appleman2006 wrote: ↑Tue Jul 27, 2021 4:10 pm
I just today became aware of this FB site and frankly I did not find the posts funny. Rather I found them very disturbing. Particularly the recent post where Cory Anderson was quoted on what he felt different positions reflected. I have very seldom been that angry in my life as I was after reading that. If that is the type of thinking that is being propagated in CM circles then perhaps a bit of sarcasm is needed to wake us up. There is nothing funny about that. It literally IMO shows the workings of a reprobate mind, I am sorry. It just really made me angry.
This stuff needs to me spoken out against. I would prefer it is done in a serious way and yes I would prefer if there was less mocking on the site. But arrrgh…. Sorry I am just furious right now, God help us all.
Yes, very sad stuff there.
And if I hadn't read it on that page, I wouldn't know about it*.
There in no perfect way to expose these things and delineate what is actually wrong. That is why I cannot fault the bythywords person or the participants too much.
*I well know about the wedding and courtship material and some of the other things printed in the Christian Example type publications. I did NOT know anything of Cory Anderson's writings.
appleman2006 wrote: ↑Tue Jul 27, 2021 4:10 pm
I just today became aware of this FB site and frankly I did not find the posts funny. Rather I found them very disturbing. Particularly the recent post where Cory Anderson was quoted on what he felt different positions reflected. I have very seldom been that angry in my life as I was after reading that. If that is the type of thinking that is being propagated in CM circles then perhaps a bit of sarcasm is needed to wake us up. There is nothing funny about that. It literally IMO shows the workings of a reprobate mind, I am sorry. It just really made me angry.
This stuff needs to me spoken out against. I would prefer it is done in a serious way and yes I would prefer if there was less mocking on the site. But arrrgh…. Sorry I am just furious right now, God help us all.
For anyone that agrees with Appleman, read this and tell me how Cory stating these things actually is a reflection of a reprobate mind. Seems to me he is just stating opinions that are already out there. If you don't believe a pose communicates something... I think you are sadly mistaken to how the world thinks and works.
Now perhaps the entire world is some what a reflection of a reprobate mind... but it doesn't take much searching to turn up stuff supporting what Cory actually says...
appleman2006 wrote: ↑Tue Jul 27, 2021 4:10 pm
I just today became aware of this FB site and frankly I did not find the posts funny. Rather I found them very disturbing. Particularly the recent post where Cory Anderson was quoted on what he felt different positions reflected. I have very seldom been that angry in my life as I was after reading that. If that is the type of thinking that is being propagated in CM circles then perhaps a bit of sarcasm is needed to wake us up. There is nothing funny about that. It literally IMO shows the workings of a reprobate mind, I am sorry. It just really made me angry.
This stuff needs to me spoken out against. I would prefer it is done in a serious way and yes I would prefer if there was less mocking on the site. But arrrgh…. Sorry I am just furious right now, God help us all.
For anyone that agrees with Appleman, read this and tell me how Cory stating these things actually is a reflection of a reprobate mind. Seems to me he is just stating opinions that are already out there. If you don't believe a pose communicates something... I think you are sadly mistaken to how the world thinks and works.
Now perhaps the entire world is some what a reflection of a reprobate mind... but it doesn't take much searching to turn up stuff supporting what Cory actually says...
It’s really quite a stretch to compare the section in your link about couples posing to the section in Corey Anderson’s book. One talks about communicating trust and connection, the other says that it invites one to fantasize about their private romance.
Sliceitup wrote: ↑Tue Jul 27, 2021 8:34 pm
It’s really quite a stretch to compare the section in your link about couples posing to the section in Corey Anderson’s book. One talks about communicating trust and connection, the other says that it invites one to fantasize about their private romance.
Feel free to look up the sexual poses... Its there, I just don't want to deal with that garbage myself. My whole point is what he is saying is not actually that far out there.
Sliceitup wrote: ↑Tue Jul 27, 2021 8:34 pm
It’s really quite a stretch to compare the section in your link about couples posing to the section in Corey Anderson’s book. One talks about communicating trust and connection, the other says that it invites one to fantasize about their private romance.
Feel free to look up the sexual poses... Its there, I just don't want to deal with that garbage myself. My whole point is what he is saying is not actually that far out there.
Once again, there’s a vast difference between sexual and romantic.
appleman2006 wrote: ↑Tue Jul 27, 2021 4:10 pm
I just today became aware of this FB site and frankly I did not find the posts funny. Rather I found them very disturbing. Particularly the recent post where Cory Anderson was quoted on what he felt different positions reflected. I have very seldom been that angry in my life as I was after reading that. If that is the type of thinking that is being propagated in CM circles then perhaps a bit of sarcasm is needed to wake us up. There is nothing funny about that. It literally IMO shows the workings of a reprobate mind, I am sorry. It just really made me angry.
