Hey nowaypablo galen Quatrarius and other smart HS students on hubski. Why write for hubski when you can publish in the NYT? We are already proud of you, but we can always be more proud of you.
galen and nowaypablo, you two should totally get in on this. You're smart enough, you're good enough and dawg-gone-it, Hubski likes you.. Represent, yo.
btw, I keep adding to lambda's poetry contribution. I don't know why. I need new friends. (tee hee)
no, he's a raging asshole
But I'll e-mail him with a link to your post and explain it instead of straight to the Times so perhaps he'll be curious enough to snoop around, and maybe decide to stop spending classtime arguing whether or not this Hilfiger ad is racist
Dude - if you're sending him the link and he does what we want him to do and scrolls down, he'll realize that you called him a raging asshole. On the other hand, you are so ethical, that it is unlikely you'd call anybody anything privately that you wouldn't also say to their face. As for the ad, if the figure at the bottom (could be a girl or a guy with long hair or some combo) and the male figure at the top in the white shirt next to the flag -- if those two changed places, would he have anything to say? I want to know this!!
He told us that that the white guy on top is implying racial dominance with his stance, that the American flag is intentionally touching that guy to show that he's the one with freedom. I don't think it would matter which white guy/girl is on top, though I'm pretty sure he also said something about the man and the Martha's Vineyard-type house and background that "we're assuming a man owns." At the same time it's like he's sexist against all the guys in the class and lets girls kiss up to him. Arghh. I guess I definitely can't link him here now :D
I mean, he may have a point. When you mentioned that someone had an issue with the ad, I immediately knew what the reasoning would be. It does seem like he's the "leader" of the image, the focal point and that the flag and the home are touching him. His stance suggests some type of dominance. I mean, I get it. I wonder if it was intentionally done this way? Could be unintentionally done, but it could be intentionally why it was chosen. Know what I mean?
Somebody please tell me that this links to angelfire quickly before I lose my mind trying to figure out why it's suddenly changed for me. Is it different for anyone else? EDIT: I swear that this was a working link to Imgur when I first saw this post.
I won't bother. I expect the rest to try and succeed, though.