On Wed, 9 Jan 2008 06:26:11 -0800 (PST), Rich Dionne
<r.dionne@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>On Jan 8, 12:30 pm, "Smoking Causes Lung Cancer (SCLC)"
><S...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> On Tue, 08 Jan 2008 07:55:25 -0500, dh wrote:
>> > Magenta doesn't even make people look pink. They still look
>> > red, just not as harsh.
>>
>> Agreed.
>>
>> --
>> Smoking Causes Lung Cancer
>>
>> "The IT industry landscape is littered with the dead
>> dreams of people who once trusted Microsoft."
>
>Are we seriously even having this conversation?
I get that feeling too. Often, in fact. Very often...
Well, there was complaining about the magenta which I
said I prefer because it's more of a red idea, and then
the other night here came a band whose LD put in some
pink that is no doubt a *pink!* pink. The powers that be
want to keep the gel the same for a while and use it with
the house band. I mentioned to one of the guitarists that:
"You guys are going to be pink for sure now", and he
sort of gave a little moan.
>Would we even discuss
>whether using "canary" makes someone look Asian? Or, better yet, not
>whether magenta makes people look gay, but whether it makes them look
>Communist? Does green make people look like a Star Trek Vulcan?
>
>Color can evoke mood, time of day, location, and any number of other
>things, but I'd be hard pressed to believe color can evoke ***ual
>preference (certainly ***iness, but not ***ual preference!), race,
>gender, creed, or anything similar. We might as well suggest that
>using mottled template patterns and white light--making the stage look
>a little like the patterns on a cow's hide--suggests the actors might
>practice bestiality with cattle.
>
>Perhaps your friend needs to seek counseling, if he's "sees" ***ual
>preference--and is bothered by it--so easily.
>
>Rich
There are a couple of other things he might discuss as well :-)
|
