[Oleg Volk]

http://olegvolk.net/gallery/d/20306-2/power4709.jpg

[mrelijahgardner]

Excellent! I Like it.

It's a very good Point allot of people I talk to don't realize.

[Albatross]

Sexy.

[Patriot-Brewer]

Well...she doesn't like snubbies.:o

[Warren]

Nice blue on that piece.

Very good point. People that support any malum prohibitum laws have only themselves to blame when the gov comes after their favorite things.

[WeedWhacker]

I'm not sure how to arrange it to do so, but I feel it'd be better if the words "a felony in ..." were the first thing a reader sees. As is, I saw the two items first, which struck me as odd and thus distracted me from the rest of the poster.

All in all, though, a wonderful illustration.

[Warren]

Weed,

You live in Vegas and you were distracted by either a martial aid or a marital aid?

[ATC]

Are you saying it's a Felony offense to own a dildo in Texas?

[Oleg Volk]

It is a felony to sell sex aids in several states, including Texas, Georgia and Mississippi.

[Warren]

Maybe use a light image of handcuffs in the background. It would tie together both objects.

[Glockman17366]

Although I am opposed to any laws that restrict personal behavior that does not affect others, I think this forum and posters should stick to the gun issue. We know that is a battle in many states.

Frankly, I didn't understand the vibrator part until I read Oleg's last post.

The legality of Sex toys should be another battle, IMHO.

[XD Fan]

Oleg,

This may be an odd thought, but in a very startling and graphic image that conveys a powerful message, I found myself distracted by the wedding ring on the thumb. I am not saying it is bad or anything, but I found my self wondering what the point was of the ring. Every other image in the poster seems to have a very clear point, but the ring distracted me slightly.

Again, very powerful message.

[jlbraun]

Oleg,

Very late here, but I would drop the colon and reduce the font size such that "a felony in Chicago" is clearly separated from "A felony in Texas"

[SaMx]

hahaha
I think this one is great.

[kungfuhippie]

It's just a neck massager officer :scrutiny:

Not really that "moving" for me. Linking an artificial phallus with a gun seems like something an anti would do.

Sorry Oleg, I can't give you a gold star for this one.

[Vandeervecken]

Yet another great Volk poster.

[Warren]

Tyrants can't control you if they don't control your tools.

What's sad about it is that there is always a constituency for this. There are always people who wnat to lord it over the other guy.




I'd like to see a reference book that lists malum prohibitum laws from the earliest times til now. I bet it would be 1000's of pages long even at one line per entry. On bible type of paper. Using atlas sized pages. Single spaced. In 4 pt type. Sans serif.

[meef]

6" barrel?

:scrutiny:

[hexidismal]

Very good poster. I like the composition and color scheme better than some actually. Also, I had no idea it was illegal to sell "marital aids" in those states, that's totally ridiculous.

[10 Ring Tao]

The gun world and the sex world are the two communities I follow the most.

From a liberty standpoint, I was almost as disgusted with alabama's court ruling on sex toys back in 2004 as I am with ********** right now:

http://www.boingboing.net/2004/07/29/sex_toys_still_banne.html

I understood the poster perfectly. Allow the .gov to control others (who like something you don't), and you better believe the .gov will get around to controlling the things you DO like.

A similar poster could be made with a hunting bolt action rifle on one side, and an AR on the other side.

[vtoddball]

I used to think the .50 BMG was a big round. I guess now I know better.

I didn't know that those were used for sex. I bought one with a bag of polishing medium to clean brass. Next you'll be telling me that the string of balls I bought in the same store aren't for cleaning the barrel.

ok, ok. I couldn't help myself. I know there's a Glock joke in there somewhere, but I refuse to make it.

[vtoddball]

I don't suppose the blue one is a Heckler & Koch.

OK. I'm done now. Really!

[skinnyguy]

I'll stay away from the obvious references already made, but will say that it is DEFINATELY attention getting. I like the ring on the thumb, it identifies the hand as being the same lady holding both items. The message is GREAT, and I agree with the person who said the captions for the photos need to "owned" by the photo, and seperation of the text would help with that.

Great message with that poster, THANKS!!

[coylh]

Finger on vibrator...

[illspirit]

That's awesome. In theory, it should grab the attention of some of the left-leaning fence-sitters who bemoan authoritarian prudes on the right, and make them think about how the authoritarian nannies on the left are cut from the same cloth. and for the antis beyond reason, hopefully it gives them a nice case of cognitive dissonance.

But, yea, like jlbraun said, I think you should lose the colon.

[qdemn7]

Good poster Oleg, but I would make two changes.

(1) Ditch the caps, use regular upper and lower case.

(2) Underscore the word "Felony" both times.

[Lew]

It's a good poster. Why do people insist on nitpicking little details? Did you understand what it was saying? Then so will other people. Crimmany. Good work, Oleg.

[Rich K]

Good poster, but drop the colon.

[XavierBreath]

I find the poster offensive. Perhaps that is because I opened the thread expecting to find a gun poster, and instead am confronted with a blue plastic phallus. Regardless, it has a shock value that obscures the intended message. I do not like that, and I do not like the inevitable comparison of a handgun to a phallus.

Call me a prude over finding an image of a vibrator offensive, but I lump it in the same category as used tampons and used toilet paper. This is coming from a fellow who puts his hands into abdominal cavities every day for a living.

If you want to appeal to the left, perhaps it would be a better poster with two couples. One couple a man/woman with a gun, the other a woman/woman or man/man with a gun. Illegal in one state, legal in others. Same principle.

[Lew]

Geah!!!

[kungfuhippie]

I do not like the inevitable comparison of a handgun to a phallus.


XavierBreath,
are we the only two who see this? Or the only two who care?

Also having a toy made illegal and a "nasty killing assault revolver with hi-capacity magazines" made illegal are two different fish to an anti. If you want to get the point across you need to have something more connected, maybe a baggy of pot, to replace the neck massager. Instead of a sex toy causing mixed emotions with little connection to guns, you open the left to realize that their quest to legalize pot and the whole "war on drugs" (to them) is the same type of governmental infringement as an assault weapon ban, a hi-capacity ban, or any other ban that only makes honest people criminals and does nothing to deter crime.

and a caption along the lines of;
Possesion of these;

<photo of ak-47 baggie of pot
A felony in (state x) A felony in (state y)

That will blow a hippy's mind. :neener:

[Titan6]

I get it, the wife gets it and we both find it funny. Now how do we explain it to the elementary school age kids? Umm in my house we don't....

[TallPine]

"I'll stay out of your bedroom if you'll stay out of my gun cabinet"

Feel free to use that for a poster if you want, Oleg

[willbrink]

Vibrators are a felony in TX? :confused:

[pacodelahoya]

KungFuHippie,

Then people would just associate the pot with the guns, ie see any one that likes pot is a killer etc.

I like the poster just fine, my wife who likes to shoot as long as I clean the guns, and tolerates my "hobby" was astounded that it is a felony in many states to own a sex toy.

Keep it the way it is, though I agree that I personnly don't like the thumb ring.(or nose rings or lip rings but I don't want to ban em)

[willbrink]

"It is a felony to sell sex aids in several states, including Texas, Georgia and Mississippi."

I had no idea. The level human beings will go to control the behavior of other human beings never fails to amaze me. Are those old laws no one pays attention to or do they enforce them? In many states, some sex acts are illigal dating from very old laws, but of course they are not enforced. Is it actually impossible to by a sex toy in the states listed above?

[willbrink]

"it is a felony in many states to own a sex toy."

To own or to sell? There's a big difference there.

[Sindawe]

Now how do we explain it to the elementary school age kids? Umm in my house we don't....I like the message of the poster, but perhaps the vibrator is a bit too realistic since even an elementary school aged kid will recognize it for what it depicts. Maybe reshoot that shot using a less realistic glass (http://www.blowfish.com/catalog/toys/glass_dildos.html#t-glw-2077) or acrylic (http://www.blowfish.com/catalog/toys/acrylic_dildos.html) item?

[Oleg Volk]

I could use a less realistic item -- it people would wonder what it is.

The poster isn't aimed at gunnies at all, it is aimed at the non-gunnies who would be more likely to flip at the sight of an HK USP than the sight of a vibrator.

I agree about the colon separator.

My original caption tried to phrase the concept "government that can track contents of my gun safe can also keep track of your bedroom" but I wasn't able to make the caption clear enough. Ideas?

[yhtomit]

Great poster! Two comments:

1) What jlbraun said :) Clearly separate the "felony in [st]" tags from each other -- otherwise, it looks a bit like an SAT analogy :) [Z is to Q as N is to K]

One idea: Arrange the images (I know their current config would make this awkward, but it's just an idea) so that one tagline is above the associated image (I'd do that with the gun, and keep it on the left), and the other is below.

2) The ring on thumb I find a distraction. I immediately saw that and was puzzled / intrigued, but (IMO) not in the best sticky-advertising way, rather continuing to puzzle over that durn ring :)

My knowledge or familiarity wouldn't make it right, wrong, or indifferent, but I can't recall seeing a wedding band (or wedding band-style ring) on a thumb like that; is it popular among some particular population or demographic? Does it a social signifier that one likes guns *and* dildos? Does a ring there stay on as well as at the base of the (what, "interior"?) fingers? Being fairly staid, not to mention oblivious, in my personal life, I'm always finding out about small signifiers which I would have no idea about unless told. This feels like one of them ;)

timothy

[pax]

Not my kind of image, nor one I would use in my own work, but it's technically a good poster and, I think, could be valuable propaganda when directed toward the demographic Oleg intended it for.

pax

[Oleg Volk]

Clarified caption:

http://olegvolk.net/gallery/d/20312-2/power2-4709.jpg

[Lashlarue]

Someone needs to inform all the sextoy shops in Texas. You just cant carry a concealed sextoy on your person, must be locked in your trunk and the batteries removed.

[geekWithA.45]

You need a comedic angle here.

It's a force multiplier, highlighting the rediculousness of malum prohibitum, and it sets people at ease.

A giant, floppy purple dildo with a clown nose oughta do the trick.

[Sean Dempsey]

It says "Ownining".

Is that like onanism?

[coylh]

... but perhaps the vibrator is a bit too realistic since even an elementary school aged kid will recognize it for what it depicts

It's for the children!

;)


Also, "marital aid" is such an awkward euphemism that it's going to both distract the target audience, and fail to lessen the discomfort of the prudish. Better to be straight forward.

[Oleg Volk]

Sean, thanks for catching that typo.

[Oleg Volk]

"Marital aid" is inclusive of various toys. Then again, "revolver" isn't...might change that also.

[kungfuhippie]

Oleg,
Papa Smurf called and wants his marital aid back :neener:

yeah, someone had to finally say it.

[Biker]

I think it's a great message and well suited for a target audience.
However, the vibe should be black so it could be labeled as an EBV.

Biker

[Johannes_Paulsen]

I like the revised poster. Good job!

[springmom]

Not to be a wet blanket, but this one leaves me stone cold. I don't like the asociation, and I agree with kungfuhippie, that the pairing sounds more like something an anti would say.

Not my thing at all, no.

Springmom

Edited to add: I think all the sex toy shops around here would be very surprised to find out they're being felons. There's places all over Houston that sell "sex aids". I'll check the law, but I think you may be incorrect in your presumption regarding Texas.

[R.H. Lee]

Excellent poster; the juxtaposition of the revolver and vibrator increases the impact of each. I like the first rendition best, it got the point across immediately because it's straight and to the point. The second one is too wordy; it's a poster, not a dissertation.

[ZeSpectre]

Bwahhhahahahahahahaha! <Gasping for air> Hahahaha HE HE HE hahahaha!!!

:D:D:D:D

I actually busted out in a full fledged guffaw at work and had to hide the page before my co-workers saw it.


YOU SHOULD WARN WHEN THE POSTER ISN'T WORK SAFE!!!

Cheers
Ze

[30 cal slob]

Oleg,

I LIKE IT!

