Convention Videos: Someone messed up royally

by ILoveTTATT2 62 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  pixel

  Sexy.
  
• 

  sparky1

  

  "I think that people can sometimes go overboard when it comes to being critical." -PeteZahut

  I could not agree with you more, Pete. Just look at how critical the Governing Body (tm) is of neat and clean casual clothing in regard to touring their printing plant and dormitories. I am siding here with the people that are critical of the way the young woman is dressed in the video.' What's good for the goose is good for the gander'. The Governing Body(tm) needs to have their foolishness rubbed in their faces as much as possible. Would the young woman in the video be allowed to tour a Bethel facility the way she is dressed? NO.......NO........AND NO!
  
• 

  Pete Zahut

  "What's good for the goose is good for the gander'. The Governing Body(tm) needs to have their foolishness rubbed in their faces as much as possible.
  

  "Yes...I agree, the Society is far too concerned about projecting their own image via it's members personal dress and grooming. Lets not be like them.

  This girl was presumably not visiting Bethel, not on her way to the meeting or engaged in the ministry. She was walking by herself in a wheat field on what looked like a warm day wearing a light cotton dress. It is what it is....if we want to be critical, why not question why she's in a field playing the violin instead of "in the field " saving lives or wonder about the time she spent learning the violin instead of spending it in the ministry.? This business about it being a "major screw-up" because one can see a barely noticeable outline of her underwear seems kinda' silly.

  -just sayin'
  
• 

  ILoveTTATT2

  Here's the thing: the video supposedly portrays paradise, where everything is "perfect" according to JW standards. There are a lot of detaila in the video that are just non-sensical or may be considered "new light"... For example, there's cheese among what the dubs are eating in paradise. I thought there wasn't going to be animal products there?

  Also, wouldn't a dress that is thin enough to show the panties not be allowed in the JW paradise? Especially if those panties are thong-like (not granny panties)?

  If the GB doesn't allow that for visiting Bethel, or probably for any occasion where the person is outside the home, the fact that it is on the "paradise" video is a major fail.

  If they bought stock video, then they should have made sure that the stock video did not contain elements they wouldn't approve of.

  I am criticizing based on their own standards.
• 

  slimboyfat

  All you guys realise we are going to be NAKED in paradise just like Adam and Eve, right? I thought all JWs knew that. They just don't put it in the magazines so as not to excite the wrong sort of interest.
• 

  sparrowdown

  The GB are like "We like white butts and we can not lie. You other brothers can't deny. When a girl walk by in itty bitty undies and that violin in your face...."

  That's quite a specific fetish they have goin on there.
• 

  ttdtt

  This is the dumbest thread ever:)

  With what is going on in the org and the world -

  "Convention Videos: Someone messed up royally"

  Are you joking?
• 

  sparrowdown

  In fact, Adam and Eve were the first to appear on the first ever reality TV program called Dating Naked.
• 

  Sliced

  I'm glad to see these little details being pointed out. I agree with the statements of giving them back their own medicine. They brag of a clean modest organization down to the smallest detail, so why not expose the fact that its NOT? Yes, its stock footage, stock music etc. and no doubt these are paid low-key actors not JW's. The question is WHY??? Why the heck would you go to the "world" to help you create a paradise scene??? Something to think about in what little spare time we have... lol
• 

  Pete Zahut

  For example, there's cheese among what the dubs are eating in paradise. I thought there wasn't going to be animal products there?

  For the sake of discussion...wasn't it the idea that there'd be no killing and eating of animals in the Paradise ? I don't recall anyone saying there'd no drinking of milk and making of cheese?

  Also, wouldn't a dress that is thin enough to show the panties not be allowed in the JW paradise? Especially if those panties are thong-like (not granny panties)?

  Weren't Adam and Eve naked in the Garden of Eden (AKA Paradise) and these naughty ideas we have today about the naked body caused by imperfection and sin? Wouldn't people who were perfect, be free of such hang-ups about seeing something as minor as the silhouette of a pair of underwear under a girls dress ? Weren't there some who speculated that we wouldn't even wear clothes in Paradise?

  If the GB doesn't allow that for visiting Bethel, or probably for any occasion where the person is outside the home, the fact that it is on the "paradise" video is a major fail.

  They have a certain dress code for visitors at Bethel just like some restaurants have for their customers. Just because they don't want people showing up at Bethel in say... their bathining suits, doesn't mean that the wearing of bathing suits is banned altogether.
  

  if they bought stock video, then they should have made sure that the stock video did not contain elements they wouldn't approve of.

  They are well known for being sticklers about modesty. How do you know they saw what you've pointed out and thought nothing of it ?
  

  I am criticizing based on their own standards.

  Or perhaps based on our bad experience with JW's, it is easy for us to take their standards to a level that they never intended just to support and justify our negative feelings about them. They deserve to be criticized at times but there's a point where it can get a bit nit picky which tends to devalue the more important and legitimate complaints.

  This is the dumbest thread ever

  True dat !