Some of you may not make it over to our message board – Convergence. A thread has generated some interesting discussion. In a semi-tease to go over and check it out, I post my “bit” for the conversation. I have learned much from those who carry on over there. You might find some good things too!
Good thread. I’d like to press the point of targeting a bit. Idealism would suggest designers produce products for which consumers ask. Realism modifies the notion by offering that designers produce products to benefit their bottom line and express the “mores” of the designer. Should he/she want to see more midrif then he/she will produce such. These then become fashionable in the places where fashion “trickles down.”
We do make good targets. We do not help our young people or ourselves for that matter think too critically. Try to explain to a young girl what bare skin means to a young boy and she will look as if horrified. She may be looking to turn a head, but she does not necessarily intend to arouse other parts of his anatomy.
Once a young girl learns this “power” (we call “sex appeal”) she will “use” these teases to get what she wants. Boys untrained to think above the waistline gladly encourage the incdrease epidermal exposure. Now a vicious cycle emerges and we wonder which came first the chicken or the egg.
The interesting thing to me is, if I can make the segway, in our churches over the past twenty years, we have “targeted” people. We give them what they want in hopes they will consider Christ and then by coming to faith validate our efforts. Jesus came to the “cast off, cast out, ignored, despised, abused and used.” Yet, we target the trendy, the rebellious, the hip.
The whole idea of targeting smacks of de-personalization. If I can classify you I only need to know you fit my survey. I do not need to know you. Could be the fashion czars simply reflect or at least employ comparable methods we seem to find “cutting edge.”