(LMAO).

p.s. the sad truth is that it'll probably be easier to legalize the sale of "marital aids" in TX than it will be to legalize handguns in Chicago (Parker v. D.C. nothwithstanding).

[tinygnat219]

Very nice!

[springmom]

Not to hijack the thread, but here's the law you were probably thinking of:

43.23. OBSCENITY. (a) A person commits an offense if,
knowing its content and character, he wholesale promotes or
possesses with intent to wholesale promote any obscene material or
obscene device.
(b) Except as provided by Subsection (h), an offense under
Subsection (a) is a state jail felony.
(c) A person commits an offense if, knowing its content and
character, he:
(1) promotes or possesses with intent to promote any
obscene material or obscene device; or
(2) produces, presents, or directs an obscene
performance or participates in a portion thereof that is obscene or
that contributes to its obscenity.
(d) Except as provided by Subsection (h), an offense under
Subsection (c) is a Class A misdemeanor.
(e) A person who promotes or wholesale promotes obscene
material or an obscene device or possesses the same with intent to
promote or wholesale promote it in the course of his business is
presumed to do so with knowledge of its content and character.
(f) A person who possesses six or more obscene devices or
identical or similar obscene articles is presumed to possess them
with intent to promote the same.
(g) It is an affirmative defense to prosecution under this
section that the person who possesses or promotes material or a
device proscribed by this section does so for a bona fide medical,
psychiatric, judicial, legislative, or law enforcement purpose.
(h) The punishment for an offense under Subsection (a) is
increased to the punishment for a felony of the third degree and the
punishment for an offense under Subsection (c) is increased to the
punishment for a state jail felony if it is shown on the trial of the
offense that obscene material that is the subject of the offense
visually depicts activities described by Section 43.21(a)(1)(B)
engaged in by:
(1) a child younger than 18 years of age at the time
the image of the child was made;
(2) an image that to a reasonable person would be
virtually indistinguishable from the image of a child younger than
18 years of age; or
(3) an image created, adapted, or modified to be the
image of an identifiable child.
(i) In this section, "identifiable child" means a person,
recognizable as an actual person by the person's face, likeness, or
other distinguishing characteristic, such as a unique birthmark or
other recognizable feature:
(1) who was younger than 18 years of age at the time
the visual depiction was created, adapted, or modified; or
(2) whose image as a person younger than 18 years of
age was used in creating, adapting, or modifying the visual
depiction.
(j) An attorney representing the state who seeks an increase
in punishment under Subsection (h)(3) is not required to prove the
actual identity of an identifiable child.

Acts 1973, 63rd Leg., p. 883, ch. 399, § 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1974.
Amended by Acts 1979, 66th Leg., p. 1975, ch. 778, § 2, eff.
Sept. 1, 1979; Acts 1993, 73rd Leg., ch. 900, § 1.01, eff. Sept.
1, 1994; Acts 2003, 78th Leg., ch. 1005, § 1, eff. Sept. 1, 2003.


I can tell you from the number of "Cindie's" shops around town, this is the most totally unenforced law on the books, which sort of weakens the argument a bit.

OK. Back to your regularly scheduled vibrators now....

Springmom

[Oleg Volk]

An email from the hand model:
Your site was down most of yesterday...but here's a nice response for Springmom...

There was a lady in TX not long ago who was arrested for carrying on "fun parties." That is, parties where sex toys are sold. She fought that one in court. It made CNN, MSNBC, etc. You should be able to Google it and find that bit of news.

And as for her assertion that these laws are not enforced, she'd be wrong. The sex shop in Jackson MS was shut down by the mayor not that long ago and MS passed such a law prohibiting sex toys like 2 years ago...it's still relatively new.

And please let everyone know I picked that thumb ring up because my rings had been laying on the floor. To most, it means nothing, but to Rob, well, different story. He has this "thing" about Left-hand thumb rings.

I think the target audience isn't necessarily pro-RKBA...they don't have to be. I want them to think twice about giving their government -- on any level -- the power to ban things.

[bogie]

I like it.

1) Makes you think.

2) Isn't for the right wing thumpin' crowd, half of whom would faint when they see it, anyway.

Sheesh... It's not even anatomically correct. Aren't they supposed to be bigger?

[arthurcw]

In Texas, all "Aides" are sold as "novelty" Items. This 1) avoids the law and 2) stops "dissatisfied customer complaints". Didn't work? Sorry... It's a Novelty.

As to the poster. I don't like it. I don't like the comparison. I don't like the association with sex. I also don't think Vibrators are in the bill of rights. Sorry, I guess I'm just not Libertarian enough to see all things as being equal.

I don't think this does much for gun ownership but cheapen it to a lowest common denominator and relegates it to "things people need when they are not satisfied, not fulfilled, or compensating."

And no... I see no reason why a couple could not have "aides" around the house. I just don't think getting off has the same weight as the right of self defense.

And (at the risk of being black balled from the high road) a local community DOES have the right to regulate S.O.B’s and obscenity. While it plays well as a Federal Powers poster to Thinking Americans (a rare and dieing breed) and as a blanket statement about powers to Libertarians and Open Minded Liberals (all 10 of them, most of which come to THR anyway), I don’t think it does much for the unconverted. It however DOES give ammo to the antis.

I just see all types of wrong with this one. Wrong argument. Wrong comparison. Wrong sentiment. With lots of unintended baggage.

P.S. Thread should have had an *Adult Content* warning. Being from Texas, I do not think it’s polite to let a lady click on this link without some warning. If she does click after the warning? Fine. Says nothin’ ill about the lady. But our distaff citizens should be respected, even though, more often than not, they can kick our tails in all manner of areas.

[exar]

I'm not real sure why, but I don't really care for it and would probably be offended if I saw it posted at my old university. I would just think to myself "What kinda asshat puts that crap up?"

[Neo-Luddite]

The traditional 'Freudian' pairing works to make the gun seem a fetish object like the 'Big Pappa Smurf' (which is a fetish object in form and function). I get the message, but I'm in the group that is made uncomfortable by dildo and not put off by the revolver. How would someone more 'offended' by the sight of the revolver de-code the message?

Or I'm just too much of a prude.

[arthurcw]

Or I'm just too much of a prude.

Yes... But that's not a bad thing.

[R.H. Lee]

As to the poster. I don't like it. I don't like the comparison. I don't like the association with sex. I also don't think Vibrators are in the bill of rights Au contraire. Possession of a vibrator is most assuredly protected by the 4th Amendment. Also, (I'm sorry if y'all don't like this, but) it's humorous how some of you are 'offended' by the sight of an inanimate object, just like gungrabbers are 'offended' at the sight of a handgun. :scrutiny:

[HayseedDixie]

I gotta chime in here... I like this one. Both versions. It's incredible the things that threaten and invoke fear in some people. As a side note, I do find it odd that a sex toy would be illegal in my state; especially considering there were sex shops displaying such items (and other far more creative deveices) all over my hometown of Austin. I suppose it's all in a name - referring to them as "novely items" and "personal massagers".

[DigitalWarrior]

Just because something is unenforced does not mean a darned thing. At some points in our history, white guys wouldn't be bothered by laws prohibiting the RKBA.

I really like the idea, but think that the text should be before the image. The image is distracting.

My suggestion:

Some Governments are uncomfortable with
the idea that you can handle things yourself.

image1...........................image2

Felony in........................Felony in
.Chicago...........................Texas

[BBQJOE]

Just thinking out loud.
I get what you are trying to convey. No problem.
And yes it's offensive to some. Some are offended by guns, others I guess are offended at the mere representation of something they already have, or see on some sort of regular basis.

But the point needs to be made somehow (which you are trying to do)
That people should be aware that when one group is allowed to vote away another's like of something it opens the door for others to vote away something they like.

A better element needs to be found for the "facial massager".
Something that a great number of people like, but is somewhat controversial to others. I don't know, maybe a big fat greasy cheeseburger, or golf clubs, or a big humvee.

Let them vote this away today, and maybe tomorrow they will vote that away.
I don't know. Just food for thought.

[springmom]

Wow. This has gotten feisty.


Also, (I'm sorry if y'all don't like this, but) it's humorous how some of you are 'offended' by the sight of an inanimate object, just like gungrabbers are 'offended' at the sight of a handgun

This is a false comparison. A handgun is not embarrassing. A handgun is not something I would hide from the view of my child (only control access and use). A handgun is not obscene. Lots of folks would say that all that is true of the vibrator too. But lots would NOT, and as we, in general, avoid stuff that would embarass people on this list (I believe the general rule is, if you could say it/show it in your living room to a mixed audience, it's okay here) this particular poster doesn't measure up to that standard. It's Oleg's list and he can do what he wants, but the fact is, it doesn't measure up to the usual standards of the High Road.

Then there's the model's response to me (not sure why she didn't email me directly, but whatever)

There was a lady in TX not long ago who was arrested for carrying on "fun parties." That is, parties where sex toys are sold. She fought that one in court. It made CNN, MSNBC, etc. You should be able to Google it and find that bit of news.

And as for her assertion that these laws are not enforced, she'd be wrong. The sex shop in Jackson MS was shut down by the mayor not that long ago and MS passed such a law prohibiting sex toys like 2 years ago...it's still relatively new.


I do recall that case, although not the disposition of it. I would also point out that ONE arrest in a state of this size and population is hardly repression of the sex toy/novelty trade.

Second, I was speaking of TEXAS, not Jackson, Mississippi. If you want to change the wording of the poster to refer to Mississippi, go ahead. But novelty sales are not repressed here, at least not in the cities I've ever lived in. They just aren't.

Look, I'm offended by the poster. I was embarrassed by it. This isn't my thing at all. Sorry. But it's your list, and I'll just skip your posters so I can avoid further stuff like this.:uhoh:

Springmom

[Grey54956]

The marital aid is too small... :D

Seriously, though, I like the poster, but it will be lost on a great many folks.

A rolled up nudie mag might be better.

[arthurcw]

Possession of a vibrator is most assuredly protected by the 4th Amendment.

Not illegal to POSSESS THEM in Texas. And even if it was, if PC exists, you can be searched. Moot point.

it's humorous how some of you are 'offended' by the sight of an inanimate object, just like gungrabbers are 'offended' at the sight of a handgun.

I find it humorous how Libertine individuals think that because someone disagrees with the message an image of an object juxtaposed with a firearm sends that they are somehow offend by the juxtaposed image. I don't believe anywhere in my post I said I was offended by a vibrator? Wait.. let me reread it...

As to the poster. I don't like it. I don't like the comparison. I don't like the association with sex. ...

...lowest common denominator ...relegates it to " ...compensating."

And no... I see no reason why a couple could not have "aides" around the house.
...don't think ...same weight ...self defense.

...black balled ...local community DOES have the right
...Federal Powers poster
...powers to Libertarians and Open Minded Liberals
...I don’t think it does much for the unconverted.
...DOES give ammo to the antis.

...Wrong argument.
...Wrong comparison.
...Wrong sentiment.
...unintended baggage.

..our distaff citizens should be respected,
...kick our tails

Nope. No where did I say I was offended by the image of the vibrator.

The Vibrator causes no feelings in me what so ever. ... not when it's... Never mind. A message that, however inadvertently, plays into the anti view of firearms as just glorified sex toys for those with "short comings" does offend me. A message that equates sex toys with self defense does concern me. But the Vibrator itself, does nothing for me other than casue concerned that this poster is simply for shock value.


Edited to add... The Vibrator also causes GREAT CONCERN that many will be turned off. It's no different that the "pro-lifers" who think it's OK to shove pictures of aborted fetuses in people’s faces. It's not charitable. It's not good marketing. If you have so little concern for your audience that you will berate them with images like this when you KNOW many will be offended, they you are saying, "You must be 100% with us or you are against us." Again... the RKBA community is its own worst enemy. Please don't confuse support for the 2nd amendment with a de facto support for everything under the sun.

I think the target audience isn't necessarily pro-RKBA...they don't have to be. I want them to think twice about giving their government -- on any level -- the power to ban things.

Sorry, but then it belongs in L&P or APS.

[AZEX]

So THAT'S where that went.

