Saturday, December 14, 2002


anatomically correct reindeer in Christmas displays. Who thinks this is a good idea?
especially when the anatomically correct parts look like shiny christmas ornaments?
can you imagine giving a child an anatomically correct stuffed reindeer?
would you give them an anatomically correct doll?
would you put an anatomically correct human in a christmas display at a shopping mall?
is that a double standard? to put anatomically correct animals but not humans? i mean, if we wouldn't put a human, why an animal? is it any less "indecent"? is it indecent at all, or are we just perpetuating prudery? where are the sociologists and psychologists on the subject of potential indecency as it relates to anatomically correct animals in mall displays?
remember in The Little Mermaid, the big controversy about the priest who is doing the wedding between prince-what's-his-name and the ursula-as-evil-woman, and how there's a frame where he has an erection? there was lots of uproar about all the subconscious sex references in disney movies (the lion king has the word sex in the dust in one scene, but only if you literally watch frame-by-frame...oy). first of all, who sits around and looks for that stuff? but besides that, is the priest with an erection in the presence of multiple beautiful women any different than an anatomically correct reindeer? Would it have been better if the anatomically correct priest had christmas ornaments for balls?
hmm. that would have been very funny, actually. :-)

read the story. :-)

No comments:

Post a Comment