HUH, is THIS ROCK-N-ROLL or WHAT?... HUH...')

You may say:
'...Now that pisses me off, I care about women, I don't support violence, I'm sensitive to them, I'd never DO such a thing...'

What you don't realize?

With that Flyer, With your arguement?

You just did.

Towel, I think your last 9 lines are meant to be the next anti domestic (or other) violence PSA. Truly beautifully stated.