Could you wash that real well before you send it back to me?

LOL. Seriously, OV, been a fan of your work for years and I once saw a pic of Lee (the mortar guy) that you did and I exclaimed "Damn, Oleg made you look sexy, I bet he could make me almost attractive!"

D.
AZEX

[Biker]

I'm truly amazed at the number of people who find a photo of a vibrator offensive.

Biker:scrutiny:

[Johannes_Paulsen]

I think the target audience isn't necessarily pro-RKBA...they don't have to be. I want them to think twice about giving their government -- on any level -- the power to ban things.

Oleg,

I think that your poster will bear some fruit toward its intended audience. A lot of the anti-RKBA people I know tend to resent government involvement in, for instance, their sex lives of the sort that the Texas statute represents. This poster advances an argument that will make them stop and think about their gut-level reaction to firearms -- exactly what it should do.

As an aside, I am constantly surprised at how many people find human sexuality to be "obscene" and "embarassing".

It also amazes me how people tolerate regulation in other areas of their private life that they would find completely intolerable if it were applied to firearm ownership. Would anyone NOT find it "repressive" if only one owner of a handgun was arrested for possession of a firearm if some state or municipality outlawed handgun ownership?

[Oleg Volk]

Honest feedback is fine and helpful. Now, how would you re-make this message to make it more effective?

[springmom]

I had to go out and water my garden to think about this (I do my best thinking in my garden, don't laugh).

What I'd do is go for a different comparison, and one that hits harder. How about a comparison with the old miscegenation laws? Showing an interracial couple being "busted", and comparing that with gun ownership? There was a time when marrying outside your race was illegal in many states, and the comparison between "the government shouldn't tell you who to marry" and "the government shouldn't tell you you can't own guns" is stronger and probably will evoke a more uniformly visceral reaction in the intended direction.

Not sure how I'd word it, though I'd leave out a reference to any specific state. The issue is not what Texas does or doesn't do, for example, it's governmental interference in our private lives. Something that drives that point home, without being too wordy, would make a strong poster.

Springmom

[Sean Dempsey]

I think this discussion penetrates to the core of Gun Rights issues.

[PRazz]

title it:
Which one would you carry concealed?
Which one will you go to jail for carrying?
Unlawful use will result in felony charges.
What's in your pocket?

ok, joking aside, keep the posts under each picture but change the last statement to: Keep the Government out of your personal business.

[coylh]

This topic is ripe... ;)

"Know your target, and what is beyond it."

"Does it come with da switch?"

"Hey, it really is a shoulder thing that goes up!"

"... and the debate between heavy/slow and light/fast remains unresolved..."

[R.H. Lee]

The bluenoses notwithstanding, I think it's perfect the way it is. That said, however, there does seem to be enough objection to consider a change. Maybe the problem is as simple as the manner in which the model is holding the vibrator. The full hand wraparound and upward thrust position subliminally transmit an overt, aggressive imagery (to some).

Maybe a re-shoot with the model holding the vibrator in a less (suggestive, to some?) position.

Keep the text the same, short, sweet and to the point.

[romma]

What, no pistol grip?

[springmom]

The bluenoses notwithstanding, I think it's perfect the way it is. That said, however, there does seem to be enough objection to consider a change. Maybe the problem is as simple as the manner in which the model is holding the vibrator. The full hand wraparound and upward thrust position subliminally transmit an overt, aggressive imagery (to some).


No, for me the issue is what I said it is. And whether it's posed up, down, sideways, doesn't matter. And if I promise to not call you names, do you think you could refrain as well? I just love being called a "bluenose" for my opinion. Not. :scrutiny:

Springmom

[vis-à-vis]

Kind of tasteless if you ask me. Thought this was a family site.

[Biker]

Gun owners cover the entire spectrum of Americans and many, if not most, do not share the puritanical views of some expressed in this thread. The message is a powerful one and strikes to the core of what government control is all about.

Biker

[Johannes_Paulsen]

Oleg,

What is your target audience for this poster?

If you are trying to take on the, if you will, "reasonable" left-wingers who tend to be against government interference in the bedroom, but don't see the true implications of government control of firearms, I think this poster does that job well.

I liked the marriage example from springmom. However, if your intended audience is what I think it is (above), I think that a gay marriage poster would probably drive the point home much better.

(Please, for the love of god, I am not trying to open a discussion on that subject, just offering feedback on tailoring the message to the intended audience.)

[SeanSw]

I wanted to buy a dildo but I wasn't an active member at the local bath house, so the state sex embassy denied my permit :rolleyes:

[686+]

..the right of the people to own v....

eh. nevermind. sorry had to be said. :neener:

I think the poster is fine and not too offensive, provided the age and maturity of the receptive audiance is appropriate. As the intended audiance of this poster is not the folks critiquing it, we are perhaps in a poor position to tell you if these images will reach them and what needs to be changed.

My suggestion is to leave the X is a Felony in Y, statements for each item and make sure the word felony is a different color/font. Then replace the whole bottom sentence with: "Why?" in a color/font the same as the words felony. This will force people to think about what the poster is and then why it shows what it shows. Heck just go with:

Felony in Chicago Fellony in Texas
WHY?

[roo_ster]

Oleg:

The audience for which that poster would be effective is pretty small*, IMO.

I am not saying that small audiences ought not be targeted, but if your aim was for a moderately broad swath of folks who might react in a manner positive to RKBA, the poster is not a success.

IMO, a goodly number of folks would be more likely to associate their negative views of the images rather than the positive views. I think that the net result by likely viewers would be negative.

Folks can whine and toss out terms like, "bluenose," but I think it behooves us (like any marketer) to understand the likely consumer.


* THR is not a good sample of the population at large.

[buck00]

The ironic thing is there are Christians (maybe some on THR) who would see nothing wrong with banning dildo's (gasp, immoral) yet support gun rights.

Some of them think its ok for them to dictate morality through laws, yet get upset when their own rights and pursuits are meddled with. Unfortunately, you can't have it both ways. :rolleyes:

[Oleg Volk]

Intended audience are liberal Democrats and Greens, mostly. I must note though, all props (gun, blue thingie, hand) were supplied by conservative Republicans. Methinks we don't know our own allies at times.

[SaMx]

you need to tailor the images to the intended audience. Some people would see that and say "ahh! you have offended my precious sensibilities!"
Some hardcore antis will say "lol guns are penises"
but for the rest of us, I think it makes a good point.

EDIT: oh, Oleg wrote a reply while I was writing one.

[Sav .250]

What happens in Vagas..........stays in Vagas!

[ATL Peach Girl]

It is a felony to sell sex aids in several states, including Texas, Georgia and Mississippi.

It sure is Oleg!! However it didn't stop me from ordering from a website. :p

I know whose hand that is and the ring's harmless (she is a good friend of mine). She just likes the look of a gold thumb ring.

Oleg!! You do amazing work!! I have seen some of the other work you did of this girl. Outstanding!!! ;)

[10 Ring Tao]

Gun owners cover the entire spectrum of Americans and many, if not most, do not share the puritanical views of some expressed in this thread. The message is a powerful one and strikes to the core of what government control is all about.


And add to that, the people who this poster will be most effective on, are likely to not be as puritanical as those on the gun forums.

I like the poster, and to change the image to make it more PC will water down its effectiveness.

My only thought on version two, is that the text/idea at the bottom is awkward to read and understand. The word government needs to be in the first line, because as its written now, its not clear who you're giving power to until you've read the whole blurb.

My caption would read:

When you give government the power to control practices you dislike, you give them power to control those you do.

I know space is at a premium for so much text, but maybe you can use a different gun or make the gun image smaller so there isn't so much wasted/empty space at the top of the image.









One of the greatest injuries to the human experience, was the introduction of the religiously motivated sexual taboo.

[B yond]

Didn't Freud say a fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual maturity? :scrutiny:

I just want to know why my post containing a pic of a condom was removed from the "what is a magnum" thread if pics like this are allowed. :D

[arthurcw]

Is it puritanical or bluenose to ask some decorum be kept on a family site and the message for the 2nd Amendment not be made a joke?

Sorry. Tired of being called names for having a sense of respect for the human person.

If all you got is Ad Hominem Attacks, I think we are done here. Otta this thread.

[exar]

It's not offensive because it's a vibrator(IMO), it's offensive because it's crude. I have no issues with anyone using the thing. I just happen to think that putting it on a poster and posting it in public is crude. Anyone could see it including children (explain that to 'em). I had a talk with my girlfriend about it and she also said it was crude before I could finish my sentence.
I really like springmom's idea and believe it's much more effective.

What I'd do is go for a different comparison, and one that hits harder. How about a comparison with the old miscegenation laws? Showing an interracial couple being "busted", and comparing that with gun ownership?

[roo_ster]

One last note:

Folks who are castigating springmom & co. as a puritan, bluenose, fearful, etc. might want to stop applying labels and think for a moment before sending off their next bit of oh-so-open-minded moral preening.

springmom is (going out on a limb, here) a parent of minor children. As is pax, who left a highly...diplomatic... :scrutiny: comment in post #41. For my own self* (parent of two minor children), I would not let my kids anywhere near the poster.

In my experience, not even most liberal/lefty types with children are comfortable with such overtly sexual imagery around their kids. Folks just get more attuned to such things after there are kids in the house. Democrat/Green/liberal soccer moms are as likely to be turned off as moderate/conservative/bluenose/puritan soccer moms. Especially given the working stereotype of soccer moms being bundles of emotion festooned with "Baby on Board" signs**.

So, such a poster on the average college campus might be effective, given that the population is overwhelmingly single, childless, and liberal/libertine.

Out in public off-campus, even in a liberal locale, it would do more harm than good.


* Not a stranger to the wilder side in my younger days.

** They don't read, "Baby on Board with Suggestively Shaped Teether"

[Biker]

Yes, it is somewhat puritanical and no, puritanical is not at all ad hom unless you choose to take it that way in which case that is your problem, not mine.

Biker

[10 Ring Tao]

So we're going to allow our government to run rampant and stomp on everyone, in the name of protecting the children?

Hmm, that sounds awfully familiar.

[exar]

So we're going to allow our government to run rampant and stomp on everyone, in the name of protecting the children?
That's just dumb. My right to self defense is one thing, explaining what a vibrator is and what it is used for to a 5 year old because he/she saw it on a poster in public is an entirely different beast.

[romma]

Moral decay should be a personal choice! While at the same time, moral guidance is helpful to the societal structure.

How much say the government should have, is anybodies argument.

One thing is for sure though, Our government, or anybodies government is far from moral at times...

[tcgeol]

I'm with Springmom and arthurcw on this. I understand the point, but it probably has a really limited audience for its intended message. I don't mind being called puritannical.

Those of you who compare not liking the poster to wanting to control other people's lives are dead wrong. It doesn't matter to me if you own that thing or use it, but that doesn't mean that I want it in my or my family's face. The same for gun control. If someone doesn't like guns, more power to them. Its their opinion. When they start trying to control them is when we have a problem.

[BBQJOE]

Another thought, instead of the big blue, substitute it with something as powerfully believed in and protected.
Use some symbol such as a cross.
"When you give government the power to control practices you dislike, you give them power to control those you do."

[Oleg Volk]

I am trying to stay with references to current laws. Help me out -- which unreasonable laws would affect the most people AND not offend the intended audiences?

[Superpsy]

I'm going to have to agree with arthurcw and springmom on this one. (just wanted to add my support to what they already said). Not a fan of this one. I like the message BUT don't like the association.

BTW I like the interracial marriage idea.

[Johannes_Paulsen]

That's just dumb. My right to self defense is one thing, explaining what a vibrator is and what it is used for to a 5 year old because he/she saw it on a poster in public is an entirely different beast.

Exar,

The right to self-defense and the right to free speech are mutually supporting.

This doesn't mean that crude comments shoudn't be labeled as such, nor does it mean that the obnoxious shouldn't be shunned. It does mean that, at the very least, one should turn a blind eye toward calls for government intervention in either of those areas. (I don't think this is what you meant, but since your comment was somewhat vague, I felt that this needed to be said.)