This stuff needs to me spoken out against. I would prefer it is done in a serious way and yes I would prefer if there was less mocking on the site. But arrrgh…. Sorry I am just furious right now, God help us all.
For anyone that agrees with Appleman, read this and tell me how Cory stating these things actually is a reflection of a reprobate mind. Seems to me he is just stating opinions that are already out there. If you don't believe a pose communicates something... I think you are sadly mistaken to how the world thinks and works.
Now perhaps the entire world is some what a reflection of a reprobate mind... but it doesn't take much searching to turn up stuff supporting what Cory actually says...
We can probably all agree that body language communicates, and that it *can* communicate something inappropriate. The issue is that Anderson seems to be saying that the inappropriate meaning is exclusively or predominantly communicated in all the poses he lists. (I recognize that there could be some context in Anderson's writing that is missing from the page reproduced on the BTW Facebook page.) The article you linked to does not support this view at all, saying that "nothing is clean-cut with body language" and giving as an example an over-the-shoulder look which could communicate either flirtiness or disdain. But Anderson draws a straight line from "leaning against or grabbing trees" to "striptease pole" (his exact words). This is not to draw any conclusions about Anderson's overall spiritual or mental condition, but I don't think that's a healthy way to think about leaning against trees.
PeterG wrote: ↑Tue Jul 27, 2021 8:58 pm
We can probably all agree that body language communicates, and that it *can* communicate something inappropriate. The issue is that Anderson seems to be saying that the inappropriate meaning is exclusively or predominantly communicated in all the poses he lists. (I recognize that there could be some context in Anderson's writing that is missing from the page reproduced on the BTW Facebook page.) The article you linked to does not support this view at all, saying that "nothing is clean-cut with body language" and giving as an example an over-the-shoulder look which could communicate either flirtiness or disdain. But Anderson draws a straight line from "leaning against or grabbing trees" to "striptease pole" (his exact words). This is not to draw any conclusions about Anderson's overall spiritual or mental condition, but I don't think that's a healthy way to think about leaning against trees.
Well this is the problem with taking pictures of a book without giving context. Also he may give more details as to his use of examples that are missing without reading the book. Either way, to condemn Anderson over his opinion without knowing the context of the actual book... I find this distasteful. Also while perhaps some of his examples are extreme, the overarching idea of communicating things without being aware is of a concern. Too often what is considered normal and okay in one setting is not in another setting. I strongly doubt he is saying these people posing are intentionally doing anything but rather trying to point out that it can be taken a certain way.
Soloist wrote: ↑Tue Jul 27, 2021 9:17 pm
Well this is the problem with taking pictures of a book without giving context. Also he may give more details as to his use of examples that are missing without reading the book. Either way, to condemn Anderson over his opinion without knowing the context of the actual book... I find this distasteful. Also while perhaps some of his examples are extreme, the overarching idea of communicating things without being aware is of a concern. Too often what is considered normal and okay in one setting is not in another setting. I strongly doubt he is saying these people posing are intentionally doing anything but rather trying to point out that it can be taken a certain way.
It's true that an excerpt of several pages from a book can be taken out of context. The article you linked to contains a few points regarding the purpose behind portrait poses that have some commonalities with the list in the book. But if you read through Anderson's book you'll find a dark forest of ideas built on leapfrogging logic that try to turn nearly every body posture, flip-flop, button, pattern, polka dot, wrinkle, pleat, and stitch of clothing into a devious feature that invites lustful thoughts. The book takes almost everything regarding a person's presentation and appearance as well as things from nature (flowers, trees etc.) and suggests perverted or sexualized ways of looking at them you would never thought of before.
It's a long trail from the linked article to the dark forest this book comes from.
Abbott wrote: ↑Tue Jul 27, 2021 10:55 pm
It's true that an excerpt of several pages from a book can be taken out of context. The article you linked to contains a few points regarding the purpose behind portrait poses that have some commonalities with the list in the book. But if you read through Anderson's book you'll find a dark forest of ideas built on leapfrogging logic that try to turn nearly every body posture, flip-flop, button, pattern, polka dot, wrinkle, pleat, and stitch of clothing into a devious feature that invites lustful thoughts. The book takes almost everything regarding a person's presentation and appearance as well as things from nature (flowers, trees etc.) and suggests perverted or sexualized ways of looking at them you would never thought of before.
It's a long trail from the linked article to the dark forest this book comes from.
I do want to read his book to see if its really that bad or if it just reflects the viewpoints that I have heard but magnified.
Soloist wrote: ↑Tue Jul 27, 2021 10:57 pm
I do want to read his book to see if its really that bad or if it just reflects the viewpoints that I have heard but magnified.
That's fair, and it would be interesting to hear your thoughts after reading it.