I see nothing crude about Oleg's poster (particularly in comparison with the other posters on his website): it makes a dramatic flourish to link two issues that its intended audience may not have considered.

Is it crude to emphasize that women, being generally weaker than men, are vulnerable to rape, and that the wise woman will consider carrying a weapon to defend herself?

I personally think this poster would be a hit on college campuses, and may very well open a few minds to supporting the right to keep and bear arms. That audience is very large indeed, and the subject is quite topical given the tragic events at Virginia Tech some weeks ago.

[exar]

Sodomy is illegal in most states. Certain sex acts are classified as sodomy, but are not seen as anything unusual in todays society by consenting adults. Perhaps just an image of a couple laying on a bed under the sheets snuggling or kissing and the appropriate caption underneath could replace the vibrator.

[exar]

The right to self-defense and the right to free speech are mutually supporting

I never said that you should be arrested and imprisoned for putting the poster up in public. I said it would be crude and in poor taste. If someone wants to take the liberty to introduce that image to children, in public, then fine go ahead. Don't be surprised, however, if I take the liberty to introduce my foot to their ass.

[Biker]

I'll keep that in mind, Exar.

Biker;)

[Johannes_Paulsen]

I never said that you should be arrested and imprisoned for putting the poster up in public. I said it would be crude and in poor taste. If someone wants to take the liberty to introduce that image to children, in public, then fine go ahead. Don't be surprised, however, if I take the liberty to introduce my foot to their ass.

Now that is crude. A threat is not an argument.

Try again.

[logical]

is it advocating decriminalization of firearms or dildos?

[springmom]

Another thought, instead of the big blue, substitute it with something as powerfully believed in and protected.
Use some symbol such as a cross.
"When you give government the power to control practices you dislike, you give them power to control those you do."


That's a good idea. Or you could reference some of the many instances in which freedom of speech regarding religious symbols has been taken away. A local example is the monument that used to stand out front of the local court house here in Houston. It contained a *gasp, faint* Bible, and was removed because it supposedly constituted an "establishment of religion". It was in fact a commemoration of the person who started the Star Of Hope mission here in Houston, but that didn't matter.

A Bible, a Star of David, a Qu'ran, all grouped together, instead of Big Blue, would be a VERY powerful statement. And a lot more, um, G-rated. Same message (but I'd still edit it down, it's too wordy).

Back to my garden :)

Springmom

[Oleg Volk]

is it advocating decriminalization of firearms or dildos?

Both.

I do have photos of an inter-racial couple which I took with a poster in mind. This isn't the exact image I'll use, but similar.

http://olegvolk.net/gallery/d/18898-2/couple8571.jpg

[XD Fan]

The more I have thought about this poster, the more I dislike it for many of the reasons stated by springmom and others.

I want to emphasize the point that no one is saying it should be banned, just that I would rather not see it in public places frequented by my five-year-pld daughter.

[Erebus]

I like it. It pushes the envelope just enough to get the point across and make people remember it.

[exar]

Now that is crude. A threat is not an argument.
I will not sit by and allow my 5 year old child to see a vibrator, or anything else man-made for sexual gratification in public. They are simply too young to understand that concept. You, sir, obviously have no children. I would, however, seriously like you to type out here your exact words on how you would explain what that is used for to a 5 year old child. And then answer the inevitable "WHY?"

[10 Ring Tao]

Get real people. These are basic marketing principles.

Issues and images of interracial couples, crosses (religion), etc, only cause people's eyes to glaze over, and the message, no matter how good or valid, will go in one ear and right out the other. People are jaded and apathetic.

This poster is effective because of the objections mentioned. If it doesn't grab attention, and titilate the (apathetic) reader into caring, whats the point?

[XD Fan]

Well, one thing is for sure, Oleg. You definitly got people's attention here.

[Caimlas]

Wait - a dildo is a felony in Texas? That is asinine.

(Though, I strongly suspect that, unlike Chicago firearm ownership, dildo possession isn't actively litigated.)

[Caimlas]

I will not sit by and allow my 5 year old child to see a vibrator, or anything else man-made for sexual gratification in public. They are simply too young to understand that concept. You, sir, obviously have no children. I would, however, seriously like you to type out here your exact words on how you would explain what that is used for to a 5 year old child. And then answer the inevitable "WHY?"

Mate, I've got two kids. I would have no problem with them seeing or even playing with a(n unused) dildo. Why? Because they're kids! They haven't got a flippin' clue what it is, other than a long vibrating thing. Once they figure out the mechanics of it, they'd probably be a little grossed out (in the "I used to play with dog poop"/"i used to pick my nose and eat it" sort of fashion).

I don't know about you, but a dildo didn't have any significance to me - as a word or as a device - until at least several years after I understood the mechanics of sex, conceptually. I didn't understand those in concept until 12 or 13 and, while I may have been a bit late to that scene (I didn't attend public schools), and I'm fairly certain I saw a dildo a time or two before that and it didn't phase me. But then, I'm a guy and not a girl, too.

And while self-pleasure (at a conceptual level) might be religiously or personally offensive to some people, so are firearms (again, including the concept behind them) to many others. Should we ban firearms, or their images, in public? No? Then why ban dildos from public perception? They are, after all, just a tool, regardless of your perception of the questionable moral justification of their use. Does putting a cigar case around a small off-kilter electric motor make that motor unfit for public display or mention?

Displaying something like sex/intimacy or the active use of a firearm for self defense would obviously not be an appropriate topical study for a poster. They aren't appropriate because they are intrusively intimate and/or personal, and that's also why we find them offensive. But finding objects relating to them innately offensive is, I think, a bit deranged.

There is nothing suggestive about the display of a dildo aside from what the person viewing the dildo brings to the table - the same with a gun. If your only familiarity with guns was at the range, plinking, and no movie violence, you would not presume that there could be any inherent evil in the device. If you hadn't solely been under the impression that a dildo was associated with decadent behavior that corrupts the country, like in those damn pornos, you'd have no problem with them.

[Sage of Seattle]

I will not sit by and allow my 5 year old child to see a vibrator, or anything else man-made for sexual gratification in public. They are simply too young to understand that concept. You, sir, obviously have no children. I would, however, seriously like you to type out here your exact words on how you would explain what that is used for to a 5 year old child. And then answer the inevitable "WHY?"

I understand this wasn't directed at me, but I'm going to take a stab at it, nonetheless.

Well, let me say in more general terms, what you say to your five year old would be different than what I would have said to my five year old (when she was five, that is). It depends on the maturity level of the child. I have had absolutely no problem at all telling my girl that there are standards and differences for children and adults and I have often told her things like "it's none of your business" (in a nice way) or "I'll explain later, when you're a bit older."

To a five year old...try... "Daddy, what's that?" "It's something some people use to feel better." "Why?" "It's difficult to explain, but I'll tell you sometime when you're older." "Do you or mommy use that to feel better?" "None of your business, kiddo! Now, did mommy say when she'll be home for dinner?"

I can't control 100% what my kid will be exposed to while she's growing up, but I certainly can control how I respond to her, and I'd MUCH rather have her ask me about marital aids than for her to hear about stuff without my influence (what little there is these days!)

Also, I would imagine it would be much more difficult to explain to your five year old why you just got done beating someone up who was putting up a poster with some pictures on it, rather than trying to explain what the pictures were.

[XavierBreath]

If the ad hominem attacks on this thread do not cease, it will be shut down.

Let's critique Oleg's poster, not each other.

Honest feedback is fine and helpful. Now, how would you re-make this message to make it more effective?Oleg, see my suggestion in post #29.

[10 Ring Tao]

There is nothing suggestive about the display of a dildo aside from what the person viewing the dildo brings to the table - the same with a gun.

QFT


Oleg, see my suggestion in post #29.

And mine in #93.

[XD Fan]

Qft ????

[coylh]

Everyone knows what you're supposed to tell a five year old in case he or she finds his daddy's dildo collection:

* Stop
* Don't touch
* Leave the area
* Tell an adult

[Odd Job]

Not all of Oleg's posters must appeal to us. We are already won over, others are not. I like this one. It must surely have an audience that it can influence, and for that reason I like it.
If there is an issue about the boldness of the vibrator, then perhaps a photograph of it in its packaging, with the package in the woman's hand will be just as good and not so distracting for some. Alternatively maybe one of those love eggs would be more subtle (for those who don't like the phallic shape of that vibrator).
http://www.drogisterij.net/producten/afbeelding/mini_love_egg225x225.jpg

We gotta think outside the box, people.

[XavierBreath]

QFT is internet slang meaning "quoted for truth". This term applies on forums and posting boards where users can edit their posts, thus the QFT holds the poster to their original statement. It is also used to express agreement with a previous poster's statement, kind of like typing +1.

[Oleg Volk]

Great suggestions and feedback, all. Thank you!

[beaucoup ammo]

Don't care for the subliminal connotation: shooting is masturbating. It's all but saying "anyone who shoots is a jerk off."

The intent is great ( I get it) but the characters are miscast, IMO.

I'll give it some thought and make more of a contribution, rather than negative critique without suggestion for improving.

[XD Fan]

Thanks, Xavier.

[XD Fan]

Beaucoup Ammo said
Don't care for the subliminal connotation: shooting is...

Interesting point, but I wonder if the subliminal connotation isn't more saying that shooting is a form of sexual release rather than anyone who shoots is a jerk off? Still, is that a message we think will win others to our side? I don't know.. just thought it was an interesting take on this issue.

[pax]

I never said that you should be arrested and imprisoned for putting the poster up in public. I said it would be crude and in poor taste. If someone wants to take the liberty to introduce that image to children, in public, then fine go ahead. Don't be surprised, however, if I take the liberty to introduce my foot to their ass.

You know, this is really a telling quote. I suppose it is commendable that you are willing to prevent free speech by using violence against other people personally, rather than bringing in the force of the state to do the violence for you. The basic impulse is the same, however.

Seriously, exar, I've got five sons. Homeschooled. Conservative Christian home. Sheltered ... (All well past 5 years old now; my baby is 11 and my oldest is 17).

We have had many conversations about stuff I'd rather not have had to explain to them. Nature of the world.

"Mom, what's that?"

"It's something that's illegal in some states but legal in other states, and some people don't think it should be illegal at all. The poster says that people shouldn't make laws that other people don't like."

"No, what's that thing?"

"Oh, that? It's called a vibrator. Some people think other people shouldn't be allowed to have one. It's really embarrassing to talk about, kinda bathroom talk. Sure you still want to know?"

MY kids would have said "Naw, I guess not" at this stage but YMMV of course. The reason for that is that I have a policy of actually answering persistent questions, in as much detail as the kid demands. Little kids usually don't understand the answer they demanded, and older kids tend to get embarrassed pretty easily, so I usually get off scot-free even now. (The detailed answer for the little kids can sometimes be deliberately obfuscatory, of course. Remember the description of 'rape' in To Kill a Mockingbird? "Rape? That's carnal knowledge of a female by force and without her consent..." -- like that.)

I believe in cherishing childhood innocence.

I also believe that it's the parents' job to prepare their children for the real world. That includes teaching your kids the proper names for every part of their bodies, and answering millions of questions we'd all rather they didn't ask, and coping with the fact that not all the adults in the world are going to behave in ways consistent with our family or religious values.

It's bad form to demand that everyone in the world has to drink mother's milk merely because your baby isn't yet old enough for steak.

pax

[helpless]

nice, I so agree with the ring on the thumb being out of place.

[kd7nqb]

I like the revision. Good job.

[vtoddball]

I think some people are reading into this WAY too much. First, it's meant to be read in a matter of a few seconds, not chewed on for an hour while you debate the artist's "true" intent and what his relationship was like with his mother. Second, I've seen far worse pictures in many other non sexually focused magazines. In fact, try and find a gun magazine nowadays that doesn't have an ad in it for male enhancement drugs. If you wanna work yourselves into a tizzy, how about having a word with all the gun magazine ad editors who apparently think that people who like guns have a problem getting it up. ;)

[springmom]

Pax, I was right there with you until this:

It's bad form to demand that everyone in the world has to drink mother's milk merely because your baby isn't yet old enough for steak.


I realize that your post had as its impetus the threat of violence in exar's post. I cringed when I read that threat. I won't speak for any of the other folks who have critiqued the image of the OP, but for myself, I'm not putting my foot on anybody else's posterior. I'm not their judge and jury, or their mom. Not my job, not my right.

But it is NOT bad form to put our values out their in the public square. It is not bad form to say "this is tacky, it is going to offend, if you want to reach people without offending, change it". It is not even bad form, really, to voluntarily limit the extent to which sexual and scatological and other intimate products, behaviors, etc., are spread all over the media. The rap artists are even taking a second look at the stuff they put out there. It has only been in the last few years that there seems to have developed the idea that the First Amendment was meant to cover sexually explicit or otherwise private images and products.

My eyes about popped out the first time I watched the commercial for genital herpes medication on prime time TV. Don't know why...for years, we've been advertising other things that people in past generations had the good taste NOT to talk about in public. The media have become a near nonstop parade of coarseness and vulgarity.

And I didn't, and don't, particularly want to run into it here.

If Oleg wants to publish that as it is, that's his business. No boots on his butt are going to be forthcoming. But I'll avoid further threads containing his (otherwise usually very fine) work. My choice.

Springmom

[beaucoup ammo]

"Comments Wanted".. To give Oleg Anything other than our honest opinions would be doing this extremely creative gentleman a disservice.

And, yes, something for public consumption..especially in this fight..is chewed on for hour(s) to make those initial few seconds an effective 1st impression.

[pax]

springmom ~

Context is everything. As you noted, my post was in response to someone threatening violence for posting an image. Hence the word "demand" in the concluding sentence.

It's perfectly okay to request, to cajole, to condemn, to speechify ... That's how civilization works, after all.

It's not okay to hit or kick in response to mere speech. No matter how offensive we find that speech.

pax

[springmom]

It's not okay to hit or kick in response to mere speech. No matter how offensive we find that speech.


True. Of course my children made the acquaintance of a bar of Ivory soap on an occasion or two if I recall :neener: but in that context, it WAS my job.

Springmom

[exar]

Well, I guess I was a little heated.:o

Springmom puts it better than I can. What I mean is "Where do your rights end and mine begin?". I pay taxes just like the guy stapling up the poster of a vibrator in the public square. If I don't want that on public property that I also paid for, then why can't I express my freedom of speech and tear it down? If you can put it up, why can't I take it down? I paid for the public space just like they did. If it was a private ad, and the billboard is privately owned then go right ahead and post whatever you want.

[Biker]

Betcha exar. Could be I don't like your ad promoting the next church yard sale. Maybe the next gun show...etc...

Still waiting for that boot.

Biker;)

[Chad]

It's fine just like it is.
Everyone I showed it to today got the point, and some were surprised that 'marital aids' were actually illegal in some places.
So they were educated by your poster.

But to fix it the only thing you can do is dump it.

Surely you've seen by now in this thread that what some folks accept as normal others don't...and people's reactions to things that offend them will almost always over-ride everything else.
We can't afford to alienate folks while we work for our 2A rights.

[GLM]

I've had many left-leaning friends over the years comment that men who carry/collect/enjoy firearms are compensating for other "shortcomings". I think this poster will just add fuel to that fire. And as an aside, I find it amusing that those who like the poster have resorted to name calling and have shown such outward disdain towards those who do not.

[Johannes_Paulsen]

Pax:

You are truly my hero. That was wonderfully put. I wish I'd you been around when I was trying to get stuff published as a student a few years ago. I could've used the help of a writer like you.

Exar:

I don't think mere expression of an idea violates anyone's rights. It is only when direct action is taken that an individual's rights might be violated. Just something to think about.

GLM:

I've heard several comments from people on this thread about how this poster "plays into" a typical anti-RKBA argument that guns are just "compensation" for something sexually.

First of all, I've never heard anyone say that. (Doesn't mean anything, I'm sure someone has someplace.)

Second, this isn't an argument worthy of the name! Does a childish comment like that from someone who's obviously too immature to engage an issue intellectually really bother you? I mean, perhaps I'm just more secure in my own sexuality than some, but, frankly, all that does is expose to me the fact that the person making that sort of comment really has nothing to support his argument! If that's all they have, well, you've pretty much won the debate on substance at that point.

Again, I really believe that (for its intended audience) Oleg's original poster (or some variant thereof) would be a good attention-getter. Again, for a college audience or for a "green"/leftist audience.

That said, I can see how the juxtaposition of phallus-shape and gun might get the discussion more off-topic than intended. I think Odd Job's proposed picture of a less phallic vibrator might minimize such deviations.

[Caimlas]

And Oleg:

While I am not racist, there is something significantly jarring and wrong about the "interracial" couple photo: I can't quite place my finger on it. It's an attractive photo, and I like the sentiment of people, regardless of color, creed, age, etc. being armed. I'd not mind a suit (or gun) like that myself, either.

It just seems to me that, unlike the dildo + gun argument, the "multiracial" one is catering to a cultural/perceptual problem that does not exist - or, at least, it caters to an aspect of society which is, at this point in history (in our country), something marginal: racism. In my mind, it is an issue which has no standing whatsoever with most people; it's an issue manufactured by the left to make Americans look bad, and should be given no credence (let alone emphasis) whatsoever.

[springmom]

It just seems to me that, unlike the dildo + gun argument, the "multiracial" one is catering to a cultural/perceptual problem that does not exist - or, at least, it caters to an aspect of society which is, at this point in history (in our country), something marginal: racism. In my mind, it is an issue which has no standing whatsoever with most people; it's an issue manufactured by the left to make Americans look bad, and should be given no credence (let alone emphasis) whatsoever.

Now, that's interesting.

I swear, I think this has become something of a Rorschach for people posting here. Everybody "sees" something different. To me, the challenge to racism (or, within the context of the poster, the challenge to miscegenation laws) is not dead at all. Nor is racism, sadly, dead. There are a multitude of reasons for it, some of which, IMO, have to do with the issue continually being fanned into flame by the liberals Caimlas references. But no, it's not dead... I wish, but no.

However, since Oleg says he wants to reference current invasive laws, this is a dead issue re: the poster anyway.

Springmom

[Oleg Volk]

something significantly jarring

It's a sexualized pin-up. It was meant to annoy the girl's father who hated the idea of a black in-law.

[BHPshooter]

Oleg,

I like the original poster as it is now. The second one is good, but a little wordy.

If I could make a suggestion, keep the visual composition like it is on the first one, but make the wording something like this:

What do these items have in common?
[Handgun][Apparatus]
Some people have decided that owning one should make you a FELON. (To be a little more educational, have a font that looks like a rubber-stamp that says CHICAGO over the pistol, and DALLAS over the dildo.)

I personally don't see what the BFD is, and this is coming from a member of Utah's "radically conservative" religion. I personally don't believe that sheltering oneself/one's progeny does anything but ensure that they will be shocked by the real world.

Sexual apparati exist. Like guns, they will always exist, and even if you could make them magically disappear, people would use other things for the same purpose. Owning one -- or several, for that matter -- should not make one a criminal, period. Like guns, they can be used morally or immorally. We need to take issue with people, not inanimate objects.

Wes

[Geronimo45]

This poster's garnered a lot of attention, fer sure. Lot of shock value to it - it definitely grabs your attention. Somebody mentioned that it would be handy for a college-ish environment... and I reckon they're right. Dormitory area would probably be a good place for it.
It would do for a special-use item... not for general use... that's the way I see it.

[Patriot-Brewer]

We gotta think outside the box, people:what:

HA HA...I get it!;)

[Ohioan]

Okay, I must admit that I did not read all the posts in this thread. I'm easily distracted.

I agree with the person that stated that the text should come before the images. I would see the images, it would draw my attention. But I think text first would take a little bit of the "edge" off the poster. But, It would still be a good illustration.

And to tell you the truth, the ring on the thumb did distract me too. I know I know, it's a minute detail, but I don't normally see rings on the thumb. I was thinking, that looks like a mans wedding band. On the thumb? Humm.. that's odd. The hand looks feminine.. (no offense intended if it was a guys hand)


That being said, I'll show the poster to my mother tomorrow. It'll offend her for sure. But, she doesn't bring any pro-gun issues to the table. Then I'll show my girlfriend. She's comming around to "our" way of thinking since meeting me. I'll post their reactions.

Oleg, I appreciate what you do. I find it interesting that the people that fight the most for our freedoms are people that weren't born with them. As a teacher, I see a lot of students who just assume that freedoms are just their rights and they always have been and always will be. I try my hardest to help them realize it isn't that so. Anyways, thanks!

Where are these posters used?

[Norm357]

It is a felony to sell sex aids in several states, including Texas, Georgia and Mississippi.


Are you sure about GA? My Sis in law manages a Starship, and they sell them by the truck full.

Plus, I get my porn with a family discount.:D

[Sean Dempsey]

Who here is MORE confused about the poster, this thread, and just what is going on here exactly? I know I am.

Is the jist: Pro-"sex toy" people should see that, and then say "well if I want vibrator/dildo's to be legal for individuals to own, then I guess people who want guns should get the same right. don't let the govt say what we can and cannot have."

A shop selling marital aides here in my town in Utah was shut down, so /shrug

[Oleg Volk]

Is the jist: Pro-"sex toy" people should see that, and then say "well if I want vibrator/dildo's to be legal for individuals to own, then I guess people who want guns should get the same right. don't let the govt say what we can and cannot have."

Yes -- and vice versa. Gun owners should extend the same consideration to those who'd like a nice back (or front) massager.

Where are these posters used?

On web sites, in publications, as posters, ads and billboards...but not enough. Feel free to borrow and propagate my pro-RKBA images.

[44AMP]

I'll comment.

Oleg, I understand the point you are making, and I personally am not offended by the "marital aid".

However, I do not feel that linking guns with any sexual reference is beneficial to our cause.

Even though there are some people posting here who have never personally experienced it, there is a large segment of the people who have been taught to equate gun with "male sexual organ", so any sexual content in context with firearms plays directly to that concept, diminishing the intended message.

Also, something else to consider is the difference between how we view behavior with firearms and how we view sexual behavior. When it comes to guns, there is a "right" and a "wrong", or if you prefer, a "safe" and an "unsafe" behavior. With sex, there are not such clearly defined standards.

Anything that muddles the message is to be avoided, and nothing muddles things like sex.

[ArfinGreebly]

And that, in a nutshell, is the rub.

It certainly has impact.

It carries a message.

And it distracts.

It has a significant "flinch" factor.

Beyond that, there is this other thing: the RKBA is not a "lifestyle" issue. Blue toys and body piercing and tattoos and smut are more "the way you live your life" whereas the RKBA is more "the right to stay alive."

I don't view them as being of the same order of magnitude.

I don't have any brilliant alternatives for you on this.

Maybe after some sleep.

[Glockfan.45]

It's bad form to demand that everyone in the world has to drink mother's milk merely because your baby isn't yet old enough for steak.

pax

Well put, and for once I agree with Pax. The same people in this thread that attack Olegs choice of props "for the sake of the children" would attack a gun grabber for using the line "for the sake of the children". We live in a free (well it used to be) society, and if you don't like the message you are free to ignore it. FWIW I have two small children, and try not to shelter them from the world. I would not have a problem with them seeing this image.

Having said that now I have to say I don't like it. It conveys the message loud and clear, but it also implies the gun = penis slander often used by left wingers. If the liberal left is your target audience then playing on their conceptions of gun owners may not be the best choice.

Heres an idea, on one side have a picture of a EBR with the caption "Legal by Federal law, Banned by California law. On the other side you could have a picture of a senior citizen lighting a small marijuana pipe ( I would have said person in a medical type setting) with the caption "Legal under California Law, Banned by Federal Law". The top of the poster in large bold type could say something along the lines of "When you allow government to intrude on the rights of one person, you open the door to intrude on the rights of all".

[Oleg Volk]

Thanks all for the advice. I'll see what I can create on the same topic but with different imagery.

[IllHunter]

I live near Chicago, I guarantee the gun would get more response than the vibrator image. Part of my work as an insurance adjuster allows me access to inventory homeowners possessions after a fire etc.. I have come across a gun only once in twenty years. I believe the fear of reprocussions and responsibility of the owners lead them to remove the guns first after the loss. They never remove the sex toys which remain in the nightstand or the box under the bed etc. I have been amazed and enlightened by the variety of toys and by the disparity of their owners. This goes to the concept of both varying the vibrator image and of who might be offended by the image. I can't see someone watching the blush or other physical reaction of each person viewing the poster and IMHO the viewers reaction is private and shielded and as such would only be exposed at the will of the viewer. Please clean up the printing, I prefer the rubber stamp concept with the location over each image and the felony tag changed to "Illegal". However you fix it , I'll post it. Keep up the great work and great threads.

[XDKingslayer]

Did she bring her own to the shoot or did you supply it?

[zahc]

I love it. The pro-sex and pro-gun are unfortunately usually at odds with each other when they should be fighting the same fight.

[.cheese.]

probably not the response you wanted, but IMO that poster actually makes Chicago look good as outlawing the vibrator/dildo is as dumb if not dumber than Chicago's dumb gun ban.

Or if it doesn't make Chicago look good... it certainly makes Texas look as dumb as Chicago.

ETA: Then again.... maybe that was the point you were trying to make?

[XD Fan]

Oleg,

I always enjoy these threads that you post looking for feed back on your work. I am especially impressed with how courteously you receive both the praise and the criticisms.

Your work is always thought provoking, even on the very rare ocassions when I do not like it.

Jeffrey

[HellsBelle]

Hi everyone. I just joined in order to answer some of your questions here in this thread.

First of all, it IS a criminal offense to own/purchase a sex toy in my home state (MS). It has been this way for some two years. When it first passed our legislature, I was shocked that our tax dollars couldn't have been used toward doing something that mattered more. Seems like a useless law that ate up tax dollars and accomplished nothing. Some women in TX have been persecuted for selling sex toys...I saw that myself on MSNBC.com. Where are we going to draw the line and tell our elected officials "stay out of this" or "quit restricting my rights as an individual to choose?"

That being said, I do not believe that government has any place in my bedroom or in my womb. The point of the poster was to say that "hey, it's sex toys now that they're restricting ownership of...what's next?"

I'm 36 and I'd be perfectly comfortable showing my mom this poster. She and I both agreed that the sex toy law was over the top. What you do in the privacy of your own home and does no harm to others shouldn't be the business of the government, IMO.

As for the thumb ring. I have been single now for 4 years following a 7 year marriage and a divorce. I recently met someone and we are involved and one of his "likes" is LH thumb rings. I'd had one, but never wore it...it is a 8mm size 8 comfort fit band. During this shoot, I had all my jewelry sitting on the floor. I thought things had wrapped up, and put them back on. That's why this thing is pictured. I wear this out of respect for our relationship and what it means to me...and to him.

Yes, that is a "piece" owned by my father which I brought to the shoot upon Oleg's request. Oleg did some research on it as it was somewhat of a mystery to him as well. I just liked the way it looked in other photos from a shoot a few months ago. Personally, I carry a Glock 19 which works out nicely since my new "SO" is a Glock dealer.

The blue thing meant for Smurfette IS NOT mine. Personally, I prefer more girth myself!

If you have any more questions regarding the poster, I may be able to assist.

[PRazz]

Funny that people are mentioning the ring. I looked twice because they looked like ladies hands but it was a wide gold band like a man might wear. I wore a ring on my thumb for a while, it was from a girlfriend but she got it way too big. The only thing it would fit on was a thumb.

Sex toys are not deadly weapons(not that I'd have any statistics to back that up) but if they managed to get outlawed then hey, why not guns? I see your point.

[ArfinGreebly]

Glad to have you on THR.

Tell us more about the revolver!

And the lady who owns it.

[igor]

Those wouldn't be the steps of the Parliament House in Helsinki in the background, would they? :scrutiny::uhoh::D

[.cheese.]

Yes... welcome.... and what did you and/or Oleg find out about that revolver? What is it?

[sm]

HellsBelle,
Welcome to THR.

Interested in the Revolver as well.

I like the Poster as is. I appreciate your sharing more about you, and how it applies to the poster.

Human Rights are Rights.
One may have differing views about others, and what they like, dislike, or do.
Bottom line is, the erosion of any right, erodes the rights of us all.

Kids?

I agree with pax.
Parents are to parent and prepare kids best can for the real world.
That is being Responsible.
Kids get bigger and some point are responsible for themselves.

If a kid cannot go to parents, family to get answers to difficult or even "dicey" questions, where will they answers?
Kids ARE going to get a answer one way or another.

Better a kid get answers from parents, family and trusted folks parents approve of, instead of Government, or other sources.

I was a step dad for a bit, his mom was a RN. No big deal to actually show how to put on a condom using a banana or cucumber, and this when he was about 8 years old.
Who knows why he asked about a Vibrator? Still he did.
So his mom and I walked into a store and bought one, brought it home and we had a lesson on these.
Beet Red 13 y/o and his mom and step dad just toss one to him and " here you go, ask away".

His biological dad tossed a fit. This is the same guy that would not have "that talk" with his son.
His mom had to do this.
Dad would not teach fishing, or anything. "School will teach him what he needs to know..."

How to get a teenage boy to turn beet red?
Toss him a Condom and ask if still remembers how one is used.
Asked him to demonstrate on the vibrator.

:p

[gyp_c2]

...hell...I like it for Playboy or some similar venue that's open to the types of images and straight ahead talk about those issues anyway...It's obviously startling enough for some of us that it's creating a dialogue...isn't that the point?
I think so...Very good work Mr. O...http://emoticons4u.com/cool/223.gif

[Oleg Volk]

Revolver history (http://olegvolk.livejournal.com/249919.html)

[Green Lantern]

I think I like it.

After all, gun control is more about CONTROL than guns.

People might think twice about blindly supporting gun control when thinking that there are other "pastimes" out there that some politicos frown on and want to try to legislate out of existence...

Beyond that, there is this other thing: the RKBA is not a "lifestyle" issue. Blue toys and body piercing and tattoos and smut are more "the way you live your life" whereas the RKBA is more "the right to stay alive."

I don't know that I agree with that. Being a CCWer is, to me, "the way I live my life." Maybe it's not an accurate way of looking at it, but I can see something of a comparison. People with tattoos, for instance, make all sorts of 'statements' by them. My statement is not as visible (unless I print or flash ;) ) but the statement is there: "I REFUSE TO BE A VICTIM."

But, it's also a pastime too (recreational shooting). And it's more of a pastime for some gun owners, than it is for others.

[Euclidean]

This poster makes a good point that often goes ignored.

I'm not really into that whole sex accessories thing at all, and don't even like talking about it, but just seeing one doesn't bother me. It's just a piece of plastic. However I agree I wouldn't want to display this in most venues, and honestly I can't think of any place I go to where it would be appropriate to show it. So while I like the poster, I can't really think of any use for it.

Is there some other object which doesn't have the connotation of a sex accessory which is also subject to some backwards law to just show the sheer absurdity of it?

One thing about the sex accessory however is that like a firearm, it's just so... personal. From that angle it is a good comparison, so I have to give it points for that.

Also, being a native Texan I'm ashamed to admit this, but I know Texas has some really weird laws about this stuff and I don't know what they are because I don't get into that scene. I thought women could buy sex accessories but not men, which is why all the sex toy party outfits cater exclusively to women. I really don't know, I'm asking if anyone can clarify that for me.

To be clear I don't think there should be any laws like that at all, I'm just curious if anyone can clarify since it's relevant to the poster.

[the naked prophet]

I understand the point of the poster, and I agree with the point. However, I think it's going to be nearly impossible to do it tastefully for a general audience (like a roadside billboard). For a college audience, I think it would be perfect with the rubber stamp idea.

My... um, I mean, random female friends tell me that they never used a real aid, just improvised with shampoo bottles and hairbrush handles. I've also heard that those vibrating motorized toothbrushes are used more often than not in non-dental applications. *wink wink*

A poster might also be done (for the college audience) about how people fulfill their needs when things are outlawed.

[rickomatic]

".....from my cold dead.........................nevermind"

[Oleg Volk]

I've also heard that those vibrating motorized toothbrushes are used more often than not in non-dental applications. *wink wink*

Out of consideration for the residual dignity of this forum, I won't post the illustration of just how to apply menthol toothpaste.

I'll look through "stupid laws" sites and see if I can find more mainstream examples.

[GRB]

Oleg,

Wit all due respect:

It maybe your site, and you can obviously post as you please, but a picture of a dildo herein does not seem to fit The High Road image but rather causes it, in my opinion, to fall into the gutter! In short my opinion of the poster itself is likewise.

All the best,
Glenn B

[shotgunkevin]

Will the poster be more effective at sparking open-minded dialog about gun control, or will it spark dialog about, umm, device control?

I imagine most people have already made up their mind regarding guns. I'm afraid the point of the poster might be missed, in favor of discussing obscure peculiarities of law.

[Oleg Volk]

Either outcome -- fostering objections to gun control or sex-toy control -- would be fine with me. It the control that I find galling.

[coylh]

Ask and you shall receive, in abundance.

Blue laws (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_law)

[sm]

Control is Control.

Once any right is allowed to be infringed, all rights are susceptible to being infringed.

Once one right is infringed to greater extent, all rights are susceptible to being infringed to a greater extent.

I am a single white male in my 50's.

What the hell do I need a vibrator for? I don't.

I do not own a AR15, therefore I don't have any 30 round mags.
I don't attend a Church.
I may not read the same books as you.
...etc.

Rights are Rights, it does not matter if anyone does the same things I do, has the same preferences I do, even if we are total and adamant enemies - we have Rights.

It is NOT the Governments business to Control these rights.

~~

Kerio.

Gov't has no business Controlling Property.
I don't care if it is a Whorehouse, Sex Shop, Church, Nursing home, little league ball field , Gun Shop, Dress shop...

It ain't right!

Years ago the State wanted some property adjacent to some State Property.
Got a bit ugly.
Long time Gun shop, Boarding houses with Retired folks, Whorehouse, Doctor offices in homes, Small Church and other folks "had to" move.

This was years ago. It was interesting seeing the various folks involved working together.
I personally got a kick out of the Church folks and Whores being on the same side.

[Oleg Volk]

sm,

You might find Edlund's Economics of Prostitution (http://www.iies.su.se/seminars/papers/Edlund.pdf) an interesting read. She treats it as an alternative to other economic models, including monogamous marriage, poly, clan, and other arrangements. Several more relevant papers at http://www.columbia.edu/~le93/Research.htm

[Lashlarue]

There are tons of blue laws on the books, that are simply not enforced. There are twenty places within 20 minutes of me where I can buy a vibrator, if I so desired. So as a Texan your poster has no relevance to me.

[HellsBelle]

Let's see...someone asked a little about me. As I said, I'm divorced, 36 years old and a resident of Mississippi. That's where I'm originally from and I returned to my home town there from Memphis following my divorce in 2003. I've been carrying since 1999 after an incident where a man tried to get into the car with me in front of the MLG&W building.

I was raised around firearms. I've always said that there are two things in MS that are passed down in families...guns and cast iron skillets. My father was an avid hunter (still is, but duck hunting got too expensive for him) and pretty much anything he shot in the field with my great grandfather you could count on seeing featured on a table near you. :D We do not believe in killing for sport.

As stated, the gun pictured belongs to my father. I borrowed it only for the shoot since Oleg wanted something "common looking" and I knew that it had photographed well weeks before when we actually shot with it outdoors.

I know many of you are stating that there are sex shops near you regardless of the laws in your state. I'm here to tell you that I know of a sex shop in Jackson MS that was shut down by its Mayor, so I know this "new set" of laws in MS is being enforced by some. I simply think it is ridiculous. I believe in the separation of church (their morals and values) and state and don't see why such a law was ever put into motion to begin with.

[Johannes_Paulsen]

I'll look through "stupid laws" sites and see if I can find more mainstream examples.

Oleg,

How about this one?

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,278523,00.html

[Lashlarue]

Black man picks up white man's habit,, ten years it will be.If he be white, would be dating the prosecutor Paula Smith!

[springmom]

Quote:
I'll look through "stupid laws" sites and see if I can find more mainstream examples.

Oleg,

How about this one?

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,278523,00.html

No. PLEASE don't make a poster about this!!!! :neener::what: :D

Springmom

[skinnyguy]

Oleg's poster has stirred up a hotbed of differing opinions concerning some peoples personal habits.

Some of the comments made by our very own people here on THR have been a little less than "High Road". I hate saying this, but as my sig line says, "the truth is not always polite". There are some people acting just exactly like the anti-gunners at the mere image of an adult accessory.

You may not like them, you may not use them, but that does not change the fact that they exist and people use them, just exactly like the firearms we are trying to hold on to.

The poster is an illustration of governmental control on ALL FACETS of our lives, not just firearms. The intrusion is rampant throughout our lives, and that is what needs your attention, not a photo of a little blue battery operated boyfriend. Please think about these things as you post.

Oleg, thank you for a fine illustration. Don't stop producing attention getting posters such as this one. A suggestion to avoid offending the puritanical amongst us (not meant as offensive, just descriptive), perhaps a link to your site for the option of viewing?

[Owens]

as Oleg has said in a previous post that he would ponder a similar message with different imagery. However, as this is 'The High Road', and it can be viewed by anyone over the I-net, the alternative imagery would be a better vehicle of the message. There are evidently a number of families with children on the forum, and as they can't be policed 100% of the time,...etc... Childhood is too short these days. I certainly do appreciate the efforts that Oleg takes in getting the truth out, but there are better, more High Road ways of doing it. Just my opinion.

[Odd Job]

Skinnyguy worded it how I wanted to.

[coylh]

However, as this is 'The High Road', and it can be viewed by anyone over the I-net, the alternative imagery would be a better vehicle of the message.

Images of guns make some people uncomfortable too.

[sm]

Oleg,

Thank you for the links.

Steve

[XavierBreath]

A suggestion to avoid offending the puritanical amongst us (not meant as offensive, just descriptive),This is not descriptive. I am not a Puritan. I am a Presbyterian.

It is odd that so many members can make such a judgement of a person's character based on internet posts. It is odd that a West Pac sailor such as I, who has lived and loved in Bangkok and Subic Bay is called a Puritan. You, sir, do not know me. I have refrained from making judgements of other member's sexual viewpoints based on their opinion of a single image. How is it that this courtesy is so difficult to reciprocate?

I do not believe Oleg will cease his work based on opinions voiced here. Let's get back to critiquing the poster rather than each other.


puritanical

adjective
1. of or relating to Puritans or Puritanism
2. exaggeratedly proper; "my straitlaced Aunt Anna doesn't approve of my miniskirts"
3. morally rigorous and strict; "the puritan work ethic"; "puritanic distaste for alcohol"; "she was anything but puritanical in her behavior" [syn: blue]

WordNet® 3.0, © 2006 by Princeton University.

[rnchick]

I'm a little late on this discussion with internet problems running amok.

I will preface my statements by saying that I am a friend of Hellsbelle's. She was actually staying at my house in TN when the photos were taken!

I find the poster (all versions) a very dramatic statement - and I think that's what oleg intended. It's meant to grab your attention by using the vibrator that, for some, may be disturbing or offensive.

Now I ddo see the point of view of the paretns - this is not a poster I would show my children (if I had any), but there are LOTS of things in the general TV, public, line of sight that I find offensive for children. It IS the job of a parent to shelter, protect, and provide age appropriate explanations as the PARENT sees fit.

I think that there is a place, time, setting, and audience that needs to hear the message on this poster. YMMV

[stevelyn]

+1 to illspirit's post.

Extreme leftists and radical right-wing fascists are the same authoritarians on the inside.

[Don Gwinn]

I haven't read the whole thread yet, so maybe my opinion will change when (if?) I slog through it all.

However, that said, I like the poster. I saw it and left a positive comment on Oleg's LiveJournal. It was something to the effect that "here's a poster you can hang at the local NRA meeting and at the local college's 'Womyn's Issues' meeting and get a good discussion in either place. Thought provoking."

I stand by that. It looks like it's provoked a lot of thought and discussion here.

Now, I am NOT saying this to insult anyone, but I think a lot of people ARE having the reaction to that vibrator that anti-gunners would have to that revolver. It's an emotional reaction, a discomfort, maybe a feeling that a child might see this, and how do I explain it to that child?

This might be a good time to think about who those anti-gunners are and WHY they do what they do. If you're feeling that way about something as harmless as a vibrator, then you understand how a person can simultaneously know all the intellectual arguments for freedom and yet feel deeply that what's in front of him is somehow indecent and should at the least be hidden. In other words, you're seeing how hard it is for an anti-gunner to set aside emotion and force himself to tolerate another person's judgment of decency, morality, utility or whatever.

Empathy is usually useful, and I don't see it here very often.

[springmom]

Now, I am NOT saying this to insult anyone, but I think a lot of people ARE having the reaction to that vibrator that anti-gunners would have to that revolver. It's an emotional reaction, a discomfort, maybe a feeling that a child might see this, and how do I explain it to that child?


I know you're not, Don, and I appreciate that. However, I have never run into an anti-gun person who had that kind of reaction. Kids see guns all the time. From their childhoods, they play guns, they see them on TV, they see them in movies...heck, they see them if all you take your kid to is Bambi. People have a visceral reaction to guns that has nothing to do with the use of a vibrator in posters. They fear guns, because (and every anti I've ever known has been) they are absolutely CERTAIN that they'll go off by themselves. Every one. They loathe guns, because they loathe the violence of society and they have bought the rhetoric that if there were no guns there would be no violence. We know that's not true, but they believe it. And they may fear them because they've been the victims of violence.

This has nothing to do with vibrators on a poster. I do not mean to continue to beat a dead horse here, because Oleg has said he's looking for other images, and I'm glad he is. Vibrators offend people's sense of decency in the public place. Private is a whole 'nuther matter. I don't care how many vibrators, of what color, and for what use, ANYBODY has. I agree it's none of the government's business, and the Mississippi legislature is stupid beyond words. That does not mean that it is less an offense to public decency to put one up on a poster.

Put one of those up in an NRA meeting and you'll get some reactions just like mine and others'. I am a life NRA member. And I don't like the vibrator on the poster.

Springmom

[Odd Job]

@ springmom

That does not mean that it is less an offense to public decency to put one up on a poster.
Put one of those up in an NRA meeting and you'll get some reactions just like mine and others'. I am a life NRA member. And I don't like the vibrator on the poster.


Is there anything more offensive about the vibrator than there is about a tampon or a suppository? I'm just trying to gauge what it is about the vibrator that you find offensive. There are some here who don't like the phallic comparison, but that is a different issue from yours, I suspect. It seems to me that you wouldn't tolerate that vibrator on ANY poster, never mind Oleg's.

[springmom]

I'm trying to wrap my mind around a poster with an open tampon on it. My mind may explode :neener: :D

Society has lost its common sense on this. NOTHING is private anymore. Our generation took EVERYTHING and "let it all hang out" (how long's it been since you read that phrase? :D) As I said in an earlier post, we shill drugs for genital herpes, get to listen to commericals for tampons and Preparation H , all in prime time. There was a time when not only were children told "that's none of your business" but adults, too, "just didn't talk about that" in public.

That's apparently gone. And that's a loss. In those days, people knew perfectly well what a vibrator was, how to use it, and where to buy one. They knew what Preparation H was, didn't need reminding in the middle of the nightly news. They knew what KY jelly was, and didn't need a 30-second soft porn movie to tell them what they could use it for. Neither do we, of course, but that's what we get.

There is a huge difference between fiercely defending the right of anybody to own whatever sex toy they want, and thinking that it belongs on a poster in public. There just IS. And this is not "puritanical" :fire: It's a matter of good taste, a matter of keeping the public square a family place (and this High Road has always aimed to BE a family-oriented place, not an "adults only" venue). We as a society have utterly abandoned good taste and restraint in favor of utterly unlimited expression of everything, anytime, anywhere, in any way.

Does that help?

Springmom

[Odd Job]

Well it does and it doesn't, but there is no need for me to press the issue.

[PTK]

To those of you offended by the image Oleg posted...

What you're feeling is an emotional response. This is the same feeling antis feel about guns and doesn't make sense in either scenario.

Just for what it's worth.

[whatbrick]

Take a look around on here at various threads on you'll find plenty of pro-gunners having an emotional response to anti-gun propaganda. That's what propaganda is supposed to do: first to make you feel, then to make you think. So there's nothing wrong with having an emotional response as long as it is tempered with logical reasoning. However, when searching for a new audience to target you have to make sure that you don't lose the one that you already have.

Were I an art director that was just handed this piece as a comp, I would not sign off on it. I get what it's going for, and I have no objection to either object personally, but losing a great percentage of the target audience (as well as a percentage of the audience you already have) is not a chance I would be willing to take. It just isn't fit for public consumption...figuratively speaking. It may be in a few years or so, but it isn't now.

I'll put it this way...if I wouldn't use an item in front of my parents, then I wouldn't stick said item on an advertisement for the public to view.

[Biker]

I think the poster would be quite effective on a college campus or on the bulletin board of a nearby coffee shop.
It's thought provoking and could inspire a quality dialogue.

Biker

[coylh]

After seeing some of the "no" responses in this thread, I think this poster is actually more important for the choir rather than the rest of the world.

How would you all feel about people in your city wanting to open carry vibrators in public? You know--to the grocery store, movies, your local Panera chain? I'm not talking about pictures of vibrators here, I'm talking about real, fully charged vibrators that could be used at a moment's notice.

[Don Gwinn]

My kids have seen commercials depicting hemhorroid creams, tampons, every kind of liquor you can imagine, methamphetamines and pot--to name but a few. Explaining--or giving a good reason not to explain--is part of my job as a parent. 200 years ago when everything was perfect and simple and people were good and children were rosy-cheeked little cherubs, a LOT of them grew up on farms watching pigs get castrated and animals of every description mate vigorously in farmyard mud. I'm just not buying the delicate family morals argument.

In this case, there's one more flaw with that argument--way back on page one or two, Springmom said the comparison is false because "a revolver is not embarassing." Why not? You can explain (or, again, give a good reason not to explain) owning a lethal weapon, but you can't explain or deflect a question about a sex toy? How do you explain it when your child asks why you carry something you may use to kill someone?
Or, more likely, have you treated your gun as if it's something natural, and your child as if it were something intelligent, and thus no big confrontation about the issue ever came up? That approach works for just about everything, not just guns.

To paraphrase Johnny Unitas, "I like to have sex as much as Joe Namath or anybody else. I just like to have it with my wife."

[Oleg Volk]

Very good question.

[fjolnirsson]

I find it interesting how offended and upset folks can get over a few ounces of plastic and metal, whatever the configuration....
Brings to mind an old saying about motes and planks....

[Don Gwinn]

How would you all feel about people in your city wanting to open carry vibrators in public? You know--to the grocery store, movies, your local Panera chain? I'm not talking about pictures of vibrators here, I'm talking about real, fully charged vibrators that could be used at a moment's notice.
Well, clearly it is better to have it and not need it, than to need it and not have it. . . . but seriously, minding your own business does wonders for your blood pressure. I highly recommend it.

[springmom]

In this case, there's one more flaw with that argument--way back on page one or two, Springmom said the comparison is false because "a revolver is not embarassing." Why not? You can explain (or, again, give a good reason not to explain) owning a lethal weapon, but you can't explain or deflect a question about a sex toy?

Because shooting is not a private behavior. Sex is. We shoot at ranges, we shoot on hunts, we shoot at matches, we carry for self defense (in fortunate states, openly). Shooting, and its accoutrements, are not private and personal. Sex is. Sex gizmos are.

Personally, when I use the term "family oriented" I'm not thinking of my children, or of children in particular, but rather a "PG rated" level of discourse. And I'm getting annoyed at the implication, repeated more than once in this thread, that opposition to this image is somehow linked with an inability or unwillingness to explain sex and other issues to our children. Speaking for my own family we did that just fine, thanks, without embarassment and without pulling any punches. But they didn't see images of vibrators on posters around town, either. What they did see, what they did ask, they got explanations for.

One more time: I fully support everybody's right to play with whatever toys they want. I fully support Oleg's right to put together whatever posters he wants. The man asked for feedback, he got it, and those of you who like this poster will NOT let it go. There's been labelling and namecalling and presumptions out the wahoo, that only one person who's opposed the poster has countered with inappropriate verbiage (and he apologized for his). I don't like it, I don't have to like it, and I think I'm done with this thread. This is getting ridiculous.

Springmom

[Pitt762x54r]

First off, I only read about 7 pages so far so I am sorry if I missed anything.


1. Would I post this in a public area where kids have access to it:

Yes, I might. The young ones won't know what it is and won't care. The parents have the job of explaining the ways of the world and this is one of them. In fact, I think it is more responsible than posting a picture of paris hilton or some other poor role model for the kids.

2. A while back a comment was made as to why someone would even have a marital aid in the house:

Well, because I can and I want to. If you don't want one, you don't have to have one. The same thing can be said for almost any object including guns. I happed to be open sexually and like to enjoy the time I spend with my partner and the aid posted seems like a great way to party.


3. You can have them, but self defence and perverted actions are not equal.

Guns are not always about self defence, they are also used for sport and recreation. I don't consider a marital aid to be offensive in any way, shape, or form and it certainly has a number of uses that should remain legal. In the end this poster is comparing rights of ownership and I think that is a powerful message. I personally do not think it clouds the argument at all.


Because shooting is not a private behavior. Sex is. We shoot at ranges, we shoot on hunts, we shoot at matches, we carry for self defense (in fortunate states, openly). Shooting, and its accoutrements, are not private and personal. Sex is. Sex gizmos are.

The actual act of sexual behavior is condicted in private, however it is discussed rather openly in society. Sex is used in marketing and ads, posted all over television and movies, and is in posters all the time. Almost every magazine in the grocery store shows cleavage. I consider this just a sign of the era, and that's not always a bad thing.

For the record springmom, I do agree with you that sex should be left private (unless you like it public :) ) but in today's world you have a lot to explain about sex to your children and i don't think this is a big deal all things considered





those are my thoughts after scanning the thread,

Keep up the good work Oleg!

Brian

[XavierBreath]

I find the intolerance here interesting. The irony is the free-thinking hypocrisy. There are those who are so self righteous that fail to see their own intolerance. Springmom should not be compeled to defend her opinion simply because it is not the popular one here. We do not all have to agree.

The High Road has taken down photos of dead soldiers in Iraq. We decided such photos were not appropriate on this forum. The High Road has taken down photos of IED damaged Hummers and Strykers. We decided they were not appropriate on this forum. The High Road has taken down photos of graphic sexual acts. We decided they were not appropriate for this forum. Where is the line drawn? Will the line be on the left or the right of the dildo?

I have to wonder if a member took a very well composed and nicely lit photo of a Smith & Wesson M&P, a deck of cards, a cigar, a dildo, and of course the ever present wrist watch, and posted it here............Would that photo be considered acceptable?

Perhaps we should rethink all photos.......afterall, they are just arrangements of pixels, right?

[JerryM]

Vulgar and offensive.

Some do not accept that “No man is an island.” There should be a sense of decency in society. When one wears the “F” word on a tee shirt, it takes away my right to take my wife and children out in public without being offended by filthy language.

There was a time when people were sensitive to the values of others. That was before the self centered thinking that no one had a right to impose moral values. Yet it has always been the case in this nation that values were imposed on others. Many of our laws do just that.
Realize that someone’s moral values are forced upon others in any case. If you wear the “F” word on your shirt you have forced your values upon others who do not consider that as acceptable, and find it offensive, but you think they should find it acceptable as that is within your moral standards.

As to free speech, half century ago it would have gotten you arrested to wear a with the F word or S Happens on your shirt. If the Constitution permits the language, then why would it not have been permitted 100 years ago? That was closer to the time it was written than now. Using such words in public where they would be heard by others would also have gotten you arrested. You think you have a right to use vulgar language where others present will/must hear. I think I have a right to not have to hear and such language.

The values of those who have little concern or sensitivity for the values of others, and what they find offensive, have been forced upon those of us who have higher moral, Christian values.

The area of moral values is where I part company with the Libertarians.
The original poster shown is in poor taste, and something that should not be shown to those who are young and those who object.

Jerry

[tyme]

The original poster shown is in poor taste, and something that should not be shown to those who are young and those who object.
The world is a cold, hard place, and doesn't care one bit what you find offensive. If you go to a war zone, you'll see people die. If you watch the nature channel, you'll occasionally see animals having sex. If you hang out on (hopefully) open-minded forums like this, you should expect to see things, or read things, that make you uncomfortable from time to time.

If that causes you to reject this place, that's your loss, not ours.

I think it was springmom who mentioned that the media and conversation didn't used to be saturated with sex-related topics. If I understand correctly, the idea is that people who think like that want realms carved out of public discourse. What's next? If medical discussions make me queasy, can I legitimately say we'd be better off if they only took place between doctors, patients, and their kin? I don't think so.

Oleg, how about a poster with a gun, and a woman going into a planned parenthood clinic?

[JerryM]

Quote:
The world is a cold, hard place, and doesn't care one bit what you find offensive. If you go to a war zone, you'll see people die. If you watch the nature channel, you'll occasionally see animals having sex. If you hang out on (hopefully) open-minded forums like this, you should expect to see things, or read things, that make you uncomfortable from time to time.

If that causes you to reject this place, that's your loss, not ours.Quote

Some care and some do not. The "do nots" outnumber the "dos." But a society who cares about self only, and little about others is a poor society. It was not always the case.

There is a lot of difference in war zones, nature channel, and what humans do in more normal times and circumstances.
If 50 years ago one had gone into a house and family was present, and used vulgar language or cursed, he would have been told to leave immediately. Yet now people invite it into their homes for their children and wives to listen to and see without any qualms. Is it any wonder we have the large numbers of teen pregnancies, and crime problems that we experience? Not in my view.

When a society feeds its minds with filth, then that becomes the norm, and what was once filthy and unacceptable becomes the norm. That is to the detriment of that society.

We have taught that life is not so important by the way it is snuffed out in movies and video games, and TV.

We teach that sex outside of marriage is what everyone does, again by our movies and such. So folks have become insensitive to the moral values that we held earlier in our history. That is what we are finding here in this very thread. Men have become lovers of self, and without a conscience that can convict because it does not know right from wrong in the area of morality.
One's conscience is clear in the same sense that a headhunter's is clear, because he has not been taught correct moral values.

So at times I will dissent when such things as the original poster are shown, and so many either approve, or are prone to accept it due to not wanting to be intolerant. Tolerance is not always a virtue.

If you do not want an honest answer then don't ask. I think the desire was for honest answers, although he may not have expect morality to enter in.

We teach morality either by default or design, but we teach it nevertheless.

Regards,
Jerry

[Biker]

"...those of us who have higher moral, christian values." Sorry, ain't buyin' that 'holier than thou' crap. Who are you to say that your values *have* more value than mine? Your morals and your's only are the only correct morals? Sex is filth?
What arrogance. What pomposity.
Now *I'm* offended by your statement.
You're too uptight. You need more sex, I think.

Biker

[JLStorm]

Great poster...even to an anti this is an image and a thought that will stick with them and at least make them think about something other than evil guns. For those on the fence it may not make them love guns, but at the very least it will make them reconsider blind faith and/or trust in government. Great job!

[JerryM]

Hi Biker,

{ "...those of us who have higher moral, christian values." Sorry, ain't buyin' that 'holier than thou' crap. Who are you to say that your values *have* more value than mine? Your morals and your's only are the only correct morals? Sex is filth?
What arrogance. What pomposity.
Now *I'm* offended by your statement.
You're too uptight. You need more sex, I think.}

Yes, my morals are correct because I am not the author of them, but God has spoken in His word, and He is sovereign.
Whether you buy it or not, and I don't expect you to, doesn't change the fact that there are absolute moral values.

I am not surprised that you are offended, as that is what we, who hold to the moral values upon which this nation was founded and made great can expect.
Just as I said, the movies, TV, the hollywood crowd, and games have caused the society to think that wrong is right, and right is wrong. It has raised a generation that has not learned correct moral values.
So we have folks who do not respect life, and murder, and then gun laws. Yet so many fail to see the connection between immorality and what we are experiencing.

We have a high rate of teen and out of wedlock pregnancies, and fail to see the connection or the lack of moral values which causes such. So we spend millions taking care of those unwed mothers and their children. In many cases grand parents must take care of those children, while mothers are on drugs or in prison, or have just abandoned the children. There is a lack of natural affection.

No, I do not expect to convince many or any, but that is not my responsibility. My responsibility is to put forth the values that will contribute to a more orderly, safer, and caring society. One in which our children are not molested by teachers, and kidnapped and raped by others. It can never be fully stopped, but it can be reduced, as it once was. Immorality has consequences, and they are not good for the nation.

One who is convinced that his liberty and his desires are the most important things in the world will always be offended by any thought that he is wrong, and that he must alter some of his actions.

This thread began with a question, and when I finally looked I answered. I will always do that wherever I am. I sometimes see posts that indicate that there immorality, but I do not post in those as to that, but if I post I attempt to post according to the question. But this involves morality directly, and so I have posted accordingly.

Best,
Jerry

[coylh]

C'mon guys, the topic of discussion is too important to squander on "my religion is the one true religion" shouting matches.

[JerryM]

Hi coylh,
{C'mon guys, the topic of discussion is too important to squander on "my religion is the one true religion" shouting matches.}

That is not the issue. The issue is right and wrong in the area of morals that should be furthered or tolerated. To picture a dildo, or whatever it is called, is an image that cannot further our cause, but instead will offend some who will be sidetracked as to what the real issue is.
It may very well give us the image of a bunch of folks who are crude, and vulgar, and who do not care what they foist on others including children. There would be some truth in that conclusion as evidenced by this thread.

I think that is more important than keeping such an image. One who is creative can do much better than that. Why offend anyone if it is unnecessary by doing such a thing? Many for whom it is meant hate us anyway, and this is just more fuel to show us in a bad light.

Best,
Jerry

[Biker]

In truth, I wasn't really offended, just making a point.
I live my life by three rules:

a)Don't lie.
b)Don't steal.
c)Never kick a dog that ain't bigger that you.

After that, it's negotiable. Now, if y'all will excuse me, me and the Ol' Lady are gonna play a few games of naked Twister with a lady Friend.

Biker
:)

[skinnyguy]

Biker, just remember to keep your gun holstered... :D

[fjolnirsson]

Ya know, Biker....
I frequently decline to respond here on THR, because I find you've already been there, and have written my thoughts so well I have nothing left to add...
Get out of my head!

I like the poster, Oleg. I think it makes a strong point, as evidenced by the arguments on this thread.

[Warbow]

I like it, but also think the text could be rearranged. Possibly have "A Felony..." above the images and "...in Chicago" and "...in Texas" under each one.

Either way, it's good because it grabs attention and is memorable.

[XavierBreath]

This thread has degenerated into a "my God/view is better than your God/view" slugfest. I have asked repeatedly that the critique in this thread stay focused on Oleg's poster, and not each other. Too many members do not seem to think that is important. Guess what, it is. The ad hominem attacks just stopped.

I really have to wonder just what some members are thinking, that they would disrespect each other with comments like the ones above.